Page 1 of 2
So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 10:16 pm
by notaznguy
I spoke with a UC Hastings graduate yesterday at a holiday party and she is currently working in big law/patent litigation. She had an engineering UG degree from a top 50 institution and worked with HP for a year before going to law school. She graduated from law school in 2007. According to her, she performed miserably in law school and finished near the bottom of her class...but ended up in big law. What the fuck? How?
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 10:19 pm
by franklyscarlet
notaznguy wrote:I spoke with a UC Hastings graduate yesterday at a holiday party and she is currently working in big law/patent litigation. She had an engineering UG degree from a top 50 institution and worked with HP for a year before going to law school. She graduated from law school in 2007. According to her, she performed miserably in law school and finished near the bottom of her class...but ended up in big law. What the fuck? How?
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 10:23 pm
by kalvano
1) Graduated 2007.
2) Hard science undergrad / eligible for the patent bar.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 10:33 pm
by sparty99
* tag...with deep regret.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 10:42 pm
by Veyron
OP = not the brightest bulb in the box.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 11:15 pm
by paulinaporizkova
kalvano wrote:1) Graduated 2007.
2) Hard science undergrad / eligible for the patent bar.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 11:53 pm
by BarbellDreams
Veyron wrote:OP = not the brightest bulb in the box.
This.
Oh the wonders of doing OCI in 2005 before the crash...
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 12:14 am
by PDaddy
notaznguy wrote:I spoke with a UC Hastings graduate yesterday at a holiday party and she is currently working in big law/patent litigation. She had an engineering UG degree from a top 50 institution and worked with HP for a year before going to law school. She graduated from law school in 2007. According to her, she performed miserably in law school and finished near the bottom of her class...but ended up in big law. What the fuck? How?
She did graduate in 2007. But the graduation date notwithstanding, there are always people whose job status belies their law school performance, and it's usually because of their intangibles....the wow factor. I have heard many similar stories. Often times, the hiring partners are just bnlown away with the candidate's intangibles. Too many law students think getting strong grades and test scores is all they need to do. However, work experience, pre--law school and during, makes a difference. LOR's make a difference. Interviewing skills make a difference. Diversity makes a difference.
This is why most law students wind up learning the hard way that they aren't really cut out for the profession. They are not prepared to do the required intangible work, they lack the maturity, charisma or worldliness to function in a biglaw environment, they are spoiled and self-entitled, they lack home-training and/or common sense (getting drunk in front of administrators, bosses and hiring partners is NEVER a good idea), and they often enter the profession for the wrong reasons.
Whenever you see a person whose apparent success belies their law school grades or test scores, think about the intangibles that person may have. I'll take a well-rounded B- student who obviously has the chops to succeed over some anal-retentive, spoiled brat who has strong grades and nothing else indicating success every day and twice on Sunday. Sadly, law schools are filled mostly with one or the other.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 11:27 am
by chasgoose
PDaddy wrote:notaznguy wrote:I spoke with a UC Hastings graduate yesterday at a holiday party and she is currently working in big law/patent litigation. She had an engineering UG degree from a top 50 institution and worked with HP for a year before going to law school. She graduated from law school in 2007. According to her, she performed miserably in law school and finished near the bottom of her class...but ended up in big law. What the fuck? How?
She did graduate in 2007. But the graduation date notwithstanding, there are always people whose job status belies their law school performance, and it's usually because of their intangibles....the wow factor. I have heard many similar stories. Often times, the hiring partners are just bnlown away with the candidate's intangibles. Too many law students think getting strong grades and test scores is all they need to do. However, work experience, pre--law school and during, makes a difference. LOR's make a difference. Interviewing skills make a difference. Diversity makes a difference.
This is why most law students wind up learning the hard way that they aren't really cut out for the profession. They are not prepared to do the required intangible work, they lack the maturity, charisma or worldliness to function in a biglaw environment, they are spoiled and self-entitled, they lack home-training and/or common sense (getting drunk in front of administrators, bosses and hiring partners is NEVER a good idea), and they often enter the profession for the wrong reasons.
Whenever you see a person whose apparent success belies their law school grades or test scores, think about the intangibles that person may have. I'll take a well-rounded B- student who obviously has the chops to succeed over some anal-retentive, spoiled brat who has strong grades and nothing else indicating success every day and twice on Sunday. Sadly, law schools are filled mostly with one or the other.
There are usually enough normal people at median or above at most schools that the people with low grades probably won't get the opportunity to show how great they are to hiring partners. Semi-decent grades and semi-decent personality (and lets be real, for law a semi-decent personality is usually all it takes) aren't mutually exclusive.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 11:29 am
by Grizz
paulinaporizkova wrote:kalvano wrote:1) Graduated 2007.
2) Hard science undergrad / eligible for the patent bar.
Also, solid pre-LS WE with HP
Cmon OP, get with the program
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 12:54 pm
by ColumbiaChamp
Please see
this, as it may clear a few things up regarding employment in 2007.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:56 pm
by Mauve Dinosaur
This dude was a U.S. congressman and check out his Alma Mater! It says he went to COOLEY!!!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_Stupak
Seriously though, it's not impossible, but common wisdom says that unless you have mad connections you are unlikely to get a good job if you went to a TTT.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 11:20 pm
by notaznguy
Dude you people have got to be fucking with me. According to the logic of this board, you are either top 50% or you are FUCKED. Even if she did pass the patent bar/had a science UG degree, the fact that she was bottom (like ranked bottom 98%) of her class should essentially close her off from any jobs right? That's like getting a 2.0 in undergrad and having top accounting firms like KPMG wanting to hire you.
I can't comment much about the crash in 2008, but come on, the legal market has always been saturated. Even when I was 5 years old people were saying, "There are too many lawyers in America."
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 11:23 pm
by notaznguy
Mauve Dinosaur wrote:This dude was a U.S. congressman and check out his Alma Mater! It says he went to COOLEY!!!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_Stupak
Seriously though, it's not impossible, but common wisdom says that unless you have mad connections you are unlikely to get a good job if you went to a TTT.
Are you seriously comparing UC Hastings to Cooley? Really? I know you TLSers are all rich, super models, and top 1% of class Harvard and Yale grads, but wow come on.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 11:46 pm
by sunynp
notaznguy wrote:Dude you people have got to be fucking with me. According to the logic of this board, you are either top 50% or you are FUCKED. Even if she did pass the patent bar/had a science UG degree, the fact that she was bottom (like ranked bottom 98%) of her class should essentially close her off from any jobs right? That's like getting a 2.0 in undergrad and having top accounting firms like KPMG wanting to hire you.
I can't comment much about the crash in 2008, but come on, the legal market has always been saturated. Even when I was 5 years old people were saying, "There are too many lawyers in America."
If you don't understand the drastic effect of the crash on legal hiring, you need to learn about it and understand it. Do not expect the same results as prior to ITE. However, hard science and serious work experience will help any student who wants to go into IP, even now.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:29 am
by kalvano
notaznguy wrote:Dude you people have got to be fucking with me. According to the logic of this board, you are either top 50% or you are FUCKED. Even if she did pass the patent bar/had a science UG degree, the fact that she was bottom (like ranked bottom 98%) of her class should essentially close her off from any jobs right? That's like getting a 2.0 in undergrad and having top accounting firms like KPMG wanting to hire you.
I can't comment much about the crash in 2008, but come on, the legal market has always been saturated. Even when I was 5 years old people were saying, "There are too many lawyers in America."
The legal market has always been saturated, but it mainly closed off grads from TTT's and TTTT's from getting Biglaw. Before the crash, if you were top 50% and went to a decent school, you had to be almost totally incompetent to not find a decent-paying job. Biglaw handed out jobs like candy. Some firms had 20+ people per SA class, at $2K to $3K a week, per person. Now, even big firms have drastically cut back the amount of positions. All of a sudden, being top 50% isn't good enough. Sometime, not even being top 10% is good enough. The same amount of people are competing for 1/4 the available jobs.
This board is overly-pessimistic at times, but I can absolutely tell you that people at median are staring at a phone that isn't ringing, at all. I would imagine it's somewhat different going to a T14, but if you don't? Boned. Severely.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:59 am
by dood
notaznguy wrote:Dude you people have got to be fucking with me. According to the logic of this board, you are either top 50% or you are FUCKED. Even if she did pass the patent bar/had a science UG degree, the fact that she was bottom (like ranked bottom 98%) of her class should essentially close her off from any jobs right? That's like getting a 2.0 in undergrad and having top accounting firms like KPMG wanting to hire you.
I can't comment much about the crash in 2008, but come on, the legal market has always been saturated. Even when I was 5 years old people were saying, "There are too many lawyers in America."
ugh, no we are not fucking with u. it seems u are new, and im too lazy to explain to u. but yea, ur analogy with 2.0 undergrad and KPMG wanting to hire you is actually about right.
.
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 1:21 am
by APimpNamedSlickback
.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 1:26 am
by 094320
..
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 8:24 am
by sunynp
acrossthelake wrote:The thing is, I've always regarded TLS as being relatively optimistic compared to other law school boards and general scamblogs.
+1
I think TLS tries to dissuade the oblivious from ruining their lives by taking on large amounts of non- dischargable debt. But it is still overly optimistic given all the recent information on employment. I'm starting to think the best advice is that anyone below median at all but the t6 should drop out after 1L or even the first semester.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 9:45 am
by vanwinkle
notaznguy wrote:Dude you people have got to be fucking with me. According to the logic of this board, you are either top 50% or you are FUCKED.
Seriously? You've got this board all wrong, or haven't been paying attention.
At most schools, top 50% is still fucked.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 1:18 pm
by Veyron
sunynp wrote:acrossthelake wrote:The thing is, I've always regarded TLS as being relatively optimistic compared to other law school boards and general scamblogs.
+1
I think TLS tries to dissuade the oblivious from ruining their lives by taking on large amounts of non- dischargable debt. But it is still overly optimistic given all the recent information on employment. I'm starting to think the best advice is that anyone below median at all but the t6 should drop out after 1L or even the first semester.
Plenty of folks below median getting good jobs at Penn. Lol, T6, just lol.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 2:46 pm
by sparty99
I've talked to prosecutors who graduated last year and have jobs. They were below median and went to a top 40.
However, I think being at median is not good. If you think about all the law schools and the people they graduate, how will employer's distinguish "top talent." The easiest way is by going with people who have high grades, law review, and moot court.
If you are below median, I wouldn't drop out (per se). There are jobs outside of a big law/attorney field that a law degree will be beneficial, however, law school is not a winning bet.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 2:57 pm
by DoubleChecks
Even if I ignore the horrible example OP gave (hard science background, great relevant work experience, pre-2008 crash, possibly any other information you or she left out), there are ALWAYS exceptions to the rule. Are you trying to disprove a general TLS attitude with ONE example? I can do that with almost anything.
The general attitude is never meant to be absolute (even if it comes off that way sometimes) because we would all waste too much time tagging all the possible exceptions. It is about probabilities. This is like you saying our statement of, "Hey, putting $150k on the number 10 is a dumb idea in roulette" is proven incorrect or bad advice when someone occasionally hits the number 10 after said bet. I still...wouldn't make that bet.
Re: So you "can" get a good job if you aren't top 50%?
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:06 pm
by sunynp
sparty99 wrote:I've talked to prosecutors who graduated last year and have jobs. They were below median and went to a top 40.
However, I think being at median is not good. If you think about all the law schools and the people they graduate, how will employer's distinguish "top talent." The easiest way is by going with people who have high grades, law review, and moot court.
If you are below median, I wouldn't drop out (per se). There are jobs outside of a big law/attorney field that a law degree will be beneficial, however, law school is not a winning bet.
No, this isn't true. There are no other fields that a law degree helps you with a job. If you can think of any, please post them! I have only heard that having a law degree means people in other fields won't hire you because they think you will leave as soon as you find a job practicing, or they think something is wrong with you because you can't find a job practicing.