Post by kellbell191 on Aug 15, 2012 8:53:30 GMT -5
I guess it really comes down to what his skill set is in. Where has he been working during the summers and what did he focus on in his coursework? If he's just shooting in the dark for any lawyer job and bringing no real skills in, then yeah, this is a good gig. If he's been interning for the AG for two years and has an in there, then I would maybe pass.
So it sounds like he willfully blinded himself to the realities of the legal market and now he's facing reality. He should take the job to get much needed experience. How much do you make? You may have to live pay-check to pay-check for a few years to cover daycare, but it will only get harder for him to find a job if he waits to get into the market.
I guess it really comes down to what his skill set is in. Where has he been working during the summers and what did he focus on in his coursework? If he's just shooting in the dark for any lawyer job and bringing no real skills in, then yeah, this is a good gig. If he's been interning for the AG for two years and has an in there, then I would maybe pass.
In this market, I wouldn't pass until you have accepted another offer. If something better comes along in 3 months, you can leave. Staying at least a year is usually ideal, but I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
The legal job market is TERRIBLE. I would not be working in my hellhole of a job if it were not.
I guess it really comes down to what his skill set is in. Where has he been working during the summers and what did he focus on in his coursework? If he's just shooting in the dark for any lawyer job and bringing no real skills in, then yeah, this is a good gig. If he's been interning for the AG for two years and has an in there, then I would maybe pass.
I don't know, I interned for the AG and a judge, had great grades, was on law review and still got my offer at 33K my first year. Granted, there was room to make more if I brought in more billables, but that is where I was. And that was almost 8 years ago, so I can't imagine how the market is now.
I guess it really comes down to what his skill set is in. Where has he been working during the summers and what did he focus on in his coursework? If he's just shooting in the dark for any lawyer job and bringing no real skills in, then yeah, this is a good gig. If he's been interning for the AG for two years and has an in there, then I would maybe pass.
There is no way in hell I'd pass on a paying job right now.
because everyone thinks they will be in that 10% or whatever that will earn 160K upon graduation. I sure did.
I also went in with a large scholarship that I lost after my first year. So, going in, I thought I would have less debt than I do and thought I'd be making a hell of a lot more than I do.
Yes I am sure this is exactly it. I considered law school when I graduated in 2006 and am thankful every day I didn't choose it. My parents WHO ARE LAWYERS kept telling me "oh you'll make a lot of money coming out, you are hard working and motivated, blah blah blah." They certainly did not grasp what was about to happen to the legal job market and neither did I. I didn't end up choosing law school because I didn't like reading and because I got excessively drunk before I took the LSATs and didn't perform as expected. So alcohol basically saved me
I didn't perform as well as I expected either-- I was scoring much higher on my practice exams. But it was "good enough" for the schools I was looking at. Except 9/11 happened and law school applications jumped. All of a sudden, my higher than average LSATs for local T1 schools became wait list fodder. I went to a T2 school on partial scholarship, thinking I was smarter than all these people. hahahahahahahaha.
Just another attorney chiming in that $40k is unfortunately pretty much par for the course. If he doesn't have anything else lined up, he should take it. It doesn't have to be permanent; it can be a stepping stone. But it's something, it'll give him some experience that will make him more attractive to better paying employers. Plus he can make more doing this than job hunting in the meantime.
Calvin started at $35k in 2006, in a small firm doing matrimonial and family law. I was a 3L at the time, and it was really difficult. We drove modest cars, rented a modest home, and I was really, really careful with the BCPs. Like pp's have said, you just don't get to have it all, at least not right away: the SLs, the mortgage, and a couple kids in daycare just aren't compatible.
Things loosened up when I started working, since I'm a patent attorney and can command a bit more as a result. He also changed jobs about 2 years in, for a county prosecutor position that paid better and had way better benefits. (Unfortunately, his salary's been frozen for the last 3 years.) We bought a house, and have a little more breathing room. But we're still putting off kids, in year #6 of marriage, almost entirely because of SLs. We need to pay a big chunk off before we can free up that money each month for daycare. That's life in this industry these days.
I guess it really comes down to what his skill set is in. Where has he been working during the summers and what did he focus on in his coursework? If he's just shooting in the dark for any lawyer job and bringing no real skills in, then yeah, this is a good gig. If he's been interning for the AG for two years and has an in there, then I would maybe pass.
There is no way in hell I'd pass on a paying job right now.
Sorry my post didn't come across as expected. Key phrase "has an in". I do have friends who lined up public interest jobs post grad with no issues, but they spent all of law school interning for the organizations that ultimately hired them.
IMO it does not sound like the OP's H did much to prepare him for post law school market and buried his head in the sand, so yeah, I would take this offer and bust my ass to do better with networking, etc.
I went to a top 25 school. I was just completely clueless. I knew nothing about how important first year grades were (and mine were respectable, just not law-review good). I knew nothing about how important connections were. The daughter of two low level civil servants in the south isn't exactly making any big connections the way my classmates whose parents were business execs were. And I knew nothing about the aspect of getting and keeping clients. Plus, I just didn't know I'd be moving into a market dominated by two law schools. Blargh.
I went to a top 25 school. I was just completely clueless. I knew nothing about how important first year grades were (and mine were respectable, just not law-review good). I knew nothing about how important connections were. The daughter of two low level civil servants in the south isn't exactly making any big connections the way my classmates whose parents were business execs were. And I knew nothing about the aspect of getting and keeping clients. Plus, I just didn't know I'd be moving into a market dominated by two law schools. Blargh.
This, to a very large extent. (well, my school wasn't Top 25), but I was clueless about connections, and I was, believe it or not, very introverted. Law school and being forced to network has really opened me up.
We've talked about this before-- but locality of the law school does matter. Despite the fact my school is T2, we do dominate the local state market here (especially in smaller law and in my practice area) and I've gotten jobs after my first one from networking bc of the law school. If I had gone to another equivalent T2 school from another area of the country, I would have been screwed here, big time. Almost every lawyer I meet locally either went to a top law school, or to one of the two local schools.
The wisdom I always heard about that is that there are three "levels" of law schools. National law schools (basically the top 14) have names that can get you jobs anywhere. Regional law schools (top 30 or so) have names that will be strong in a large geographical area (like the northeast or midwest or whatever) but that won't be as strong outside that area. Local law schools (all the rest, essentially) may have strong connections in the area they're in but the name of the school generally won't help much in other geographical areas.
I'm truly not trying to be rude, but if he was making $17/hr working with a solo during law school, what kind of jump was he expecting upon graduation?
Also, if you have two kids in daycare, there is another income somewhere tha tyou aren't accounting for. His $40k shouldn't be expected to pay all the bills.
The wisdom I always heard about that is that there are three "levels" of law schools. National law schools (basically the top 14) have names that can get you jobs anywhere. Regional law schools (top 30 or so) have names that will be strong in a large geographical area (like the northeast or midwest or whatever) but that won't be as strong outside that area. Local law schools (all the rest, essentially) may have strong connections in the area they're in but the name of the school generally won't help much in other geographical areas.
We've talked about this before-- but locality of the law school does matter.
The wisdom I always heard about that is that there are three "levels" of law schools. National law schools (basically the top 14) have names that can get you jobs anywhere. Regional law schools (top 30 or so) have names that will be strong in a large geographical area (like the northeast or midwest or whatever) but that won't be as strong outside that area. Local law schools (all the rest, essentially) may have strong connections in the area they're in but the name of the school generally won't help much in other geographical areas. [/quote]
I think this is mostly true, but I think even in your category of "regional law schools", many of them still have nationally known brand names, they just aren't marketable everywhere. A graduate of BU law might have the best luck looking for a job in Boston, but they'd probably fare well in DC, NYC, SF, and LA, where there isn't any one school that dominates, but rather, most firms are fairly diversely staffed. They'd probably have a hard time in smaller markets, like Milwaukee, where 90% of the lawyers came from one of two law schools, or other similar cities that don't pull in tons of people from out of state regularly.
Not a JD but married to one and worked in PI (assistant to managing partner) for about a decade and am familiar with the culture so I'll put in my two cents as well.
$40K does sound about right for what's going on out there, particularly in PI right now (and in the past.) One of DH's associates husband graduated three years ago and it took him well over a year to find a job -which paid less than $40K base.
The pay structure in our old firm was a salary draw/contingency commission base. (Boss is retired so the firm is no longer in existence so I'm putting this out there as something he can maybe work with now or in the future. I don't know how other firms work.) The associates each negotiated their base salaries and the draws and percentages were based on that. The salary was paid bi-weekly. Cases which came into the firm and handled by the associate were paid at a percentage which was counted against the draw. Once the draw was met, a higher percentage was paid. If the associate brought in the case, he was paid a higher percentage than if it was a "firm" case.
An example would be an associate making $52K, which gives him a bi-weekly check of $2K. He is handling a case brought in by the firm, which settles for $100K; the firm gets 30% cut or $30K. Of that $30K, he gets 10%, or $3K, which is applied toward his $52K salary, bringing his draw down to $49K for the remainder of the year. He brings in his own case, it also settles for $100K with a 30% contingency. It's his case so instead of 10% he gets 20%, or $6K. This brings his annual draw down to $43K. (Some firms will negotiate so he gets half paid when the case settles and half goes toward the draw; in this scenario he would get his $2K paycheck, plus $1500 and $3000 but his draw would remain at $47.5 because he's already been paid half.) Once he's reached his draw (or base salary) the full percentage would be paid to him. (e.g. once his draw is at $0, when a case settles for $100K, he would get his full $3K or $6K plus his $2K paycheck for that pay period.) This is where litigation and contingency really begins to pay off. If he has a bonus/percentage structure in place, he can develop quite a network of referrals to bring in new cases the he would get full credit for. Please note that I'm just throwing numbers out there.
Does this make sense?
And I very much agree with +v+ and the others re: degrees. DH's was not a top-tier but in his field several instructors were very renowned fortunately, and it was based in DC so it was moderately universal for those "in the know." Others in DC were much more recognizable (Georgetown, American) and therefore more marketable. His first choice was a state college, with a high percentage of graduates remaining fairly local and the majority of state judges being graduates; it would have helped him if he'd remained local or active in politics but on a national level not-so-much. The same was absolutely true in the cities where we have lived. Just as there are T1/2/3 universities there is National/Regional/Local recognition for schools.
The pay structure in our old firm was a salary draw/contingency commission base. (Boss is retired so the firm is no longer in existence so I'm putting this out there as something he can maybe work with now or in the future. I don't know how other firms work.) The associates each negotiated their base salaries and the draws and percentages were based on that. The salary was paid bi-weekly. Cases which came into the firm and handled by the associate were paid at a percentage which was counted against the draw. Once the draw was met, a higher percentage was paid. If the associate brought in the case, he was paid a higher percentage than if it was a "firm" case.
An example would be an associate making $52K, which gives him a bi-weekly check of $2K. He is handling a case brought in by the firm, which settles for $100K; the firm gets 30% cut or $30K. Of that $30K, he gets 10%, or $3K, which is applied toward his $52K salary, bringing his draw down to $49K for the remainder of the year. He brings in his own case, it also settles for $100K with a 30% contingency. It's his case so instead of 10% he gets 20%, or $6K. This brings his annual draw down to $43K. (Some firms will negotiate so he gets half paid when the case settles and half goes toward the draw; in this scenario he would get his $2K paycheck, plus $1500 and $3000 but his draw would remain at $47.5 because he's already been paid half.) Once he's reached his draw (or base salary) the full percentage would be paid to him. (e.g. once his draw is at $0, when a case settles for $100K, he would get his full $3K or $6K plus his $2K paycheck for that pay period.) This is where litigation and contingency really begins to pay off. If he has a bonus/percentage structure in place, he can develop quite a network of referrals to bring in new cases the he would get full credit for. Please note that I'm just throwing numbers out there.
Does this make sense? quote]
Before DH went out on his own, this is exactly what the pay structure was like at his PI firm. He worked for a well known local PI firm that had plenty of work (and therefore plenty of settlements), so it worked out very well financially. Maybe OP's husband can propose something like this after he's been working there for a while.
I'm in a MCOL area and started out at a small firm in the suburbs making $42,000 plus bonuses. With bonuses, I ended up making a bit under $50k. I stayed a year to get good experience, then changed firms to a mediocre but still better salary. Stayed there three years, and then went to another small firm for another pay increase. I was able to double my income after four years of practicing and finally making what I felt was pretty good money.
I kept my law school loans to a manageable level and also put off having kids until my income was at a more comfortable level. This is definitely a career where one needs to go into it because they love it and not to make a lot of money. Some people get rich, many are comfortable, and quite a few aren't doing any better than they would as a teacher.
OK, I get that the job market for attorneys is bad, but why is everyone advising he just accept the offer? I haven't seen anyone say he should counter before accepting. OP, if I were your H I'd counter at $46-48K (15-20% above their starting offer). They'd probably come back at $42-44K. Then I'd accept.
OK, I get that the job market for attorneys is bad, but why is everyone advising he just accept the offer? I haven't seen anyone say he should counter before accepting. OP, if I were your H I'd counter at $46-48K (15-20% above their starting offer). They'd probably come back at $42-44K. Then I'd accept.
I assumed that attempting to negotiate was implied.
But I wouldn't turn it down even if he doesn't budge.
I asked for $5k more than my shitty firm offered, and I was told no, the offer was the offer. I took it anyway. Considering I haven't gotten any other offers in the last 15 months, it was probably a smart move.
We've talked about this before-- but locality of the law school does matter.
The wisdom I always heard about that is that there are three "levels" of law schools. National law schools (basically the top 14) have names that can get you jobs anywhere. Regional law schools (top 30 or so) have names that will be strong in a large geographical area (like the northeast or midwest or whatever) but that won't be as strong outside that area. Local law schools (all the rest, essentially) may have strong connections in the area they're in but the name of the school generally won't help much in other geographical areas. [/quote] I've heard that, too, namely from lawyer friends in NJ who are in similar situations to cosmos. It made me really glad I'm not a lawyer.
I have to admit that even as a 2008 JD grad, this post comes as a surprise to me. I guess I'm grateful that I didn't job search, 40k is pretty depressing. And also thankful that I had a full scholarship that paid me beyond tuition each year, otherwise my low tier law degree could be a big mistake. This also confirms that I'll definitely be encouraging my kids to follow dh into medicine. Even as a pediatrician (low pay relative to most), it would be unheard of to make less than 6 figures. At least when you have a huge mountain of school debt, you can be pretty assured that you'll be able to pay it off.
I have to admit that even as a 2008 JD grad, this post comes as a surprise to me. I guess I'm grateful that I didn't job search, 40k is pretty depressing. And also thankful that I had a full scholarship that paid me beyond tuition each year, otherwise my low tier law degree could be a big mistake. This also confirms that I'll definitely be encouraging my kids to follow dh into medicine. Even as a pediatrician (low pay relative to most), it would be unheard of to make less than 6 figures. At least when you have a huge mountain of school debt, you can be pretty assured that you'll be able to pay it off.
You certainly wouldn't be making 6 figures fresh out of med school. First you would have to do residency for 3-4 years and would probably make a comparable salary to the ones mentioned here. OP's husband is straight out of law school so he would be the equivalent of a first year resident.
I have to admit that even as a 2008 JD grad, this post comes as a surprise to me. I guess I'm grateful that I didn't job search, 40k is pretty depressing. And also thankful that I had a full scholarship that paid me beyond tuition each year, otherwise my low tier law degree could be a big mistake. This also confirms that I'll definitely be encouraging my kids to follow dh into medicine. Even as a pediatrician (low pay relative to most), it would be unheard of to make less than 6 figures. At least when you have a huge mountain of school debt, you can be pretty assured that you'll be able to pay it off.
So, if you didn't job search, what did you do after law school?
You certainly wouldn't be making 6 figures fresh out of med school. First you would have to do residency for 3-4 years and would probably make a comparable salary to the ones mentioned here. OP's husband is straight out of law school so he would be the equivalent of a first year resident.[/quote]
True and very good point. Dh made something like $50k during residency, but jumped up considerably after he became an attending. I guess I just meant that the ending larger salary is presumably much more bankable for physicians, since I know of not one that makes less than $100k after it is all said and done. Of course it is a heck of a long road (8 yrs of post grad work for dh vs. my 3), so whether its worth that much extra opportunity cost in lost time is debatable.
I have to admit that even as a 2008 JD grad, this post comes as a surprise to me. I guess I'm grateful that I didn't job search, 40k is pretty depressing. And also thankful that I had a full scholarship that paid me beyond tuition each year, otherwise my low tier law degree could be a big mistake. This also confirms that I'll definitely be encouraging my kids to follow dh into medicine. Even as a pediatrician (low pay relative to most), it would be unheard of to make less than 6 figures. At least when you have a huge mountain of school debt, you can be pretty assured that you'll be able to pay it off.
So, if you didn't job search, what did you do after law school?
I stay home with our kids (I had my first a week after graduation). It definitely isn't where I expected my life to go, but it has worked. I do plan to work after my youngest starts school, but not in a traditionally legal field. I knew this going in, however. I only went to law school b/c I knew not what else to do with an economics degree, and it was free.
This is sad. I work in a law library, so I see the delusional 1L's everyday. However, the sad part is where a profession in what some consider a "dying" field (librarian) will probably start at more than that.