What's New About the New Normal: The Evolving Market for New Lawyers in the 21st Century

Bernard A. Burk
{"title":"What's New About the New Normal: The Evolving Market for New Lawyers in the 21st Century","authors":"Bernard A. Burk","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2309497","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Everyone agrees that job prospects for many new law graduates have been poor for the last several years; there is rather less consensus on whether, when, how, or why that may change as the economy recovers from the Great Recession. This Article analyzes historical and current trends in the job market for new lawyers in an effort to predict how that market may evolve. The Article derives quantitative measurements of the proportion of law graduates over the last thirty years who have obtained initial employment for which law school serves as rational substantive preparation (“Law Jobs”). In comparing entry-level hiring patterns since 2008 with those in earlier periods, a significant development emerges: While other sectors of the market for new lawyers have changed only modestly during the Great Recession, one sector — the larger private law firms colloquially known as “BigLaw” — has contracted proportionally six times as much as all the others. Entering BigLaw classes overall are now roughly one-third smaller than they were seven years ago. And though BigLaw hiring has historically accounted for only 10% to 20% of each graduating class, it is responsible for over half the entry-level Law Jobs lost since 2008. While some observers predict a return to business as usual as the economy recovers, this Article is skeptical of that account. The Article identifies significant structural changes in the way that the services BigLaw has traditionally provided are being produced, staffed, and priced that diminish BigLaw’s need for junior lawyers, both immediately and in the longer term. These observations suggest that entry-level BigLaw hiring, and thus the market for new lawyers overall, will remain depressed below pre-recession levels well after demand improves to or beyond pre-recession levels. At the same time, even though entry-level demand may remain static, new lawyers’ job prospects may nevertheless improve as the con-traction in the legal academy now underway reduces the number of new graduates competing for work.","PeriodicalId":129013,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Law eJournal","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2309497","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Everyone agrees that job prospects for many new law graduates have been poor for the last several years; there is rather less consensus on whether, when, how, or why that may change as the economy recovers from the Great Recession. This Article analyzes historical and current trends in the job market for new lawyers in an effort to predict how that market may evolve. The Article derives quantitative measurements of the proportion of law graduates over the last thirty years who have obtained initial employment for which law school serves as rational substantive preparation (“Law Jobs”). In comparing entry-level hiring patterns since 2008 with those in earlier periods, a significant development emerges: While other sectors of the market for new lawyers have changed only modestly during the Great Recession, one sector — the larger private law firms colloquially known as “BigLaw” — has contracted proportionally six times as much as all the others. Entering BigLaw classes overall are now roughly one-third smaller than they were seven years ago. And though BigLaw hiring has historically accounted for only 10% to 20% of each graduating class, it is responsible for over half the entry-level Law Jobs lost since 2008. While some observers predict a return to business as usual as the economy recovers, this Article is skeptical of that account. The Article identifies significant structural changes in the way that the services BigLaw has traditionally provided are being produced, staffed, and priced that diminish BigLaw’s need for junior lawyers, both immediately and in the longer term. These observations suggest that entry-level BigLaw hiring, and thus the market for new lawyers overall, will remain depressed below pre-recession levels well after demand improves to or beyond pre-recession levels. At the same time, even though entry-level demand may remain static, new lawyers’ job prospects may nevertheless improve as the con-traction in the legal academy now underway reduces the number of new graduates competing for work.
新常态的新动向:21世纪新律师市场的演变
每个人都同意,在过去的几年里,许多新法学院毕业生的就业前景一直很差;随着经济从大衰退(Great Recession)中复苏,这种情况是否、何时、如何以及为何会发生变化,人们的共识要少得多。本文分析了新律师就业市场的历史和当前趋势,以预测该市场将如何发展。本文对过去三十年中法学院毕业生获得初步就业的比例进行了定量测量,法学院为其提供了合理的实质性准备(“法律工作”)。将2008年以来的入门级律师招聘模式与早些时候的招聘模式进行比较,一个显著的变化出现了:在大衰退期间,市场上的其他行业对新律师的需求变化不大,但有一个行业——大型私人律师事务所(通常被称为“大律师”)——按比例收缩的幅度是其他所有行业的六倍。现在进入大法学院的学生总数比七年前减少了大约三分之一。尽管从历史上看,BigLaw的招聘人数只占每个毕业班的10%到20%,但自2008年以来,超过一半的入门级法律工作岗位是由BigLaw提供的。虽然一些观察人士预测,随着经济复苏,商业活动将恢复正常,但本文对这种说法持怀疑态度。文章指出,BigLaw传统上提供的服务的生产、人员配备和定价方式发生了重大结构性变化,这将立即和长期减少BigLaw对初级律师的需求。这些观察结果表明,在需求改善到或超过衰退前水平之后,BigLaw的入门级招聘,以及整个新律师市场,将保持在衰退前水平以下的低迷状态。与此同时,尽管入门级律师的需求可能保持不变,但新律师的就业前景可能会有所改善,因为目前正在进行的法律学院的收缩减少了竞争工作的新毕业生数量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信