Live data from Hacker News

An Expensive Law Degree, and No Place to Use It

nytimes.com

41–50 of 146 posts

Re: An Expensive Law Degree, and No Place to Use It

#41
post #2

Kids are being advised by parents to get an expensive degree because when they were growing up that's how you made it. That's not how it is anymore. There's no free pass to success, no check all these boxes and then you've made it. You gotta use your brain early on, figure it out for yourself, because ultimately you're going to be the one having to live with the consequences of how you've spent your youth. I think th…

> no check all these boxes and then you've made it.

There never was such a time.

Re: An Expensive Law Degree, and No Place to Use It

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lucrative is also a relative term I'm familiar with the sum($)/sum(hours) =< minimum wage arguments. We're also talking about the top 1% of 1% of wage earners in their age bracket. You might be able to get there via other means with better quality-of-life, but by all means -- absolute or relative -- $160K/year base + bonus is lucrative.

2500-3000 hours billable typical result: burn-out, alcoholism, drug abuse, self destructive behaviors, infidelity.

They're talking about 2000 billable hours and 2500-3000 actual hours (50 to 60 hours a week).

Of course, many engineers work similar hours, for far less than a NYC law associate.

Re: An Expensive Law Degree, and No Place to Use It

#43
When I went to university (sometime in the 18th Century) the idea was not vocational training but "learning to think" - at least that's what I was told. Most of my courses had underlying principles that if had attended lectures or worked hard I probably would have picked up. And I would assume the same is true of a top law degree - you may not be a lawyer, but fast thinking hard working articulate graduates are valuable whatever.

Re: An Expensive Law Degree, and No Place to Use It

#44
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lucrative is also a relative term I'm familiar with the sum($)/sum(hours) =< minimum wage arguments. We're also talking about the top 1% of 1% of wage earners in their age bracket. You might be able to get there via other means with better quality-of-life, but by all means -- absolute or relative -- $160K/year base + bonus is lucrative.

And $160k-$180k is first year salary, which is bumped up automatically until the seventh year, at which point the associate is making $280k-$315k salary. If they then make partner, they'll make much more.

That's also the base salary. Yearly bonus can easily be 100% of the salary. Partners at decent firms are of course clocking ~2M or more.

Re: An Expensive Law Degree, and No Place to Use It

#45

Why are lawsuits so expensive if there are so many broke lawyers aching for a job? It seems like a company could pay them a middling salary of $70k/year to handle ongoing lawsuits, rather than the $300-$700/hour that other lawyers demand. Obviously not for your big Oracle vs. Google lawsuits or where the entire company is riding on it, but for anything less than that. For example, every public company gets sued by op…

This is exactly what most companies do. They hire in house counsel for their baseline, routine legal needs. And then outsource to biglaw for peak law stuff (litigation, big transactions).

In house counsel salaries are way less than those at a top law firm and you don't have to pay the difference between the firm's billings and what an associate--who's actually do the work-- gets paid.

Re: An Expensive Law Degree, and No Place to Use It

#46

Why are lawsuits so expensive if there are so many broke lawyers aching for a job? It seems like a company could pay them a middling salary of $70k/year to handle ongoing lawsuits, rather than the $300-$700/hour that other lawyers demand. Obviously not for your big Oracle vs. Google lawsuits or where the entire company is riding on it, but for anything less than that. For example, every public company gets sued by op…

> It seems like you could hire a couple broke lawyers to fight patent trolls, and the cost wouldn't run into millions when your attorney books a ton of hours.

That's approximately like saying you could hire a couple of broke developers to build a software package upon which much of your company's success will depend. Both the 10X-productivity phenomenon [0] and the FizzBuzz Problem [1] can show up in law just as much as in software development.

[0] E.g., http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/179616/a-good...

[1] E.g., https://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/

Re: An Expensive Law Degree, and No Place to Use It

#47
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peak legal. Automation is affecting discovery and the demand for the junior lawyers that used to do it, but there just isn't the demand growth to keep up with the supply growth of lawyers.

Yeah, it's the perfect storm of automation and an industry that assumed growth would go like gangbusters forever. And by "industry" I mean law schools - law schools were (and maybe still are) big profit centers for universities, so they were expanded as quickly as possible.

Law is relatively cheap to teach compared to the hard sciences and engineering. You can charge students a lot so it is not surprising that universities want to keep the lawyer production pipeline open and gushing.

Re: An Expensive Law Degree, and No Place to Use It

#49
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lucrative is also a relative term I'm familiar with the sum($)/sum(hours) =< minimum wage arguments. We're also talking about the top 1% of 1% of wage earners in their age bracket. You might be able to get there via other means with better quality-of-life, but by all means -- absolute or relative -- $160K/year base + bonus is lucrative.

There is no way that $195k ($180k + $15k) is the top 1bps of wage earners at 26. That's pretty comparable to, if not less than, what you could expect in tech at that age. This is ignoring finance, small business owners, etc.

>There is no way that $195k ($180k + $15k) is the top 1bps of wage earners at 26. That's pretty comparable to, if not less than, what you could expect in tech at that age.

First you can not say a person works "in tech" any more like you can with Legal. The Information Technology industry has sooo many different Job Classification today that you can not longer loop everyone that "works in tech" together. Not even all programmers or administrators can be looped together anymore IMO. However there is 3 Basic area's of information technology that you might be able to Group together. Support, Administration, Development...

That said like the legal Field, Technology has also be decimated, H1B, "The Cloud", the rise of MSP model @ the expense of Internal IT and other issues are massively lowering the wages

So while a person @26 working for a Top Silicon Valley Company (apple, Amazon, Google, etc) as a High level Programmer, might get 195K, I do not believe you can say a person at 26 should "expect" to get 195K far far far far far from it.

If they are in Operations/Administration, you are looking at 40-70K nation wide, if you are in programming a little more, if you are In Repair or "HelpDesk" a little to much less..

Specialty Area's like DBA or Senior Linux Admin can command those high pay levels in select regions as well.

Re: An Expensive Law Degree, and No Place to Use It

#50
Lawyer and part-time adjunct law professor [0] here. In terms of root-cause analysis, some of the comments to the NY Times article are thought-provoking --- they suggest that perhaps the urge for prestige and income, on the part of both students and schools, resulted in an upward ratchet for law-faculty salaries and thus for law-school costs, resulting eventually in a mismatch with market realities.

For example (all italics are mine):

"The question many have asked is why is law school so expensive .... [O]ther than books and space to sit in lectures and small sessions, what is there? Medical schools need labs, cadavers, hospitals, and other expensive equipment. Physicists need telescopes, rockets into space and expensive equipped labs. ... But law school? Every time I hear that graduates are hundreds of thousands in debt, I wonder where the money went." --- from "Dale," http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/business/dealbook/an-expen...

"The schools have little in expenses ... physical plant, library and professors. Students buy the only 'equipment': texts and laptops." --- from "Billy Bobby," http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/business/dealbook/an-expen...

"As to the commenter who asked why law school is so expensive, try taking a look at the professor and dean salaries. [1] I was shocked when I learned what some of the professors and deans made at the third tier law school I attended. And, in my view, the school routinely admitted students who had no business being there, likely to pay the bloated salaries of the professors and deans." --- from "JJ," http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/business/dealbook/an-expen...

"But in the mid- to late 1980s, he said, the school put an increasing emphasis on legal scholarship .... Across the country, many law schools were undergoing a similar evolution. It’s no coincidence that the average law school faculty began to grow quickly around this time: Each professor was teaching fewer courses to make time for research. ... Every law school seemed to want to emulate Harvard and Yale." --- from the article itself, not the comments

"I heard a lawyer say recently that in law school there were many students for whom the 'choice' to do law was more the result of a process of elimination. They are not able or interested in stem fields, but want the prestige and income of a white collar profession which the soft sciences don't necessarily provide, i.e. Sociology, social work, psychology. ... [T]his is why the field is saturated." ---from "Johanna," http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/business/dealbook/an-expen...

"Make no mistake, the American Bar Association created this mess. The ABA has certified too many law schools and has placed ridiculous standards on these school thus driving up tuition to back-braking [sic] levels. Now law schools are admitting unqualified students to keep their numbers up. It is scary to observe many of these recent graduates. They are poorly read, lack critical thinking skills and are loosely educated." --- from "Peter," http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/business/dealbook/an-expen...

"There are crushing unmet legal needs in communities across the country. Survivors of gender based violence lack representation. Police violence is uninvestgated. Predatory lenders prey on retirees." --- from "monte," http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/business/dealbook/an-expen...

"There is a genuine need for lawyers in this society. First, let's all get beyond the popular fantasy that they should all be upper middle-class. Yes, a minority can become well-paid attorneys. For the reset [sic], lower tuition, train them at public universities, and shut down the lawyer -mill expensive private places. Teach most to expect social worker-type salaries and conditions. Allow some loan forgiveness for those who work with the indigent. If nothing else, such an approach to legal training would attract people who would otherwise go into social work." --- from "Oceanviewer," http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/business/dealbook/an-expen...

[0] Adjunct law professors are paid a pittance, so we're not part of the problem of escalating law-school costs --- we all have day jobs as lawyers or judges, and teach because we enjoy it and find it rewarding.

[1] I looked up the faculty salaries at my alma mater law school, at UT Austin, as reported by the Texas Tribune. Supposedly, the dean makes $466K; 64 full professors get a median salary $212K; one assistant professor gets $172K; one associate professor gets $122K; 18 lecturers get a median salary of $91K. https://salaries.texastribune.org/university-of-texas-at-aus...

Post reply on HN