Posts Tagged ‘future’

Bloomberg’s News Article, Death of the Legal Industry and its Obituary

Law school No Longer a Safe Safe Bet
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-22/when-law-is-no-longer-a-safe-bet.html
Bloomberg News

Although the article seems to mourn associates and their high salaries which the author recognizes is only a small percentage of actual attorneys, it gives the reader a backlash if you are a law graduate. It references how white collar employees who demeaned or look down upon blue collar workers in the 1950s who chose to forego higher education. This portion is distasteful as many law graduates who graduated before the 2008 economic collapse but in the late 1990s or later had nothing to do with 1950s social stigma as they were not even born and just emphasizes what I pointed out in the last point that no one cares what happens to attorneys as society has nearly always relegated practitioners as underhanded, spoiled, backstabbers and overpaid. The author basically gives a “middle finger” to attorneys and reflects why there is lack of support of reform from the accrediting agencies to those on Capitol Hill. The article did however discussed the legal industry as dead (yet more confirmation from mainstream media) and even wrote its obituary. A portion of the news article is displayed below:
_______________________________________________________

When I was contemplating becoming an English major, lo these many years ago, one helpful counselor told me that despite the stereotypes, English majors had lots of job opportunities. Advertising, public relations, academia. “And there’s always law school!” she said chirpily.
I didn’t end up going to law school; instead, after graduating, I embarked on a peripatetic odyssey of jobs and graduate school that culminated in my becoming a journalist. But I can imagine an alternative universe in which I did go to law school. Law school has long been the backup plan for humanities majors who don’t quite dare to apply for food stamps.
That era appears to be ending. Noam Scheiber writes the obituary:
“‘Stable’ is not the way anyone would describe a legal career today. In the past decade, twelve major firms with more than 1,000 partners between them have collapsed entirely. The surviving lawyers live in fear of suffering a similar fate, driving them to ever-more humiliating lengths to edge out rivals for business. ‘They were cold-calling,’ says the lawyer whose firm once turned down no-name clients. And the competition isn’t just external. Partners routinely make pitches behind the backs of colleagues with ties to a client. They hoard work for themselves even when it requires the expertise of a fellow partner. They seize credit for business that younger colleagues bring in.
“And then there are the indignities inflicted on new lawyers, known as associates. The odds are increasingly long that a recent law-school grad will find a job. Five years ago, during a recession, American law schools produced 43,600 graduates and 75 percent had positions as lawyers within nine months. Last year, the numbers were 46,500 and 64 percent. In addition to the emotional toll unemployment exacts, it is often financially ruinous. The average law student graduates $100,000 in debt.
“Meanwhile, those lucky enough to have a job are constantly reminded of their expendability. ‘I knew people who had month-to-month leases who were making $200,000 a year,’ says an associate who joined a New York firm in 2010. They are barred from meetings and conference calls to hold down a client’s bill, even pulled off of cases entirely. They regularly face mass layoffs. Many of the tasks they performed until five or ten years ago—like reviewing hundreds of pages of documents—are outsourced to a reserve army of contract attorneys, who toil away at one-third the pay. ‘All these people kept on going into this empty office,’ recalls a former associate at a Washington firm. ‘No one introduced them. They were on the floor wearing business suits. … It was extremely creepy.’ Still, any associate tempted to resent these scabs should consider the following: Legal software is rapidly replacing them, too.”

Advertisements

Did I Read This Correctly?: ABA Telling College Students NOT To Go To Law School…

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       ABA Telling Law Students Not to Go To Law School (01/2012)according to Outside the Beltway the ABA issued this Statement last month. Interesting points:   

*According to the association, over the past 25 years law school tuition has consistently risen two times faster than inflation. Keep going…

All Rights Reserved

*The ABA is also warning of endowment losses, declining state support, and difficulties in fundraising that have hit law schools hard. It expects most public schools to raise tuition this year by 10 to 25 percent. Oh you were doing so well. I hardly believe law schools are “hard-up” despite law school scam warnings some law schools actually saw an increase in enrollment between 2008-2009. Or with tighter scrutiny law schools are being accountable for quality of accepted students and class size. I seriously doubt it’s for the reason the ABA claims.

To conclude: “Tens of thousands of dollars in debt — and a shiny degree: But, at the end of the day, getting a job in law could be a cold case in 2011.” Translation: Having a law degree is a dead end for your career. Enjoy.

Via Stanford Law School’s Website: Race Conscious College Admissions: KCBS Radio

Stanford Law Journal posted this on their website: (my ramblings in blue)

Publication Date: February 16, 2010 Source: KCBS All News Radio 740 AM

Professor Bill Koski discusses the delicate issue of affirmative action in higher education after activists have challenged Prop. 209: “A coalition of activists students from the University of California are filing a lawsuit to overturn the higher education portion of California’s proposition 209 the affirmative action initiative. The group “By Any Means Necessary” says that proposition 209 violates the equal protection clause in the Fourteenth Amendment of the US constitution. The students and their lawyers claim that the UC system is segregated and that African American and Latino student enrollment at UC Berkeley has dropped steadily since proposition 209 was passed in 1996. For more we’re joined on the KCBS news line by Stanford law professor Bill Koski. We thank you so much for the time today. What does proposition 209 have if anything to do with the equal protection laws in the constitution.”

“Proposition 209 was a voter passed initiative that only applies to the state of California. And what it does is it bans the use of racial preferences or racial discrimination in university admissions and other government contracting. In essence, what it says that decision makers in government have to be race neutral in their thinking. And this — Proposition 209 — was actually upheld against a court equal protection challenge back in 1997. And so it has survived one challenge but I understand the folks who are now taking a fresh look at this — they believe that the times have changed and that within the data showing that there has been this precipitous drop in African American and Latino enrollments at the UCs. They believe that it is now ripe for a new challenge under the equal protection clause.”

One may argue that many minorities may have become disinterested in law school. Equal Protection requires similar opportunities be provided for all regardless of race, color, national origin, etc. I know most people will argue that objective criteria such as LSAT, undergraduate gpa are the most determinant factors in law school admissions. It was my understanding that if an equally qualified minority was available and were underrepresented for an opportunity or admission, then he or she should be selected. Thus, the disparate impact on blacks and Latinos would give rise to them as a suspect class and thus allow them to have standing for a cause of action.  Oft-times I read people “yell” liberal-heart agendas are taking over and unqualified persons are trumping qualified whites. As far as a legal education is concerned I don’t believe this is so unless someone shows me evidence otherwise. With rare exception, regardless of the tier ranking you will likely see very few minorities, especially Black Americans in law school, even now.  I am unsure how for so many years state colleges and universities which receive grants and federal funding as well as the federal student loan circuit were able to circumvent affirmative action via the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The system goes from a history of condescending paternalistic governance of blacks and education to a free for all-the door is open, it’s all on your back if you succeed. There is an underlying issue regarding preparation for higher education of minorities to equitably compete. Instead of addressing these underlying issues the law school industry promotes lower tier schools to accept minority students to show that there “is still room for them” in the legal field. This in turn, along with inherent racial discrimination is a definite recipe for failure. Maybe it’s a good thing law school enrollment among minorities have declined. Though I think undergraduate school is a good experience it isn’t for anyone; one still cannot justify depriving certain people a chance to attend a good school

Around the year 2000 I came across and article in the newspaper and actually kept it throughout the years. It was entitled: “Black Law Students disappearing with end to affirmative action” by the Associated Press. One guy stated:  “That really is the story–that we have been giving such huge preferences based on skin color that it kind of masked the fact that we have such a long way to go in the K-12 system to get black kids prepared for the competition,” said Ward Connerly. So untrue, really? huge preferences…to blacks? The truth is that there weren’t hardly Black American students attending law schools, and that the door remained slightly ajar for few and now some desire to completely shut it again. 

Yet, I’ll agree that he makes a valid point regarding student preparation before reaching college. I even noticed a journal article 23Harvard BlackLetter Law Journal 107 (2007):http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/blj/vol23/lee.pdf  entitled: Justifying Affirmative Action in K-12 Private Schools; which I still need to take a more in-depth look at. Interestingly the author focuses on private schools because obviously little attention is giving to most public schools, especially now.  To start, with the funding of public middle and high schools based on zoning and racial preferences (within the classroom), quality of teachers, we would be addressing root problems. During the 1970s and 1980s bussing was the sought after solution, instead of creating or improving schools in predominately black communities, just send them to a school where the majority of the student body is white, that’s how you get around investing in the future of black neighborhoods, schools and local government.

But this would take years and an honest admission that the current method of state/public schooling is not adequate for most Americans. With the history of this country it is difficult to digest when an oblivious person says they can go to a good school or just move to a good neighborhood. Economic, social and historical factors all play a trickle down effect on what people have access to. It’s like saying anybody can go to Paradise Island and enjoy it’s fruit, it’s the best of all places–but to get there you need specific equipment, canoe, compass, life-jacket, a captain, etc. Some things are to some degree fundamentally an unequal playing field, yet all the players are expected to engage the system as if it were even. As a result, the same people who propogate that it’s a free market and that equal opportunities exist will just say see “they can’t compete” or “don’t throw money at them” or “reverse discrimination.” When people are maligned, constantly culturally bashed, put in conditions comparable to animals, de-humanized and basically dis-enfranchised, what do you expect the result to be? One can do this with any race, deprived of decent education because we’re dealing with conditioning environments and modifying behavior, then this becomes the world they know, this is what becomes “normal.” Then expect to suddenly be able to easily adapt to a world unbeknowst to them, that just seems fundamentally unfair. For those who were not raised or exposed to this environment, certain inequities become more evident and surprising as you age, because as a child it was unknown to you. Thus, growing up thinking you can be whatever you want, no matter what trials or systemic curveballs are thrown to you, one becomes bewildered; because it was only when you were a certain age to understand a degree of depth of the system, you realize you’re in too deep. Now it appears insurmountable to survive.

“Without looking at the lawsuit because I haven’t of course seen the lawsuit — it hasn’t been filed yet, to my knowledge. I can imagine that what they’re thinking here is that given the numbers of students who are African American Latino in the UC system — it’s largely because the system now uses test scores and grades almost exclusively or to some large extent in making admissions decisions. And what the feeling might be is that in the state of California at least the resources devoted to schools with high percentages of African American and Latino kids in the K -12 system are much lower than more affluent neighborhoods which are perhaps more white and Asian American. And what they’re thinking is that if you have access to fewer resources, fewer honors classes, fewer counselors, fewer people that get you prepared for college, that that in effect is discriminating against those students in terms of their preparation for the UC system. And then when the UC system chooses to use just test scores and other kinds of grades for their admissions process it perpetuates that discrimination. Now that might be the theory that they’re working under and that might be the changed circumstance that they can point to that in fact there has been this drop and there is this potential fact of resource disparity in the state of California.” “There’s no doubt this is a novel claim and I’m sure that they feel very strongly about their position. It will be a difficult case to pursue. One thing that has happened in the interim on the is another — affirmative action case at the University of Michigan Law School in which the law school itself wanted to use race conscious admissions policies. But it was challenged by a white student who said that that type of affirmative action was essentially reverse discrimination. At the University of Michigan case their admissions policy was upheld because it took an individualized holistic look at each applicant. And it didn’t use a quota system for African American and Latinos. So at least when a university chooses to use or is able to use race conscious admissions policies that are very narrowly tailored it will be held up against an equal protection clause challenge but that doesn’t mean that there is any obligation on a university to use those race conscious policies especially where Prop. 209 exists. One thing that I will say may happen with the filing of this kind of lawsuit — the great hope will be that it will change the conversation. How is it that we as a state can tolerate such unequal numbers of African American and Latino students in our flagship UC system and how is it that we can reach out and try to change those numbers given that we have Prop. 209 in existence.”

The issue is the root problems, not scoring and making holistic approaches to admissions the norm, if it means lower standards to appease interest groups. Regardless of race the system should want to promote qualified diversity. Look at how often the U.S. attracts scientists and engineers from abroad but fails to invest in its own education system that would provide dedicated, qualified Americans in the same field. A quality education starts when they’re young, not all of sudden you’ll be thrown out into the real world let’s try to maneuver around the problem instead of creating real solutions. The system is failing because it doesn’t care about future generations, just how to profit on the way things work now, which obviously isn’t too well.