I wouldn't listen to 95 percent of the stuff here Forum

[John_rizzy_rawls]

my boyfriend

lol okay

[Myself]

.

[smaug_]

Listen dude, on the off chance you're real and not just a colorful troll, I don't think everyone here thinks that everyone who isn't above median is doomed, but I do think you're the exception that proves the rule. Someone who is super dedicated and can carve a niche can succeed, but that isn't where people draw general rules.

Moreover, when people say that things are bleak, they are often drawing from their own anecdotes. I know I think about my friends who are still job hunting with JDs. I hope they find something and I hope you do too, but there are competing anecdotes and the data tells it like it is. Moreover, it seems like law is a profession where your first position is all you're guaranteed: people get forced out, burn out and abandon the field all the time. The reason focus so much on that first job is because it's the only way you can actually assess if the debt/opportunity cost is worth it.

If your boyfriend is following in your footsteps, I hope that he doesn't have much debt and he two can do well in the job hunt. Godspeed to him. I just hope that you both don't learn the hard way that the folks here were right.

(Also, ever visit JDU? That place makes TLS look like a rainbow factory.)

[PDaddy]

Bottom line: the current state of legal employment is one that necessitates a bottom-up influence of change via market forces; the primary one being the demand for legal education by unwary law school applicants. Those students must reduce the overall demand largely by exploring and pursuing other carter paths.

The potential outcomes will include the following:

Widespread reductions in tuition costs;

Better oversight by the ABA, including oversight of law school recruiting, admissions and reporting, as well as elimination of useless ranking systems;

Closures of schools with poor education, bar passage and employment records;

Increased diversion away from the legal profession at the undergraduate level by pre-law advisors, resulting from improved training and cross-pollinated career development services at undergraduate schools. Pre-law advisors must be trained to identify the true talents of students, present them with alternative career options, and then assist them in planning and pursuing those careers.

The broadening and deepening of large firm recruiting, as well as firm recruiting overall, and finally;

Improved responsiveness to student-centered educational directives at all law schools, including streamlining and diversifying practical education, and improved career services operations.

That is a long-winded way of saying that TLS elitism is a necessary evil right now. Schools and firms will only change the way they do business if students force them to. That means we should endeavor to cut the number of LSAT takers to about 30,000...law school applicants to about 15,000. We can only do that by continuing to put the word out. Let's see what the law schools, ABA and recruiters do then.

[20160810]

"My anecdotes are data with a soul you cunts!" is right up there with "I used to teach syntax and I like tigers because they fit my personality. Is this morally culpable?"

[Bikeflip]

That means we should endeavor to cut the number of LSAT takers to about 30,000...law school applicants to about 15,000. We can only do that by continuing to put the word out. Let's see what the law schools, ABA and recruiters do then.

Cut faculty and adopt open enrollment.

[PDaddy]

I forgot that we will need some help from Capital Hill. The bankruptcy law must be amended to allow the discharge of student loans. Schools will be forced to lower tuition rates. At first, this would seem to increase demand for law school education again, but if interest rates are raised, all but the most appropriately matched students will be deterred from applying and attending.

by "appropriately matched", I mean students who possess a true desire as well as the right aptitude to become attorneys.

Btw: Vermont Law School...sick!

[Moomoo2u]

There are some helpful threads - like the procedural/mechanical aspects of looking for a job - but don't believe anything you believe on these forums. It's just fear mongering at its most disgusting level. This is the fox news of internet forums.

I was caught up in here for a while, then things worked out excellent for me (top 30 school, bottom half) and I feel FOOLISH for being stressed out by what I would read here on a nightly basis.

Unbelievable. These threads in the legal employment section epitomize why law school sucks, you're a masochist if you read too much into what some of these people claim.

K

QFT

[NYstate]

The 50% stat getting legal jobs (give or take) at most law schools seems to be on the whole loosely related to class standing. From what I've seen, it's fairly tightly related to class standing at the very top of the class (someone close to the top of the class has far better than even odds of getting a legal job). But if you're not near the top of the class, grades rapidly become of quite limited significance, at least in comparison to the importance law students are told to ascribe to them.

Again, this applies to non-elite schools. Whether you're in the 70th or the 30th percentile matters a lot at an elite school, but seems to make very little difference outside those schools. (This what I've seen in studying the issue over the past couple of years, and I'd be curious to know how well it lines up with current students' and recent graduates' experiences).

This is the information I was asking about. Maybe the advice should be that if you aren't at a T14 and you aren't top 5-10% you should either drop out or realize that your grades are not the key factor in getting a job? The below median cutoff as a job determinant maybe only applies to the top schools?

I'm not with OP as I think more people should drop out and I would have advised OP to drop out. But for those people who are searching, maybe the idea that some small percentage of people will get jobs is helpful?

[A. Nony Mouse]

This is the information I was asking about. Maybe the advice should be that if you aren't at a T14 and you aren't top 5-10% you should either drop out or realize that your grades are not the key factor in getting a job? The below median cutoff as a job determinant maybe only applies to the top schools?

I'm not with OP as I think more people should drop out and I would have advised OP to drop out. But for those people who are searching, maybe the idea that some small percentage of people will get jobs is helpful?

To be fair, this is the advice that's given in the non-biglaw threads around here all the time.

[Bronte]

"My anecdotes are data with a soul you cunts!" is right up there with "I used to teach syntax and I like tigers because they fit my personality. Is this morally culpable?"

Yes. That last post was pure gold.

[Samara]

My simple intention was purely to warn those who skim these forums twice in their legal lives. Once in August before their 1L year, and once during the 2L job hunt.

The first time, these boards are helpful.

The second time, they are not. Here is why.

My anecdotal evidence is more helpful than your "statistics" and "data." My anecdote is data with a soul.

Your statistics and data track a lawyer's FIRST POSITION out of law school and their STARTING SALARY, sometimes before they have even graduated. Statistics that come from the schools themselves of course are TOTAL bullshit - they juke the numbers like Rawls and Burrell.

When you guys figure out how to plug someone's GPA into a machine that predict what a lawyer's salary will be in 10 years and also some sort of barometer to measure his happiness, I'll start buying into what is said here.

I understand I talked bad about this masturbatory little club of yours and will not be well received, but my point is that simple. The numbers relied upon do not tell the whole story, yet some people here present them as such. Going to law school is an investment - and not a short term one.

I think only two people should even go to law school.

1) The sort of optimistic ones who think they can promote "justice" in our country. Good for them, there's plenty of them, and we need them.
2) Those who think a legal career aligns with their specific skill set. I went to law school for this reason.

So, before these sharks try to tear down your dreams, remember that 1) what they're saying probably isn't true or at least is manipulated to seem more terrifying and 2) why did you want to come to law school in the first place? Remember this my little lords and these miserable, tyrannical little cunts cannot hurt you.

But, ALAS, it is true that you do not have a good chance at working at Ropes and Gray if you suck it up in law school like I sort of it (by suck it up, i mean, barely below the median).

BUT WAIT, I HAVE ONE MORE WONDERFUL DATA WITH SOUL TO MAKE THIS CONFUSED, DEPRESSED FUTURE OFFICER OF THE COURT FEEL BETTER!

A man I know was doing work you gunner cunts call "shitlaw.' He was an associate at a place that does personal injury (watch where this goes, because I actually end up taking his job!). He won an 18 million dollar settlement against an insurance company. A couple months later he now works in Connecticut at a firm with 125 lawyers, and he makes a salary comparable to first year big law associates.

Lucky? NO! Well, sort of, but no. This guy was really good at med mal cases. He had a science background and was the only person in the office who could really dissect medical records AND THEN turn them into plain English for the jury. Luck had nothing to do it, he, like me, simply was not top 25 percent at the reputable school he attended. Like him, I will hopefully find a specialty that allows me to be the best "shit law" lawyer I can be (why I came to law school!) and maybe make a lot of money doing it.

That's all I'm saying, and if you lunatic cunts can't appreciate these types of discussions, I understand and will take my business elsewhere, and will warn my boyfriend who will be a 1L in September never to look for advice here.

Cunts

Huh, it's almost as if you merely skimmed the forums instead bothering to actually read the advice relevant to your situation.

[BarbellDreams]

I highly suggest sneaking into a high school for a few weeks to sit in a Statistics 101 class. Basically everything you said will be rebutted with basic knowledge learned from that class. A randon guy from a random place who started with shitlaw won a big case and found a midlaw job? Whoo! I can show you five thousand lawyers that started the same and ended up nowhere. Its called a outlier, look it up. When you understand how statistics work, realize that its a simple fact of probability and not certainty, and accept the that you < data you will be a much more intelligent individual. Dudes that pay sticker at TTTTs likely "make it" too...just not 99.999% of the time.

[hyakku]

I always enter these threads thinking that there's no way dozens of people would: a) Get trolled so often with the same tactics or b) Legitimately care about someone's flawed opinion enough to write out paragraphs on paragraphs to refute something that's obviously wrong. But then it happens and I'm left laughing but also really fucking confused about why anyone would waste their time responding to this (can't lie, I wasted time at work reading through this for the lulz, so I'm at least half as bad).

Also:

Hate to say it, but I'm with the OP on this one. I graduated bottom 10% of my class from a crappy tier 2 and got a job at a reapectable midsized firm doing substantive commercial litigation work, making approx half of NYC market. I think that's a better result entry level out of law school compared to what ppl on here tend to represent.

What I don't get is why you don't see that you're in the very small minority of people that graduated at the bottom and yet end up fine. There might also be a subset of people who had such substantial connections (e.g., dad/mom is a named partner at a law firm, or is a CEO of a substantial client of a law firm, that type of connection) that as long as they graduate and pass the bar exam they have guaranteed employment. But statistically, people with your stats don't get into a respectable firm doing substantive work making approximately half of NYC market. Your result is better than what people on here tend to represent because you're an exception.

Ill add that once you lose this job, you're screwed. So hold on tight!

Ouch.

User was outed for anon abuse.

Did no one notice that this guy went anon to essentially support his own anon post? I've wondered if this happens on TLS and now I've got confirmation about how crazy some people are. Lol, you really needed to validate an anonymous post to yourself?

Edit: Ah, Bronte, didn't notice because Soj excluded that other quote. I thought I was the only one that found that to be a new level of douche.
Edit 2: No, nvm, Soj didn't exclude the other quote. I just noobed out for a minute, my bad.

[Bronte]

Did no one notice that this guy went anon to essentially support his own anon post? I've wondered if this happens on TLS and now I've got confirmation about how crazy some people are. Lol, you really needed to validate an anonymous post to yourself?

At least one person noticed:

Ill add that once you lose this job, you're screwed. So hold on tight!

Ouch.

User was outed for anon abuse.

fuck you.

[romothesavior]

The OP's post and replies in the thread illustrate a couple of very common psychological reactions/defense mechanisms, that I think are related in an interesting way.

(1) A basic refusal, at a psychological/emotional level, to accept the validity of statistically-based arguments. The OP no doubt understands that if half the graduates of a law school don't get jobs as lawyers that means the chances of not getting a legal job for graduates of that school is 50%, but, if he gets a legal job, this reasoning no longer applies, since the odds of him getting a job are now reinterpreted as 100%. After all, now he isn't a statistic, he's a "success."

(2) An overwhelming desire to give a moralized interpretation to statistical outcomes. If half his classmates didn't get legal jobs while he did, even though he wasn't an obvious candidate to get a job (not top 10% etc), then that must mean that they failed to do what he did to get a job (key terms: "hustle," "network").

This is all tied up with cultural imperatives to treat social outcomes as reflections of merit, as opposed to cronyism and other forms of unearned privilege, and most of all sheer random luck.

What I'm still curious about Prof Campos is how tied that 50% is to class standing. I realize OP doesn't address this at all, but I thought that there is a hard line at median. I think I'm wrong about that.

How did you go thru three years of law school and join the workforce with this notion in your head?

[romothesavior]

There are some helpful threads - like the procedural/mechanical aspects of looking for a job - but don't believe anything you believe on these forums. It's just fear mongering at its most disgusting level. This is the fox news of internet forums. .

What I don’t see on TLS are many discouraging grumbles from T14 students. What I do see a lot of are people with +5,000 posts proclaiming how bad things are. There is a solid disconnect between those two worlds.

User was outed for anon abuse.

You are a rancid POS.

Yes, T14s have much better job prospects than most law schools, which is why pretty much all of us "5000+ posters" push people to go to one if they can. But if you think going to a T14 somehow insulates you from the harsh realities of the job market, think again. If your firm finds you as uppity and insufferable as those of us on TLS, you'll be busting your ass for a job 3L year like the rest of us T20 lemmings. Or, even more likely, you could very well find yourself thrown out on your ass in a couple of years by that wonderful NYC biglaw firm that you have such a hard-on for.

[Kronk]

My anecdotal evidence is more helpful than your "statistics" and "data." My anecdote is data with a soul.

I lol'd so hard motherfuckas wanna fine me.

[romothesavior]

My anecdotal evidence is more helpful than your "statistics" and "data." My anecdote is data with a soul.

I lol'd so hard motherfuckas wanna fine me.

+1. Almost died at this line.

I have a lot of anecdata too: plenty of unemployed friends and fellow TLS posters with great personalities and hustle with decent grades from top 20-30 schools without jobs. This thread reeks of arrogance. OP, if you think you are "better" than these people because you were able to land something and they're still looking, then I hope your comeuppance takes the form of a pink slip on your desk in the near future.

Also... statistics, you self-satisfied twat waffle.

[rad lulz]

.

[Kronk]

My anecdotal evidence is more helpful than your "statistics" and "data." My anecdote is data with a soul.

I lol'd so hard motherfuckas wanna fine me.

+1. Almost died at this line.

I have a lot of anecdata too: plenty of unemployed friends and fellow TLS posters with great personalities and hustle with decent grades from top 20-30 schools without jobs. This thread reeks of arrogance. OP, if you think you are "better" than these people because you were able to land something and they're still looking, then I hope your comeuppance takes the form of a pink slip on your desk in the near future.

Also... statistics, you self-satisfied twat waffle.

There is a large contingent of on-topic TLSers believe that they succeeded in getting a job / will succeed in getting a job because they have the necessary skill set for practicing law, whereas those who fail at getting a job or didn't enjoy law school just don't have THAT LEGAL MIND.

[FeelTheHeat]

My anecdotal evidence is more helpful than your "statistics" and "data." My anecdote is data with a soul.

I lol'd so hard motherfuckas wanna fine me.

SOUL, MOTHAFUCKER

[romothesavior]

According to mcduff all those people are just slackers or people who want to practice digeridoo law, so you're wrong

I do think he's right that there are some people in every law school class who don't try hard enough, or simply don't have what it takes between the ears (either bookwise or socially), or simply aren't going about it the right way. So if a school has a 50% LST score, I'm inclined to say that a person of reasonable intelligence who tries hard and goes about it the right way is going to have a better than 50% shot at a job. Just like I think that the average TLSer will on average land a little above median, because the "everyone in law school is smart and works hard" schtick is a flame.

But 25% of the class wants to practice international bird law or doesn't want to practice law or is a slacker? Wat. Colorado must be a strange place.

[romothesavior]

There is a large contingent of on-topic TLSers believe that they succeeded in getting a job / will succeed in getting a job because they have the necessary skill set for practicing law, whereas those who fail at getting a job or didn't enjoy law school just don't have THAT LEGAL MIND.

Now that I'm a 3L, I've gone from thinking "Wow what a delusional moron this guy is" to "Wow, what an arrogant prick this guy is." I know enough highly qualified, top-notch people who are still looking for jobs or just barely found a job to find this holier-than-thou attitude borderline offensive.

[NYstate]

The OP's post and replies in the thread illustrate a couple of very common psychological reactions/defense mechanisms, that I think are related in an interesting way.

(1) A basic refusal, at a psychological/emotional level, to accept the validity of statistically-based arguments. The OP no doubt understands that if half the graduates of a law school don't get jobs as lawyers that means the chances of not getting a legal job for graduates of that school is 50%, but, if he gets a legal job, this reasoning no longer applies, since the odds of him getting a job are now reinterpreted as 100%. After all, now he isn't a statistic, he's a "success."

(2) An overwhelming desire to give a moralized interpretation to statistical outcomes. If half his classmates didn't get legal jobs while he did, even though he wasn't an obvious candidate to get a job (not top 10% etc), then that must mean that they failed to do what he did to get a job (key terms: "hustle," "network").

This is all tied up with cultural imperatives to treat social outcomes as reflections of merit, as opposed to cronyism and other forms of unearned privilege, and most of all sheer random luck.

What I'm still curious about Prof Campos is how tied that 50% is to class standing. I realize OP doesn't address this at all, but I thought that there is a hard line at median. I think I'm wrong about that.

How did you go thru three years of law school and join the workforce with this notion in your head?

I live in a sheltered world obsessed with grades and prestige.