Newly minited lawyers how is the job outlook and salaries? Forum

[ksllaw]

Rayiner, for the uninitiated ...an 0L like me just beginning my research on law schools and legal employment, what exactly is "CLS data" if you don't mind my asking?

I appreciate the analysis and insider view of things. Am thinking about your post and will maybe respond later. I'm also reading and trying to find data that either supports and weakens Campos' argument...this is great stuff, however, as it'll certainly aid in what may be the biggest decision I may make in my life (attending or not attending law school).

Thanks.

[gnuwheels]

I feel like i'm gonna regret posting in here, but a family friend who has been involved with hiring at a V10 recently put their approach to hiring from T14s this way:

1. If you're at HYSish, we're interested.
2. If rest of T14ish, then...
a. If you're top of your class (10-15%ish), we want to interview you
b. If your'e bottom of your class (10-25%ish), we probably are going to avoid you
c. Everyone else...we'll interview you, but now we're just looking for fit/personality/how much you can stand out from the rest.

I'm not going to defend this, you can question the veracity of this or whatever you want, i'm just passing along what he told me and it seems pretty legit. I haven't been through OCI myself yet so I don't know how this matches up with GPA requirements or whatever that firms have for interviewing slots. Again, this is just what he told me.

ETA: why I thought the above was relevant - it seems that a lot of discussion is operating under the assumption that the percentage of people who fail to get jobs is related to a sliding scale of grades, which, if we take the above to be true, is not quite accurate. There is a threshold, for sure. If your'e at the bottom of your class outside of HYS then your'e obviously not in a good situation. BUT, as someone else pointed out, firms don't seem to be distinguishing between 40% and 60% in class rank, and again if you take the above to be true, that band is even wider, to more like between 30% and 80%.

[ksllaw]

I feel like i'm gonna regret posting in here, but a family friend who has been involved with hiring at a V10 recently put their approach to hiring from T14s this way:

1. If you're at HYSish, we're interested.
2. If rest of T14ish, then...
a. If you're top of your class (10-15%ish), we want to interview you
b. If your'e bottom of your class (10-25%ish), we probably are going to avoid you
c. Everyone else...we'll interview you, but now we're just looking for fit/personality/how much you can stand out from the rest.

I'm not going to defend this, you can question the veracity of this or whatever you want, i'm just passing along what he told me and it seems pretty legit. I haven't been through OCI myself yet so I don't know how this matches up with GPA requirements or whatever that firms have for interviewing slots. Again, this is just what he told me.

ETA: why I thought the above was relevant - it seems that a lot of discussion is operating under the assumption that the percentage of people who fail to get jobs is related to a sliding scale of grades, which, if we take the above to be true, is not quite accurate. There is a threshold, for sure. If your'e at the bottom of your class outside of HYS then your'e obviously not in a good situation. BUT, as someone else pointed out, firms don't seem to be distinguishing between 40% and 60% in class rank, and again if you take the above to be true, that band is even wider, to more like between 30% and 80%.

That's not too terribly far off from the rest of this thread's descriptions of hiring. I appreciate the point about employment odds not necessarily linked to exact corresponding class ranks and GPA for the middle of the pack students. That corroborates what someone else said as well and makes sense (the difference in quality of students in that range is probably not that significant vs. being very top of your class).

Where then do bottom of the class T14er's end up then? If presumably big/top law firms avoid them, where can they go to be competitive?...Certainly "down" the ladder...but I'm just wondering exactly where/what that is within the legal world (being an OL and not yet completely informed of the legal employment landscape)? Are we talking very small firms in lesser known places?...things like that? Thanks! It's quite an interesting perspective and insight. Peace.

[PaulKriske]

From an OL perspective

thanks for hijacking the thread jackass.

[ksllaw]

Rayiner - You might be able to also knock off about 1 percentage point from those numbers too for women who may have gotten married and decided to not go into law after graduation, in order to be a stay-at-home wife or mom. I'm guessing it'll only be maybe a few (perhaps 2 or 3 people in a class of several hundred?) that do this, but that would certainly account for some who are not working after law grad as well. .....But, overall, 1 percentage point is still negligible in the big scheme of things.

[ksllaw]

There's a website out there that's actually seeking Ivy League or "top"/"prestigious" law school graduates who are unemployed and in debt for a show that they're hoping to create and run:

http://alleducationmatters.blogspot.com ... s-law.html
Monday, July 30, 2012
Did you graduate from a prestigious law school, unemployed, and deeply in debt?
Help A Reporter: Are you a law grad from an Ivy League or prestigious school (Georgetown, Stanford, U. of Chicago, etc), can't find a job, and have a lot of student loan debt? A major broadcasting company is doing a show and asked for assistance on finding people who are willing to be interviewed.

Does anyone know anything about this?


The website Above the Law also had a piece about an Ivy League law school graduate who was unemployed a while back:

http://abovethelaw.com/2010/01/ivy-leag ... raigslist/
"We know that many law schools fudge their “employed upon graduation” statistics for the benefit of their U.S. News ranking. But I wonder what it would like if law schools reported their “still employed five years after graduation” numbers. Something tells me it wouldn’t look good. One well credentialed top law school graduate has been reduced to looking for work on Craigslist. I’m sure he’s not alone:

Ivy League Honors Grad with Substantial Experience Seeking Work (Upper East Side)
Graduate of top-5 law school with big firm and federal government experience seeking employment, preferably full-time but also will consider contract, per diem and part-time work. I have experience in litigation, arbitration, regulatory and administrative matters, among other areas. Will provide resume upon request. I look forward to your inquiries.

Random guess, this guy or girl graduated from Columbia, right? The add says “top-5,” instead of top-3. But it’s an Ivy. Columbia is the only school that fits the bill, right? (Yes, I got every logic game question right on the LSAT.)

In any event, wouldn’t it be interesting to see how many law school graduates are still employed as attorneys five to seven years after graduation? Because people who go to law school aren’t just looking for a job, they’re looking for a career. It’d be great to see how many people actually find a career in the law, broken down for different schools."


Elie Mystal raises the one question I'm most curious about at the moment: What are employment numbers/propspects like for law graduates (esp. from "top" schools) 5 or so years post-graduation?

I wonder if there are any decent statistics on this? I know it could be tough for Ivy League or top law school grads, who were let go at big law or other jobs and are unemployed + in significant debt, to be willing to speak up about their experiences. The stigma that could be attached (real or perceived) might prevent them from coming forward. ...But I'm wondering how accurate some of the "word of mouth" information I've been hearing has been (that I wrote about in earlier posts in this thread) that legal employment at good law firms is very unstable even for top law school graduates. There was the "revolving door" picture of hiring I gave, where firms can annually hire from a large pool of top law school graduates and only have to keep the very best of the best knowing there'll be another over-supply of T14 grads the following year...and so to make it past year 1...or year 2, etc. of a big law firm can be quite tough. I'm wondering how the same pool of T14 grads going into these good paying jobs after graduation do several years down the line?

[bk1]

Elie Mystal raises the one question I'm most curious about at the moment: What are employment numbers/propspects like for law graduates (esp. from "top" schools) 5 or so years post-graduation?

Yale does a survey of 5 years out. Sadly Yale is a pretty unrepresentative (and it's a sample size of 1 school) on top of the economy having tanked in the interim. But it's better than nothing and I don't know of any other school that does something similar.

Source: http://www.law.yale.edu/studentlife/cdo5yrsurvey.htm

[rayiner]

There's a UVA law class of 1990 longitudinal survey out there.

[bk1]

There's a UVA law class of 1990 longitudinal survey out there.

http://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/manus ... wanson.pdf

Damn, they make a lot of money.

[Miracle]

Very informative post!

[ksllaw]

Elie Mystal raises the one question I'm most curious about at the moment: What are employment numbers/propspects like for law graduates (esp. from "top" schools) 5 or so years post-graduation?

Yale does a survey of 5 years out. Sadly Yale is a pretty unrepresentative (and it's a sample size of 1 school) on top of the economy having tanked in the interim. But it's better than nothing and I don't know of any other school that does something similar.

Source: http://www.law.yale.edu/studentlife/cdo5yrsurvey.htm

Right. I think you took the words out of my mouth. It's not only a small n size, unrepresentative sample, but likely the most biased possible sample, lol. It might be a little like asking the top 1% of all wage earners in the U.S. how their lives have been since the 2007 U.S. economic downturn.

But thanks for offering it nonetheless.

For longitudinal studies, I was thinking the best date ranges for them would something like a min. of 5+ years out after graduation post-1990-ish. Even Campos has said that 20-25 years ago law grads from a school like Michigan would have found it hard not to get a big law job after graduation. ...So it'd be nice to have something more relevant to our own times.

For anyone interested in a few more numbers, Campos has this post I also saw from June 8, 2012:
http://insidethelawschoolscam.blogspot. ... chool.html
Two out of three 2011 law school graduates did not get real legal jobs

"NALP has released preliminary employment statistics for the class of 2011 as of nine months after graduation. They are, unsurprisingly, terrible.

12% of 2011 graduates were completely unemployed in February 2012, and another three per cent had re-enrolled in further graduate study, which can be treated as the functional equivalent to post-law school unemployment. So the first takeaway from these numbers is the nearly 15% unemployment rate for people who got law degrees from ABA-accredited schools last year. This compares with an 8.2% overall national unemployment rate, which, to my surprise at least, is also the unemployment rate among 25 to 34 year-olds (see Table A-10). So getting a law degree correlates with a doubling of the risk that a young adult will be unemployed nine months after receiving it.

But of course this 85.6% “employment” rate includes every kind of job law graduates obtained: legal, non-legal, full-time, part-time, long-term, and temporary. Let’s work with this preliminary data to make an estimate regarding how many 2011 graduates of ABA law schools had real legal jobs nine months after graduation, with a real legal job defined as a full-time non-temporary paying position requiring a law degree..."

(just an excerpt for anyone interested...And to be sure, Campos does use a lot of guess work in his data analysis too. So, it's by no means rigorous. But the question is...how far off might he be from the truth?)

[ksllaw]

This was possible inside data specific to a single school, but a T14 one:

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/08/uva-laws ... mpressive/
UVA Law's Employment Numbers are Less Than Impressive (Class of 2011, so one year ago, but still relatively recent.)

[bk1]

You realize that you don't have to repost every single old blog link that you find, right?

[ksllaw]

You realize that you don't have to repost every single old blog link that you find, right?

Understood. Thanks.

[splittertothemax]

I think the problem is that theres to many law schools and to many below par people getting a crap law degree, see charlotte school of law, and getting jobs because of connections.

For instance, A 24 year old kid got a 140 on his LSAT and is attending charlotte school of law. His dad owns a law firm in Charlotte, so he's garunteed a job after graduation.

[ksllaw]

He assumes that e.g. all business/industry jobs are "not acceptable" even though Columbia has a JD-MBA program and lots of those students take business/industry jobs...

I start with the data reported by the schools to the ABA (http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org), and make some inferences based on my own observations as someone in the class of 2012 who can see where my classmates got jobs. For example, at NU, half the people (14 of 29) who took "business/industry" jobs were JD-MBA's who took non-law jobs. Northwestern has an M7 business school (like Columbia). These are good jobs. It makes no sense to count them as "not acceptable outcomes."...

I don't know how many JD-MBA's Columbia has, but if you assume that at least some of the business/industry jobs are legit, that's where my ~80% figure comes from. I think, based on my observations (Campos can't Linked-In stalk actual students), that's a more accurate figure than the one Campos has calculated...

* Because of JD-MBA's and dat-work experience, I'd say another 10% either didn't want law or had something lined up from before school, for a total of about 20% not gunning for big law.

Hi rayiner:

Just wanted to return to the thoughts about joint-MBA/JD graduates getting well-paying jobs outside of law that may not be included in Campos' figures.

Surprisingly, the number of dual-JD/MBA program graduates is very low and rare from what I've been told. Approximately 100 students (total out of all ABA law grads - last year's class was approx. 44,000) PER YEAR graduate with an MBA/JD. That was surprising to me and others. One might be tempted to think the numbers would be higher, given the potential benefits of the dual degree program, but it's been rare.

Take Berkeley's graduating law classes, for example. Having merely 3 or more students with a joint-MBA/JD is rare. Recently, one graduating class had exactly 1 MBA/JD... So, if these figures hold true, it would maybe lessen the chance that there are significantly more people getting higher paying jobs that Campos' figures don't include due to the business track jobs they've taken on.

But, a counter-argument here might be that there may still be JD students who ALREADY have an MBA and are not in joint-MBA/JD programs (for which the graduate numbers are low) and are going into good business tracked jobs. These figures I don't know anything about.

But just in general dual-MBA degree students have been very rare (less than 1% of MBA students): http://www.businessweek.com/business-sc ... 82011.html
Dual Degrees: For MBAs, the Road Not Taken.

[IAFG]

Take Berkeley's graduating law classes, for example. Having merely 3 or more students with a joint-MBA/JD is rare. Recently, one graduating class had exactly 1 MBA/JD... So, if these figures hold true, it would maybe lessen the chance that there are significantly more people getting higher paying jobs that Campos' figures don't include due to the business track jobs they've taken on.

That's really not representative of the T14. Northwestern, Penn, Columbia and Harvard all have relatively popular joint programs (28 in c/o 2013 at NU, typically 15-18 at Penn, ~12 at Harvard). So while there may not be many JD-MBAs generally, those that do exist are disproportionately T14 grads, and must be factored into an analysis of T14 outcomes.

[ksllaw]

Take Berkeley's graduating law classes, for example. Having merely 3 or more students with a joint-MBA/JD is rare. Recently, one graduating class had exactly 1 MBA/JD... So, if these figures hold true, it would maybe lessen the chance that there are significantly more people getting higher paying jobs that Campos' figures don't include due to the business track jobs they've taken on.

That's really not representative of the T14. Northwestern, Penn, Columbia and Harvard all have relatively popular joint programs (28 in c/o 2013 at NU, typically 15-18 at Penn, ~12 at Harvard). So while there may not be many JD-MBAs generally, those that do exist are disproportionately T14 grads, and must be factored into an analysis of T14 outcomes.

Ah, thanks. Good points to know. Yeah, maybe we can take a look at the T14'ers alone.

How about for Virginia, Yale, etc.?...Anyone have some numbers? Good discussion topic!

[manofjustice]

I would pick the true figure somewhere in the middle of Raynier's and Campos's numbers, tilting toward Raynier's. Campos excludes <200 firms, which is weird. He also excludes public interest, which is weird. And a fair bit of government jobs he excludes are also good. Some are LRAP eligible. And just looking at the salary data for Biz and Industry jobs (either 2011 or earlier, if 2011 isn't available), a fair portion, maybe 30 to 60% of Biz and Industry jobs are no jokes. I would say at a T20 25% minimum get BigLawBigClerkBigBizCoolGov.

Campos's point, however, remains well taken. That is VERY low. Just objectively, it is horrible. Campos should be taken seriously. If you take Campos seriously, most don't apply to law school who are now going to the T6-bottom. That's what 0Ls need to get through their heads. I am not trying to offend anyone. We all have had to make our call. It's just my advice to 0Ls.

I would say, you have to interview well, and know yourself well enough to feel convinced you can at least make median. (It's hard to admit to yourself when you don't think you can.) If you take the acceptable jobs, say...if they constitute 55% (or the good jobs: say they constitute 25%)...you'll not have to be in the top 55% or 25%...there is a buffer...and that's because some people in that top 25% or 30% won't interview well..but the buffer is small.

All this is 2011 data, however. Keep in mind 2011 offers are 2010 summers which are 2009 OCI, the first OCI since the great crash, when we were in the worst of the recession and still falling like a knife. But all reports are of minor tick ups. Business is still slow. And as business gets better, doc review is outsourced and insourced. All you can really do is take a guess at how much improvement we'll see this year and next. My stab? I think we'll crawl back to 2010 numbers: that would be from 25% minimum to 33% minimum on the good jobs, and maybe 55% to 67% for the acceptable jobs.

This is T20, though. Or T20-like T20 to 30 (BU/BC/Fordham). Everywhere else, the situation is different. Wouldn't go to any other school.

edit: Biz and Industry jobs are not LRAP eligible (typo) and other stuff.

Raynier's opinion is to be given great deference, bear in mind, as his number-crunching and fact development is superb.

[ksllaw]

I would pick the true figure somewhere in the middle of Raynier's and Campos's numbers, tilting toward Raynier's. Campos excludes <200 firms, which is weird. He also excludes public interest, which is weird. And a fair bit of government jobs he excludes are also good. Some are LRAP eligible. And just looking at the salary data for Biz and Industry jobs (either 2011 or earlier, if 2011 isn't available), a fair portion, maybe 30 to 60% of Biz and Industry jobs are no jokes. I would say at a T20 25% minimum get BigLawBigClerkBigBizCoolGov.

Does Campos really exclude PI? I was under the impression that he did include them from what he said.

Manofjustice - What are "<200 firms" by the way? I'm a legal newbie and not familiar with many of these terms yet.

I'm thinking of emailing Campos to see how he constructed his figures/stats. In the video he initially offers to break down his stats when he starts going into the percentages of people having meaningful employment and then pulls back and says he'll exclude that part and if anyone wants to know to contact him. ...I think it would help to see exactly what numbers he's using - even though he seemingly gives us the formula earlier on. ...It's just that the wording he used possibly left it open that there were maybe other types of positions included into the formula too and that perhaps he only listed the major ones as examples...

I think emailing Campos would be safest. I'll even refer to our thread here, lol.

[rayiner]

Surprisingly, the number of dual-JD/MBA program graduates is very low and rare from what I've been told. Approximately 100 students (total out of all ABA law grads - last year's class was approx. 44,000) PER YEAR graduate with an MBA/JD. That was surprising to me and others. One might be tempted to think the numbers would be higher, given the potential benefits of the dual degree program, but it's been rare.

Take Berkeley's graduating law classes, for example. Having merely 3 or more students with a joint-MBA/JD is rare. Recently, one graduating class had exactly 1 MBA/JD... So, if these figures hold true, it would maybe lessen the chance that there are significantly more people getting higher paying jobs that Campos' figures don't include due to the business track jobs they've taken on.

But, a counter-argument here might be that there may still be JD students who ALREADY have an MBA and are not in joint-MBA/JD programs (for which the graduate numbers are low) and are going into good business tracked jobs. These figures I don't know anything about.

But just in general dual-MBA degree students have been very rare (less than 1% of MBA students): http://www.businessweek.com/business-sc ... 82011.html
Dual Degrees: For MBAs, the Road Not Taken.

I think the number may skew dramatically based on the school. Here at NU, about 10% of each class is JD-MBA's. For C/O 2011, 24 of 287 graduates were JD-MBA's, and 14 took non-law jobs, accounting for about 5% of all graduates. I don't think it's determinative anywhere, but I do thing it's worth counting, and in general it is important to properly account for people who get business or in-house gigs out of law school.

I'm not sure what the JD-MBA class size for other M7 business schools happens to be, but I wouldn't be surprised if schools like Columbia that have both M7 b-schools and T14 law schools had much larger JD-MBA classes than the average.

[rayiner]

I would pick the true figure somewhere in the middle of Raynier's and Campos's numbers, tilting toward Raynier's. Campos excludes <200 firms, which is weird. He also excludes public interest, which is weird. And a fair bit of government jobs he excludes are also good. Some are LRAP eligible. And just looking at the salary data for Biz and Industry jobs (either 2011 or earlier, if 2011 isn't available), a fair portion, maybe 30 to 60% of Biz and Industry jobs are no jokes. I would say at a T20 25% minimum get BigLawBigClerkBigBizCoolGov.

Does Campos really exclude PI? I was under the impression that he did include them from what he said.

Manofjustice - What are "<200 firms" by the way? I'm a legal newbie and not familiar with many of these terms yet.

Firms smaller than 200 attorneys.

I don't think Campos is wrong so much as he's very conservative with his figures because he's operating with less information. He knows that firms of 250+ attorneys all pay good salaries, but knows that there are some firms smaller than 250 that are insurance defense firms that pay very low salaries. So he makes conservative assumptions and counts only people at firms with over 250 attorneys. I don't make that conservative assumption, because as a student I can see the internal summer jobs database, etc, and know that those smaller firms are much more likely to be one of the dozen IP boutiques in Chicago, or one of the dozen commercial lit boutiques in Chicago, etc, than an insurance defense firm like Wilson Elsner.

[HBBJohnStamos]

I think the problem is that theres to many law schools and to many below par people getting a crap law degree, see charlotte school of law, and getting jobs because of connections.

For instance, A 24 year old kid got a 140 on his LSAT and is attending charlotte school of law. His dad owns a law firm in Charlotte, so he's garunteed a job after graduation.

How is this a problem at all? Please kill yourself.

User has been warned.

[Miracle]

I think the problem is that theres to many law schools and to many below par people getting a crap law degree, see charlotte school of law, and getting jobs because of connections.

For instance, A 24 year old kid got a 140 on his LSAT and is attending charlotte school of law. His dad owns a law firm in Charlotte, so he's garunteed a job after graduation.

How is this a problem at all? Please kill yourself.

Don't tell him to kill himself. Thats so immature, and totally uncalled for.

He might of not "worded" the issue at question very well but his concern is valid.

[HBBJohnStamos]

He might of not "worded" the issue at question very well but his concerns is valid.

lol