Wednesday, July 22, 2015

A CASE OF DEMAND & SUPPLY IN LAW SCHOOLS




During the recession, the logic was ubiquitous: The economy is terrible—better to wait it out! It is a three-year fast track to a remunerative, respectable career! It's not just learning a subject—it's learning how to think! Law school, always the safe choice, became a more popular choice. Between 2007 and 2009, the number of LSAT takers climbed 20.5 percent. Law school applications increased in turn.
But now a number of recent or current law students are saying—or screaming—that they made a mistake. They went to law school, they say, and now they're underemployed or jobless, in debt, and three years older. And statistics show that the evidence is more than anecdotal.

One Boston College Law School third-year—miraculously, still anonymous—begged for his tuition back in exchange for a promise to drop out without a degree, in an open letter to his dean published earlier this month. "This will benefit both of us," he argues. "On the one hand, I will be free to return to the teaching career I left to come here. I'll be able to provide for my family without the crushing weight of my law school loans. On the other hand, this will help BC Law go up in the rankings, since you will not have to report my unemployment at graduation to US News. This will present no loss to me, only gain: in today's job market, a J.D. seems to be more of a liability than an asset."

He is one of dozens of law students who have gone public, very public, to chastise the schools they elected to attend for leaving them older and poorer. One popular medium is the "scam blog," where indebted, unemployed attorneys accuse law schools of being little better than tuition-sucking diploma mills. (Sample blog title: Shilling Me Softly.) The author of one popular, if histrionic, such blog describes his law school as a Ponzi scheme.

Others have taken, perhaps inevitably, to the courts. Kenneth Desornes, for instance, named his law school in his bankruptcy filing. He asks the school to "[a]dmit that your business knew or should have known that Plaintiff would be in no position to repay those loans."

The students might be litigious—no surprise there—and overwrought. But they've got a point. The demand for lawyers has fallen off a cliff, both due to the short-term crisis of the recession and long-term changes to the industry, and is only starting to rebound. The lawyers that do have jobs are making less than they used to. At the same time, universities seeking revenue have tacked on law schools, minting more lawyers every year.

That has caused some concern among lawyers who think the accrediting organization, the American Bar Association, is doing the profession a disservice by approving so many new schools. (Contrast that with medical schools. They come with much higher startup costs and tend not to be money-makers. Relatively few students get medical degrees every year, and demand far outstrips supply.)

The job market for lawyers is terrible, full stop—and that hits young lawyers, without professional track records and in need of training, worst. Though the National Association for Law Placement, an industry nonprofit group, reports that employment for the class of 2009 was 88.3 percent, about a quarter of those jobs were temporary gigs, without the salaries needed by most new lawyers to pay off crushing debts. Another 10 percent were part-time. And thousands of jobs were actually fellowships or grants provided by the new lawyers' law schools.

The big firms that make up about 28 percent of recent grads' employment slashed their associate programs in 2009 and 2010, rescinding offers to thousands and deferring the start dates of thousands more. Worse, the profession as a whole shrunk: The number of people employed in legal services hit an all-time high of 1.196 million in June 2007. It currently stands at 1.103 million. That means the number of law jobs has dwindled by about 7.8 percent. In comparison, the total number of jobs has fallen about 5.4 percent over the same period.

At the same time, the law schools—the supply side of the equation—have not stopped growing. Law schools awarded 43,588 J.D.s last year, up 11.5 percent since 2000, though there was technically negative demand for lawyers. And the American Bar Association's list of approved law schools now numbers 200, an increase of 9 percent in the last decade. Those newer law schools have a much shakier track record of helping new lawyers get work, but they don't necessarily cost less than their older, more established counterparts.


12 comments:

arun kumar sharma said...

respected sir I also want to share my opinion and conclusive thinking after seen your post

becoming lawyer has really to be one of those career moves that could stand up any type of economic setback . but this case has no longer stand the recession has really changed the dynamics of legal profession to relate this topic via demand that in America nearly one million employed as lawyer and only 10% get job. this show a great decline in demands of lawyer, so that's why law school are really in this type of situation .


arun kumar sharma
15balo49

Unknown said...

Sir, I believe that in the given case the demand that was created or rather got created in the minds of the students was not actual demand, as there was no actual substantial requirement of lawyers in the US. It got created as a result of the recession which compelled people to look into more safer and reputable carrier options, that would help them in finding jobs in future. Many other people thought of it as an opportunity to make bugs, by baiting students who got disoriented as a result of the recession. Many students during the time frame of recession did not choose law because they wanted to do law but because it was the something which at that point of time made them to think of a better, prosperous and secure.
In the given situation the supply of the law students was much more than the demand of the same, which as a result created the disequilibrium and many jobless lawyers.
Aishwarya Chouhan,
15BAL017.

Unknown said...

Sir,i think that the main problem with which America is dealing with is quality issue.Most lawyers who are graduating do not have sufficient skills to cope up with market demand and thus lowering the quality of profession demanded which ultimately resulted in deduction in salary.

Prteek Shrivastava
15BBL048

Shreyansh Tripathi said...

Quantity or Quality.... Let's think why.. Why did they choose a career in which the would be older than the rest and still stand the risk of being unemployed?
What does every person want? In today's world one could say with quite a majority that it would be "MONEY"... Ever thought why? Simple answer right, it makes the world work with you, sometimes even for you. So can we conclude saying that the choose this profession for the MONEY. Here it also about Money and whatever follows it.. Its the exact same situation in which you took a load to start a business, invested your time, worked hard for it and after 3 years it didn't pay back and now your standing feeling alone and insecure, cause you lost your sense of security which you expected out of this business (profession). The Money would have guaranteed a sense a financial security. The Case does not state that all are unemployed, but it does say that it's not paying back well. Yes, the rates of unemployment are high & we quite the same situation here in India in which we have an army of engineers, but not the job market to sell them in. BUT, India is still a Debit Market and not Credit market as USA, and also the fact the higher education in India is comparatively quite inexpensive when compared to USA.


I m sure someone will surely argue against the point as to does money always matter & yes we all should but before you make your point think.. Why are we all here..?? or Think yourself as an Investment of your parents and you'll have the answer to your question.

Thank You For Reading

Shreyansh Tripathi
15BBL065

Arun B. Prasad said...

I am avidly reading all your comments and see a lot of brainstorming.. Good to go! The real output should be the research and publication that you can deliver after this thought process.

Arun, Prateek, Aishwarya and Shreyans.. Well Done ! We will continue this discussion in class.

See you tomorrow.
Warm Regards,
Arun

Unknown said...

SIR
as per my view the demand for anything in one or other way depends upon skill.in case of any profession demand will largely be dependent on skill and quality of the professionals.In AMERICA,during recession ,all those who entered law schools had in mind the illusion of a very respectable ,glamorous and profitable profession.But as, in any profession what counts is not your degree or you marks rather what counts is your skill and interest.Any person whose only motive is to make money out of a profession will surely get irritated and frustrated after sometime and will critize the profession or the institute anyhow!!so basically the lack of passion and skill amongst those who graduated must HAVE degraded their quality as law professionals .What AMERICA needed was not a huge crowd of law graduates but rather a bunch of law professionals.
MANSI SINGH
15BBLO52

PRIYA said...

SIR
as what i think and believe is demand is what which the people the society wants but in this case rather than wants its basically created between students.There was no requirement as there was recession due to which people being on safer side selected law a very prominent n attracting carrier option.as its only the skills which make u earn with 5 years down line.its all your capabilities and abilities which will u give u the right position.keeping in mind the above case as the number increases and even too the number got increased with skills it gave more skilled n top cream graduates which ultimately decreased the demand but at the same time if you are lowering the quality whatsoever be the case demand will definitely fall

PRIYA KHEMCHANDANI

Unknown said...

Sir,
if we see the case in context with what we have studied till in economics is that due to recession the demand of lawyers has been seen decreasing and inversly proportionally the supply of graduates is incresing as provided in the statistics, the slope is going from up to downwards as if we see in the demand-supply curve. Also if we compare the supply with the profit making it's also given that there is an increase in no. Of law schools so as in order to maximise the profit . Also due to factors such as recessions and unemployment the demand curve is shifted toward the left which is also a factor for the demand as in the particular case of lawyers. If the employment ratio would further improve then it is possible that the demand curve could shift from left to right

Unknown said...

Sir,
if we see the case in context with what we have studied till in economics is that due to recession the demand of lawyers has been seen decreasing and inversly proportionally the supply of graduates is incresing as provided in the statistics, the slope is going from up to downwards as if we see in the demand-supply curve. Also if we compare the supply with the profit making it's also given that there is an increase in no. Of law schools so as in order to maximise the profit . Also due to factors such as recessions and unemployment the demand curve is shifted toward the left which is also a factor for the demand as in the particular case of lawyers. If the employment ratio would further improve then it is possible that the demand curve could shift from left to right

Sumit said...

as per the statistics the demand of legal services boomed in 1990's and 2000's. as a result more people in greater number flocked towards the law school subsidize by government guarantee d loan. even the higher prices people willing to pay . not surprisingly supply overtook demand. i personally think that many (not all) law school train student badly. some law school also misrepresent their employment statistic so as to attract most of the applicant- and they should be condemned for that. so as to overcome this problem the government should be excessively strict or rigid accreditation standards should be applicable for each law school

Khwaish said...

The case : Supply of lawyers more than the demand for lawyers in the USA market.
I accede with my fellow batch-mates that the decrease in the demand is the upshot of the thinking of the people today which is purely money oriented.They choose law as there profession not because they fancy it but because of the material benefits which they thirst to derive out of it. Everyone, somewhere in, has the notion to derive something out of their profession like name , fame and most importantly" money". In today's world there is a paucity of people who carry out their vocation not because they love doing it and the fundamental reason behind choosing a profession is to render their basic needs ( i.e. money ). I f we look at the problem in a more complex form then we arrive at conclusion that this problem of excess supply has resulted in laying off workers ,meager paid jobs and unemployment which also instills depression among the job seekers and ultimately there real potential gets wasted.


SONAKSHI JAIN
15BBL019

Unknown said...

Sir,
I believe basic flaw raised was due to the fact that not only where the number of people seeking employment as lawyers more but also their quality, as pointed out earlier, was a problem. The American Bar Association did not want to upgrade their standards to the level that was required because they believed that what they teach was good enough to meet the current scenario. This of course is not true. Even in our day to day life, we look for things which are in vogue rather than the obsolete ones, be fashion or technology or anything. This factor affected not only the ones who took law as a substitute option but also the ones who had prioritized it as their first choice of career.