RECESSION PANIC MEGAPOST: Bad economy threads go here! Forum

[pany1985]

Yeah, since judges go to PCL

[Fup]

Excellent, we need a place for all that stuff. I just hope people actually listen and keep it all contained here.

[06072010]

This is a pretty unanimous decision by the mods. We really want the discussion of the economy on the practice of law to be robust and we actively solicit people to post on this topic, but some people are abusing the privilege and mucking up the main forum. We feel a stickied thread and active moderation is the best way to reach these competing goals.

[thesealocust]

edit: n/m

[doctorgonzo]

I completely disagree 100% with OP. There need to be substantial changes in the legal profession if it is to survive. If tuition costs continue to rise, fewer and fewer people are going to go to law school and get a six-figure debt just on the off-chance that they will make enough to pay it off. I think people are starting to realize that law school isn't all it's cracked up to be from an economic standpoint. Furthermore, clients at BigLaw are definitely starting to realize that paying hundreds of dollars an hour for associate work makes just as little sense.

And that crack about the judges who attend PCL is ridiculous. Where do you think judges come from? They aren't being appointed to the bench as fresh grads straight out of T4 schools, nor should they be. Judges are (and should be) experts who have been working in the legal field for decades, and they should be paid a salary that reflects that fact. Otherwise, you will not get the best caliber judges. If an intelligent lawyer is considering whether to be a judge, and the prospect of a huge salary cut stops him or her from doing so, we all lose as a result.

I do think the future is going away from the billable hour towards a fixed fee-for-service model. Can't happen soon enough.

[RVP11]

Thank you, mods.

[SilverE2]

Oh my God you are my new favorite mod ever.

[utexas2010]

I completely disagree 100% with OP. There need to be substantial changes in the legal profession if it is to survive. If tuition costs continue to rise, fewer and fewer people are going to go to law school and get a six-figure debt just on the off-chance that they will make enough to pay it off. I think people are starting to realize that law school isn't all it's cracked up to be from an economic standpoint. Furthermore, clients at BigLaw are definitely starting to realize that paying hundreds of dollars an hour for associate work makes just as little sense.

And that crack about the judges who attend PCL is ridiculous. Where do you think judges come from? They aren't being appointed to the bench as fresh grads straight out of T4 schools, nor should they be. Judges are (and should be) experts who have been working in the legal field for decades, and they should be paid a salary that reflects that fact. Otherwise, you will not get the best caliber judges. If an intelligent lawyer is considering whether to be a judge, and the prospect of a huge salary cut stops him or her from doing so, we all lose as a result.

I do think the future is going away from the billable hour towards a fixed fee-for-service model. Can't happen soon enough.

I agree with you about tuition...it is just sad how expensive education is, it seems like the best thing to do to create a more informed and educated society would be to cap tuition, but we all know it is all just big business like the Catholic church and banking systems. I would most likely pursue more than 2 graduate degrees if tuition was lowered, but the idea of getting into 100K of debt for an NYU master program or 200K for a law program just sucks.

[huckabees]

Thanks!

[18488]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/opini ... u4.html?em

I'm sorry, I thought that you were SUPPOSED to make more money for taking out $200,000 in loans and slaving away at a top 10 law school instead of going to PCL.

You have what we call a major unjustified sense of entitlement.

[frotteur]

Yay.

[helfer snooterbagon]

So is this where I start an AA post?

[rayiner]

So here are some of the thoughts that have been clunking around inside my head for awhile. First, some facts:

I got a bunch of numbers from this article, which has some incredibly useful data in it:
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202425894490

This article also has a lot of useful data:
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 7904889498

1) The growth rate of the NLJ250 (# of associates):
2008 - 4.3%
2007 - 5.3%
2006 - 4.8%
2) The size of the NLJ250 (# of associates)
2008 - 67,648
2007 - 64,885
2006 - 61,619
2005 - 58,796
3) Change in # of Associates in NLJ250 (over previous year)
2008 - 2,763
2007 - 3,266
2006 - 2,823

So going into inferences, the first thing I want to observe is the "After Graduation" table in the second article. According to that table, 12.6% of graduates went to NLJ250 law firms in 2007. This corresponds to roughly 5,700 hires. Furthermore, let's assume that there are about 1,500 clerkships that lead into NLJ250 jobs each year. So we get a net influx into biglaw of about 7,200, or roughly 12% of associates. To balance the numbers means the natural attrition is about 6.4%. Off the bat, this seems a bit low given the reports of attrition rates at NLJ250 firms. Perhaps there is another significant influx of associates I'm missing?

The second thing I want to observe is that the trends are ultimately beneficial for those at top schools. With class sizes remaining fixed or even shrinking, and with firms hiring more and more people each year, people deeper into each class will get biglaw. Of course, precisely balancing this trend is the fact that as the population grows and class sizes remain fixed, LSAT medians inflate and getting into the top schools becomes more difficult.

The other thing I want to observe is the "associate population" chart in the first article. Between 1988 and 1997, the NLJ250 associate count grew negatively or stayed the same. That means that firms only hired to overcome natural attrition. Luckily, there were not so many law students graduating back then. Between 2002 and 2004, associate population growth was also either negative or flat. Again, that means that firms only hired to overcome natural attrition.

That "associate population" chart has some frightening implications for the current recession. In the best case, the dip for this recession looks like the 2002-2004 one. It slows in 2008, shrinks in 2009 and 2010, and starts growing again in 2011 and 2012. In the worst case, it looks like the 1988-1997 dip, with flat growth for years. If growth is flat, and natural attrition is kept in check by a weak stock market, hiring could drop in half or worse. Job prospects at Tier1s ranked 20-40 could look like job prospects at T2s do now, top 10-15% or bust for NLJ250.

[jeisner]

THE WORLD IS ENDING.

WE WILL GRADUATE AND BE MIRED IN DEBT.

WE WILL ALL BE APPLYING TO MCDONALDS WITH OUR JDs.

RECESSIONRECESSIONRECESSION.

[kurla88]

THE WORLD IS ENDING.

WE WILL GRADUATE AND BE MIRED IN DEBT.

WE WILL ALL BE APPLYING TO MCDONALDS WITH OUR JDs.

RECESSIONRECESSIONRECESSION.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =9&t=46170

[jeisner]

THE WORLD IS ENDING.

WE WILL GRADUATE AND BE MIRED IN DEBT.

WE WILL ALL BE APPLYING TO MCDONALDS WITH OUR JDs.

RECESSIONRECESSIONRECESSION.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =9&t=46170

This is why I love this board.

[journogirl]

I think federal judges make 150K and up. It's less than a partner at a law firm, sure, but it is also guaranteed employment and has great benefits. It's not exactly a shabby salary, either.

[skadden_farts]

This is the state of the NYC legal "market," and an example of what TTT kids have to look forward to if they miss Biglaw. This job also offers no health benefits.


--LinkRemoved--

[frotteur]

See http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =2&t=66974

[Helmholtz]

See http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =2&t=66974

To be fair, OP's an idiot and shouldn't be expected to use this forum correctly.

[RVP11]

Lock/ban?

[dantimreynolds]

.

[stateofbeasley]

See http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =2&t=66974

To be fair, OP's an idiot and shouldn't be expected to use this forum correctly.

He may be a bitter flamer, but don't let that blind you to the facts on the ground.

Things are bad, really bad, for law graduates. It is shameful when even document review jobs become highly competitive, as they have become in my geographic area.

Law school has, and will continue to be, a scam where expensive, private, low ranked schools are concerned.

[Tacitus]

--ImageRemoved--

Skadden Farts, is that you??? Thankfully folks, this guy will run out of power soon. Oh wait....damn you public libraries!!!!!!!!!!

[stateofbeasley]

<--I'm sorry, I thought that you were SUPPOSED to make more money for taking out $200,000 in loans and slaving away at a top 10 law school instead of going to PCL. My bad, I must be one of those evil capitalists.

Just thought this article was junk all around, thoughts?

This kind of attitude is not going to get you much sympathy from the public at large. It's symbolic of everything that's wrong with many people who grew up in the 80's and 90's: self-entitled, self-centered, and greedy. It's also symbolic of the failure of the Baby Boomers to raise kids with character. Failure all around.