Alternative employment routes for lawyers... Forum

[QandAphorism]

I also have a JD friend involved in a pretty huge/novel enterprise that rhymes with "Poupon." He was hired (coming directly from the hiring mngr) over several others who had a specialized graduate degrees related to this type of business because they prefer people with the capacity to understand the current and future legal implications of this fairly new business/model. He has never worked as an attorney, graduated from a lower T1 LS (but high in the class) and would NOT have gotten this job without the JD. It does help in some cases. Your generalizations are wrong.

How the hell could he possibly understand legal implications if he never worked as lawyer? If hiring firm is dumb enough to believe that this person knows anything about legal implications without practicing, then they are retards.

They may be retards, they just may be. (millionaire retards per their equity stake in the co)

[pandacot]

I also have a JD friend involved in a pretty huge/novel enterprise that rhymes with "Poupon." He was hired (coming directly from the hiring mngr) over several others who had a specialized graduate degrees related to this type of business because they prefer people with the capacity to understand the current and future legal implications of this fairly new business/model. He has never worked as an attorney, graduated from a lower T1 LS (but high in the class) and would NOT have gotten this job without the JD. It does help in some cases. Your generalizations are wrong.

How the hell could he possibly understand legal implications if he never worked as lawyer? If hiring firm is dumb enough to believe that this person knows anything about legal implications without practicing, then they are retards.

They may be retards, they just may be. (millionaire retards per their equity stake in the co)

Did this person have some other qualifier that made them eligible for this job? This doesn't make sense.

[megaTTTron]

I don't fully understand why so many on TLS'ers are so magnetized towards the "absolute." Did I ever say that I considered a JD an absolute "de facto" edge over anybody else outside of law? You guys seem to invent the de factos (pun intended) required in order to quickly make your arguments against generalizations I didn't make. I said a JD has, in my experience, helped a few of my friends secure non attorney, high-paying jobs. This may be rare for you, but in my peer group, it hasn't been. That's all.

I have a few friends who, after graduating law school, decided working as an attorney isn't their ideal path anymore.

They interviewed well, received a few medium-to-big-law offers which would have surely involved 70+ hours a week, but turned that path down altogether. One essentially said he decided that just isn't the lifestyle he can see himself being happy in.

They both do quite well and are into six figures for income, but will likely never work as attorneys, despite the JD. One is a marketing director, the other is in medical equipment.

What other industries, markets, alternative careers/roles, etc, do you see lawyers becomming an attractive commodity for in the next 3-5 years?

That's the generalization you made, that everyone is telling you is wrong.
"Other" implies that in the markets your friends work "lawyers are becomming an attractive commodity."

[QandAphorism]

I also have a JD friend involved in a pretty huge/novel enterprise that rhymes with "Poupon." He was hired (coming directly from the hiring mngr) over several others who had a specialized graduate degrees related to this type of business because they prefer people with the capacity to understand the current and future legal implications of this fairly new business/model. He has never worked as an attorney, graduated from a lower T1 LS (but high in the class) and would NOT have gotten this job without the JD. It does help in some cases. Your generalizations are wrong.

How the hell could he possibly understand legal implications if he never worked as lawyer? If hiring firm is dumb enough to believe that this person knows anything about legal implications without practicing, then they are retards.

They may be retards, they just may be. (millionaire retards per their equity stake in the co)

Did this person have some other qualifier that made them eligible for this job? This doesn't make sense.

Yeah, a type-A personality.

[QandAphorism]

I have a few friends who, after graduating law school, decided working as an attorney isn't their ideal path anymore.

They interviewed well, received a few medium-to-big-law offers which would have surely involved 70+ hours a week, but turned that path down altogether. One essentially said he decided that just isn't the lifestyle he can see himself being happy in.

They both do quite well and are into six figures for income, but will likely never work as attorneys, despite the JD. One is a marketing director, the other is in medical equipment.

What other industries, markets, alternative careers/roles, etc, do you see lawyers becomming an attractive commodity for in the next 3-5 years?

That's the generalization you made, that everyone is telling you is wrong.
"Other" implies that in the markets your friends work "lawyers are becomming an attractive commodity."

Are you serious? Did you happen to miss that question mark at the end of that sentence? I like your creativity though - an attempt to set a new precedent involving how asking a question can be construed as making a generaliztion... this is innovative, to say the least.

"Other" could have meant, "aside from law."

The answer could have been "none" - ok, fine. (if that was/is your opinion) In my experience, it's not.

[paratactical]

In my experience listening to other people talk but not actually doing anything myself, it's not.

Fixt for accuracy

[megaTTTron]

I have a few friends who, after graduating law school, decided working as an attorney isn't their ideal path anymore.

They interviewed well, received a few medium-to-big-law offers which would have surely involved 70+ hours a week, but turned that path down altogether. One essentially said he decided that just isn't the lifestyle he can see himself being happy in.

They both do quite well and are into six figures for income, but will likely never work as attorneys, despite the JD. One is a marketing director, the other is in medical equipment.

What other industries, markets, alternative careers/roles, etc, do you see lawyers becomming an attractive commodity for in the next 3-5 years?

That's the generalization you made, that everyone is telling you is wrong.
"Other" implies that in the markets your friends work "lawyers are becomming an attractive commodity."

Are you serious? Did you happen to miss that question mark at the end of that sentence? I like your creativity though - an attempt to set a new precedent involving how asking a question can be construed as making a generaliztion... this is innovative, to say the least.

You are more competent that I could ever imagine!

Let me explain:

Other than X what else is Y?
This means X = Y.
You're asking for more "things" that are Y.

Kapeesh?

EDIT: you edited your above post. Well done sir.

[QandAphorism]

In my experience listening to other people talk but not actually doing anything myself, it's not.

Fixt for accuracy

First of all, great tar.

Secondly, exceptional tar.

Lastly, I do things as well.

[QandAphorism]

Judging by the rampant pessimism in this thread, I might change the title to "the unemployed lawyers player haters ball"

I have still have a career and will be pursuing a part time JD, which is why I might be a bit more positive than some of you. But with that said, I'm sure most of you hope you're at least a little wrong.

Good luck, seriously. I know how f'ed up things are out there for a lot of capable/educated people.

[reasonable_man]

In my experience listening to other people talk but not actually doing anything myself, it's not.

Fixt for accuracy

First of all, great tar.

Secondly, exceptional tar.

Lastly, I do things as well.

While I understand your achievements in life are likely worthy of their own Wikileaks post, lets let national security blow in the wind and why don't you reveal your storied background to us. We would love to hear it. Seriously.

As an aside, my experieince comes from watching others I graduated with and many others trying to find jobs. It comes from trying to hire a few law clerks (i.e. law students), and having to fend off 100s of resumes from admitted attorneys begging for work. It doesn't come from my own experieince in not finding a job. I'm very happy in my line of work and would be hard pressed to trade it in, even if it meant working in some exotic non-law field for more money.

[megaTTTron]

--ImageRemoved--

[QandAphorism]

In my experience listening to other people talk but not actually doing anything myself, it's not.

Fixt for accuracy

First of all, great tar.

Secondly, exceptional tar.

Lastly, I do things as well.

While I understand your achievements in life are likely worthy of their own Wikileaks post, lets let national security blow in the wind and why don't you reveal your storied background to us. We would love to hear it. Seriously.

As an aside, my experieince comes from watching others I graduated with and many others trying to find jobs. It comes from trying to hire a few law clerks (i.e. law students), and having to fend off 100s of resumes from admitted attorneys begging for work. It doesn't come from my own experieince in not finding a job. I'm very happy in my line of work and would be hard pressed to trade it in, even if it meant working in some exotic non-law field for more money.

No way - I still have apps out, am a bit paranoid about lurking adcomms, and aren't going to reveal specifics because I'm still hoping for some scholarship money.

In any case, those 100's of resumes from admitted attorneys represent people that might have to start thinking outside of the box to break into some other type of employment. Maybe I'm a bit biased in thinking they can spin their experience towards creating at least some additional probability of their getting hired in another field over a non-JD, but that's because I've been able to do just that with even the most arbitrary of internship experience 7 years ago post UG. Anyways, gotta get back to work. Fun chatting w/you all - will be back this weekend.

[QandAphorism]

--ImageRemoved--

+1

[pandacot]

--ImageRemoved--

[094320]

..

[pandacot]

--ImageRemoved--

Only cowards hide behind the anon feature when hurling insults.

That post wasn't anon?!?!?

[094320]

..

[megaTTTron]

--ImageRemoved--

+1

I'm beginning to realize that any quotation on that meme makes me laugh. That guys facial expression is priceless.

[pandacot]

--ImageRemoved--

Only cowards hide behind the anon feature when hurling insults.

That post wasn't anon?!?!?

Your others were.

SO? There weren't any insults in them. I didn't post that one under anonymous.

[Big Shrimpin]

Judging by the rampant pessimism in this thread, I might change the title to "the unemployed lawyers player haters ball"

I have still have a career and will be pursuing a part time JD, which is why I might be a bit more positive than some of you. But with that said, I'm sure most of you hope you're at least a little wrong.

Good luck, seriously. I know how f'ed up things are out there for a lot of capable/educated people.

I'm definitely not hating broski. I've got a biglaw SA lined up for next semester. Two things that I love about TLS, and that I came to learn very early on before I applied to schools a few years ago, are brutal honesty and scathing opinion. Now, surely you weren't expecting an assault about the jorb market ITE. However, my friend, you asked for it with your posts in the first page of the thread (which clearly show us that you don't really know that much about lawl school OR non-legal hiring!).

One of the flaws in the legal education system that is coming to light, in part due to the guys from Vandy and the law school transparency project (which, I might add, just got some major street cred by a nod from USNEWS...can't find the article, and it's not the end of the law-school-black-box-employment-reporting-conspiracy-plague but it's a step in the right direction to removing the veil from the eyes of the unwitting, would-be-law-student who thinks a JD is a one-way ticket to a four star restaurant and a four car garage...whoa, long aside), is how higher education institutions like law schools perpetuate the half-truth that a law degree is a good thing. In part, it is, but for a vast majority, it isn't. If you don't spend any time in the blogosphere or ever pick up a copy of the american lawyer, national law journal, et. al, then this would sound like Portuguese to you.

Bottom line, OP, and for all those prospective 0Ls out there - do NOT be fooled that, just because you know a few people who found a nice career outside of law AFTER paying a fortune for the degree and essentially doing nothing with it, you might end up there too. FAR too many have failed.

The road to a successful career after law school is paved with the souls of the unwitting and tolled by by the liars that built it.

/thread

[QandAphorism]

Judging by the rampant pessimism in this thread, I might change the title to "the unemployed lawyers player haters ball"

I have still have a career and will be pursuing a part time JD, which is why I might be a bit more positive than some of you. But with that said, I'm sure most of you hope you're at least a little wrong.

Good luck, seriously. I know how f'ed up things are out there for a lot of capable/educated people.

I'm definitely not hating broski. I've got a biglaw SA lined up for next semester. Two things that I love about TLS, and that I came to learn very early on before I applied to schools a few years ago, are brutal honesty and scathing opinion. Now, surely you weren't expecting an assault about the jorb market ITE. However, my friend, you asked for it with your posts in the first page of the thread (which clearly show us that you don't really know that much about lawl school OR non-legal hiring!).

One of the flaws in the legal education system that is coming to light, in part due to the guys from Vandy and the law school transparency project (which, I might add, just got some major street cred by a nod from USNEWS...can't find the article, and it's not the end of the law-school-black-box-employment-reporting-conspiracy-plague but it's a step in the right direction to removing the veil from the eyes of the unwitting, would-be-law-student who thinks a JD is a one-way ticket to a four star restaurant and a four car garage...whoa, long aside), is how higher education institutions like law schools perpetuate the half-truth that a law degree is a good thing. In part, it is, but for a vast majority, it isn't. If you don't spend any time in the blogosphere or ever pick up a copy of the american lawyer, national law journal, et. al, then this would sound like Portuguese to you.

Bottom line, OP, and for all those prospective 0Ls out there - do NOT be fooled that, just because you know a few people who found a nice career outside of law AFTER paying a fortune for the degree and essentially doing nothing with it, you might end up there too. FAR too many have failed.

The road to a successful career after law school is paved with the souls of the unwitting and tolled by by the liars that built it.

/thread

Good post - well said. The only thing I'd correct is that my few examples did secure scholarship so their JD's didn't cost them much, aside from time of course. There's no way I'd pay sticker either. Anyways, I'm going to look into that transparancy project you mentioned...