Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - jack24

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 107
Job Search / Re: For all those who cry about our jobs stats......
« on: August 28, 2012, 11:34:15 AM »
  Now, I can't speak for every other employer out there, but if I have to choose between someone who worked at Burger King for the last year with a 3.2 gpa versus one with a 4.0 gpa and no work experience, I'm going to hire the BK kid.  I'm looking for a strong work ethic and a desire to work.  If you stayed at home depending on mommy and daddy for the last year without doing some type of work, it insinuates that either you won't do certain tasks required for your job or that you may not even want to work.  Everyone has to pay their dues at some point.  How can I possibly give someone a chance at an entry level job when I don't know if they can even hold down a job?   

I don't know if you want to hire drones or even what your definition of drones is.
Work ethic and "dues paying" are important, but they can often be overcome with management and incentives.  Many employers don't think they should have to manage or incentives.  They want someone who works because that's what people should do.   I had an employer who complained about how people were on facebook all the time.  He managed to get it banned from the network but he didn't point out deficiencies in our work product, and we hadn't missed any deadlines.  He addressed the symptoms, not the problem.

The new generation, particularly those smart kids with no work experience, probably won't work without an assignment and a reason.  Drones work because they are there to work.  They find things to do. They see a need, they fill a need.   That said, Many managers are far to busy (lazy) to train, assign, evaluate, and give feedback.  They feel this is "babysitting."    Also, many managers don't want workers who say, "Why are we doing this>?  This doesn't make sense. I'm not doing it."   Most of the time that is because managers are either too busy (lazy) or they don't have a good answer.

Your statement implies that you either evaluate work ethic over talent, or you don't see a 4.0 as evidence of talent.  If it's the latter, then fine.  If it's the former, then you don't have enough confidence in your ability to manage.

Job Search / Re: Interview Questions
« on: August 28, 2012, 09:54:50 AM »
This really depends on what size of firm you are interviewing at.   Small firms are all about the money.   If you will need to generate revenue in five years, tell them how your five year goal is to be a major contributor, and bring in more business than you can bill yourself.

I don't think the answer is necessarily reducing the number of students who can get in, but I do think the federal lending policies need to be tighter.  Students currently get more and more financing depending on the cost of attendance rather than their career prospects.  I think schools should finance student loans themselves and risk never getting paid.

Also, law schools and the ABA should get over themselves and make law school a one year degree.  If you can pass the bar and get someone to hire you, one year of law school should be enough.  If people were concerned about baby solo practitioners, the state bars could require a lengthy apprenticeship or something.  This would cut the cost of law school down by 2/3.   A residency requirement is interesting, but it would have to be very flexible.  The legal field is so diverse, and some employers would rather hire and train employees after school than hire them after a residency.

Job Search / Re: For all those who cry about our jobs stats......
« on: August 27, 2012, 04:56:47 PM »
What is personal litigation?  Does that mean non-business litigation.  Couldn't you just say, "Litigation"

Anyway, I'm glad this thread was resurrected.  I remember reading it a while back.

Cher1300, if you are reading this, sorry to be sassy:
1) What type of work experience do they need?  What if they move bricks for a living or work at the school library?  I worked my way through school, and I learned a lot.  But I don't think you need to work through school to know how to handle stress and show up on time.  Additionally, work ethic changes depending on the job.  A salesman who makes commission by selling mortgage products might have to go to luncheon's and play golf a lot and he has to be self-driven and commit to the sale.  A grocery store clerk basically just has to work at a high level and stay put.  Those are two wildly different skill sets.

2) The second paragraph of points you make sounds like someone who only likes to manage one type of person.  Maybe a college student who was involved in several campus activities and frats and partied all the time will actually have a wildly different skill set than someone who worked the window at the movie theater.   Your post implies (not insinuates, since that's different) that you want to hire drones. 

Also, a 3.0 and a 4.0 are miles apart, Duncanjp.  At most state universities, a 3.0 in a liberal arts degree doesn't require hardly any effort.  Maybe some 4.0's aren't "that" impressive, but a true 4.0 shows dedication.    That said, a 3.6 and holding down a job is pretty dang impressive. A 3.0 and holding down a job shows you have the skills of a highly functioning primate, at least.

Most (if not all) law schools offer practical skills, courses, trial advocacy, etc. My law school offered a few courses that were designed for small firm/solo litigators. That's not really the point, though.

The tough part of starting a solo practice straight out of law school is not managing the office, it's finding clients, getting paid by clients who are often broke themselves, and learning how to navigate the court system. The people I've known who successfully started solo practices had several years of hands-on experience working in small offices. The typical law school class is only 30-45 hours per semester, not nearly enough to prepare the average student.

This is great insight.  The easy clients to get are the hardest to get money from.  I do think some firms suffer and die because of mismanagement, but most of the time they starve from a lack of paying clients.

Minority and Non-Traditional Law Students / Re: Disgusted and Depressed
« on: August 24, 2012, 01:26:16 PM »
It costs a bit of monty, but might be worth it for you. 

That's just a funny typo to my immature mind.

To the OP
Sorry you are depressed.  What score do you think you need to reach your target schools?  It's different if you are peaking at 165 and need a 172 than if you are peaking at 151 and need a 158

General Off-Topic Board / Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy: Help me!
« on: August 23, 2012, 11:56:19 PM »
There are a few joint Econ Polisci Ph.D. programs out there I'd be very interested in. 

What type of PhD are you interested in?

General Off-Topic Board / Re: The Sunk Cost Fallacy: Help me!
« on: August 23, 2012, 04:34:34 PM »
I love research and writing and I love teaching, but I understand there are many challenges and barriers on the road to being a career professor.

My job isn't that awful, but I still feel like I need to make a move now or stick it out.   The longer I wait the more difficult it will be to change.

I went to law school knowing exactly what I wanted to do: Banking law and Real Estate litigation..   I did well, I graduated and I hustled for a job.  Luckily, my firm represented the regional interests of two large banks.  Unfortunately, those accounts dried up due to an FDIC takeover and a sale just six months after I started.  Now I do a random mixture of collections, family, criminal, and personal injury, none of which is very interesting.  But it's work.  I want to start a firm in a few years because I've owned businesses in the past, but I want more contacts in banking and real estate law before I go out on my own, and this firm isn't making that happen anymore.

General Off-Topic Board / The Sunk Cost Fallacy: Help me!
« on: August 23, 2012, 12:48:04 PM »
Working in the legal field sucks.  Wait, that's not right.  The legal field is so huge and diverse, that it can't all suck unless all work sucks.   So let me rephrase: I hate my job and I think I'd hate at least 25% of all law-firm jobs.
So I have law school debt, and I make less than I made before law school.   The long term financial outlook in the legal field is still very good, but it really sucks in the short term.
In summary, I hate my job, I'm bored to death, I have soul-crushing debt, I have a modest income, everything else in my life is going very well.
In addition to my law job, I teach college as an adjunct.  I absolutely love everything about it, but the pay sucks.

So I'm deciding between forging on with my current career and going back to school for a Ph.D. 

I understand there are many pitfalls with the professor path, but when evaluating my decision, should I consider my student loans and time investment as a sunk cost?  In other words, is it rational to consider the time and money investment as a significant factor when I can make more money and be happier doing something that doesn't require a law degree?

What did you do your undergrad in?

You are a unique splitter.    Your GPA isn't horrible, but it may be viewed as horrible depending on your undergrad degree.

That 175 is a monster score.  Congrats on that.  For better or for worse, most law schools will view you as more intelligent than 95% of LSAT takers.   Based on what I've read, Most of the top 14 will have a big problem with the 3.0, unless there is some very unique reason for it.  (Like if you got D's in your first year because your family died, or if your degree was in chemical engineering from MIT)
On the flip side, most of the schools outside the 25 will salivate at that 175.   But in the 14-25 range (not exact, of course) your soft factors may matter more than usual because you are a splitter.   If the school you apply to has a great crop of high-GPA applicants but the LSAT scores aren't great that year, they will jump at the chance to get you in the door, and the soft factors will sweeten the deal.

That said, generally speaking, soft factors, though important to you and some prospective employers, are only used as tie-breakers.  But you are weird on paper, so all bets are off.

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 107