Posts Tagged ‘upward mobility’

Too Little Too Late: Four Ways to Fix Law Schools (U.S. News & World Reports)

It has been a long time since I posted here, primarily due to focusing on my survival in such a grave economy and Sallie Mae venomously nipping at my heels. Anyway, I came across this “article” Four Ways to Fix Law Schools (click link). I find this as too little too late. Sometimes it is better to let something that is on death bed to pass away peacefully. For decades proponents of the law school industry have known that they were creating a bubble that would burst. Those law schools already in existence continued to pump out exorbitant number of law graduates by either increasing class sizes or adding programs to its over-saturated law school population. The ABA who loves to perpetuate the fun continued to accredit law schools though statistically it was quite aware of the economic burden v. benefits were not adding up. The main excuse the ABA used was that it would violate antitrust laws should it limit the accreditation of any additional law schools. This is counterintuitive. Antitrust laws exist to keep a market competitive for available sources, it is not to create a general market with barely any regulation so in reality there is no competition because there aren’t many jobs to compete for. Increasing law school admissions does not expand the job market it only makes the legal industry worse.

The suggestions listed in the article are simply too little too late. Even where it states to train U.S. attorneys to work abroad, in previous posts I have discussed that Spain, England and some Asian countries have a surplus of attorneys, and most of them do not think highly of the U.S. It is unreasonable to think that other countries, some part of the European Union which has their own economic crises to deal with, will welcome an influx of American attorneys with open arms.

Though it is common sense that in any industry, the learner must have “hands-on” experience and some level of intellectual pursuit. Law schools churned out too many “what if” asking professionals instead of those who can actually practice law. Those who can likely went to law schools that catered to local hiring and thus do not fall within the IVY League core, in essence the former has little to no change of upward mobility in experience or expanding their practicing fields. This article also focuses on the ‘future’ and has no solution or even reference to recent law graduates or attorneys who were not trained under apprenticeships though required to CLEs.  Thousands upon thousands of American attorneys who have already been thrown to the wayside, yet we are to believe that all of a sudden a 3-point article offers best solutions for potential law graduates.. Should of any of the law schools and ABA would like to take this article seriously it would have to take an economic loss by choosing a moratorium on any further law schools to be accredited and recommended lower admissions until either the legal industry re-invents itself or the lawyer to job creation numbers reaches a reasonable number. Until then this is simply baiting those who are still in their desperate state of minds consider law school as a viable option for a career and those who have a financial stake in the business aspect of the law school industry. This is just more fluff to keep the facade that the legal industry can recover. Times change, both economically and practically and they appear to change for the worse. The recommendation stays the same, the nearly insurmountable debt and poor quality of life is not worth it. Do not go to law school.

Advertisements

Cornell Journal of Law & Public Policy: Predatory Student Loan Lenders, Middle Class Hope for Upward Mobility, the Legal Industry and the Inevitable Bubble

As some potential law students continue to await LSAT scores, law school admissions or are wondering whether or not going to law school will give them that one chance at a better life, it would benefit you to read the following:

Being led to the slaughter

A law journal article: 20 Cornell Journal of Law & Public Policy 67 (2010)
Options for Student Loan Borrowers: A Derivatives-Based Proposal to Protect Students and Control Debt Fueled Inflation in the Higher Education Market, Michael C. Macchiarola; Arun Abraham

O.k. so this article is 72 pages, obviously I won’t delve into the entire piece but I am placing some introductory quotes in which the author is direct with failing legal industry and how the student loan industry are basically predators. He specifically discusses law schools and new lawyers are a bad investment. the author is a ‘distinguished lecturer.’ The author is a law professor and is honest enough to basically state that going to law school isn’t worth it. Do you 0Ls get it? one of your potential professors is telling you that LAW SCHOOL IS A BAD INVESTMENT!

Here are the Table of Contents for a very brief overview:
INTRODUCTION                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    I. THE RUNAWAY COSTS OF AMERICAN LEGAL EDUCATION
By the Numbers
The Causes: A Combustible Mix of Accreditation,Rankings, Peculiar Incentives and Federal Encouragement
A Brief History of the Law School and Its Accreditation
The Rankings Game
The Peculiar Incentives of the Law School Faculty
The Federal Government and the Student Loan Market
The Scope of Government Involvement
Crisis in the Market and the Emergence of SAFRA
Income-Based Repayment and More of the Same
“For-Profit” Schools and a Way Forward

THE DISAPPOINTING REVENUE PICTURE FOR LAW SCHOOL GRADUATES
INFORMATION ASYMMETRIES AND ENTERPRISE LIABILITY
Informational Asymmetries Abound
Applying Lessons from Enterprise Liability Theory

Now for some introductory quotes:
Runaway tuitions and the burdensome student debt required for most Americans to obtain a post-secondary degree are under scrutiny like never before.4 Evidence is beginning to mount that, for too many students, debt-financed education represents a stifling encumbrance instead of the great investment that society’s collective commonsense has long advanced.5 Such a finding is unsurprising in light of the fact that, for too long, the value of education has been reflexively embraced without adequate examination of its cost. (p. 69-70)

As most bloggers have been stating, the cost is not worth the proposed benefit with all of the practical variables: economy, shrinking industry, inflation, lower salaries, loan payments and their capitalized interest as well as the time and psychological warfare this field demands.

The cost of attending law school, for example, has increased at two to three times the rate of inflation over the last three decades.11 The promise of accessible loans has made loan eligible middle- and lower-income students an easy mark for unabashed, aggressive student-loan marketing.12 “The end result,” in fact, “has been an unprecedented, debt-fueled wealth transfer from students of modest means to the increasingly prosperous higher education industry and opportunistic student loan lenders.” (p. 71-72)

Now deemed “McLaw” this along with LPOs and general outsourcing has set the middle class population in a cycle of perpetual financial slavery. Upward mobility is not founded in usurious personal debt. Do not think of the titles. Do not think of prestige. Think of your life and happiness and with any common sense you will decide not to attend law school.

US News & World Reports: (Law School) Know What You’re Getting Into

US News & World Reports
Ann Levine
November 22, 2010

I am proud to be a lawyer and I am proud to help other people reach their dream of becoming a lawyer. [sounds desparate to sell the profession]. However, there have been numerous stories recently that may discourage you from applying to law school. There are negative and disgruntled law students and attorneys warning you about the evils of law schools, of the profession, and of anyone remotely related to it. My goal is to make sure you don’t join that disgruntled bunch. [Which can simply be prevented by not attending law school]

So, if you decide to go to law school, you need to feel that the benefits outweigh the sacrifices and potential drawbacks that many of the naysayers routinely harp on. Go into it with your eyes wide open, ready to work hard, ready to make your way and create your own career. [Sounds like a tort in the beginning you are proceeding into a known danger and that it’s forseeable that you will have damages]. You won’t expect anyone to hand you a six figure job at graduation.

[This is such a misleading characterization, that most attorneys EXPECT six figures. No most attorneys expect after committing and investing time, money, effort and basically their life into achieving admittance into a noble profession that one can obtain a job in which one can have DECENT housing, food and transportation. The only graduates who really expect six figures upon graduation are those set for the patent bar, trust fund babies, IVY League graduates with connections.]

You will go into this with an understanding of the realities of the profession. You will know that success does not happen overnight, that your dream job isn’t the first job out of law school, but the one you hold ten years down the road. [false misrepresentation, how in the world can such a writer state this with a ‘straight face’ without submitting statistics or even state based on people he or she knows. It appears the author writes in theory or the same rhetoric that continues to be told to unsuspecting 0Ls.]
There is no fast track to success in law school or in anything else in life. The key is to make the best decisions you can about your future with the information you currently have at your disposal.

I want you to really consider whether to go to law school, and I want to share the questions you should be asking before you go. Plus, I want to make sure you are equipped to make good decisions about where to attend.

Let’s start here: Reasons NOT to Go to Law School:

1. Money (How much does law school cost and how can I pay for it?)

2. Time (three years full-time, 4 years part-time)

3. Bad career outlook in current economic environment

4. It’s difficult

5. It’s competitive

6. There are too many lawyers

It appears that 1, 3, 5, 6 are all related to NOT being able to get a job or make decent money with a law degree. Decent refers to enough money to sustain you and your family (whatever that may be) with food, gas, heat, electricity, housing and transportation. Four out of the six reality checks are stating that you cannot live a normal life with a law degree. So those of you who are already making $50,000-$75,000 without a law degree; you are in a much better position than most licensed American attorneys. So, does it make ANY sense to encumber your life with unnecessary debt to be in a profession with superficial professionalism, mentally disabled persons who many have broken down after realizing the reality of what going to law school has done to them, all while struggling to meet your monthly financial obligations and reaching for straws to keep a facade of upward mobility. Reason with yourself and don’t ignore the signs.

Points 2 and 4 are related to losing valuable years of your life to spend hours, days, weeks studying to impress law professors who already made their decisions of who each student is, where they will fall in the mandatory curve within the first week of classes, all the while subjecting students to the Socratic method with the intent of satisfying a power-trip. Now all professors are like this but most are. Your first year you do not select your law professors and many have tenure, so good luck in being treated fairly while learning about the law–ironic isn’t it?

Now, the Reasons TO Attend Law School:

1. Learning how to think

2. Profession you can always rely upon/Job security

3. Helping others/contributing to the community

4. Being important and respected

5. Financial security, prosperity

Points 2 and 5 do not make any sense in light of the previous set of points. Although most professions and both the private and public sector is suffering due to the current economy, the legal profession has forever changed. There is no such thing as financial security in general when there is a permanent oversaturation of law graduates and attorneys. Due to this saturation how can point 4 be valid? Value is based on quality and rarity. Many media outlets have exposed how unprepared most law graduates are and have been over the past few decades. When lawyers are a dime a dozen, how are you important? Though theoretically an attorney is to advocate, be a defender of the Constitution, etc, most attorneys are either focused on keeping their financial security which inevitably compromises the value of the services and as a result the profession. Additionally, when there is not a demand for a product or service, the price steadily decreases (oversaturation).

You need to do your research about each one of these pros and cons. How much can you expect to make in the area of law you plan on pursuing? What would your student loan payment be? Your rent? Your car payment? Etc.

So, how can you research this? Talk to lawyers in big firms, lawyers who work for the public defender, lawyers who work in a firm with only two or three attorneys, or insurance defense attorneys. Ask them how much they made in their first five years of practice and how much they made after ten years. Ask them what they really do all day. Ask them to describe a typical case they are working on. [A simple approach is to read these blogs. The following two questions are good suggestions though:]

Ask them what time they get to the office everyday and what time they leave. Ask them if they like their jobs.
Ask them where they went to law school. Did they take a scholarship to a lower ranked school? Why or why not?

Do top law schools open some doors? Do you want to clerk for the Supreme Court? Be a law professor? I suggest you look up people who have jobs you would like to have one day and see where they went to law school.

It’s essential you have a firm grasp on what the profession entails before you commit. Comparing and contrasting the answers to these questions with your expectations is key to helping you make your decision.

If you’ve gone through this thought process and you still decide to attend law school, you will know what you are getting yourself into. You will be in a position to make good decisions about your future. And then you’ll be ready to hear this podcast: How to Get Hired as a Rookie Attorney.

In other words you will definitely be “proceeding into a known danger.”

Minorities Decrease Enrollment in Law Schools: They Figured Out the Game

In January Life’s Mockery posted: Law School Admissions Lag Among Minorities January 6, 2010 « Life’s Mockery .

All Rights Reserved

Though minorities increased obtaining a Bachelor’s degree and their LSATs score, decided to opt out of the law school, bury your financial future game. Well, it’s being reported again: 

Black Presence in Law Schools Dwindling
by Kenneth Mallory
We know how sincerely you’re concerned about minorities becoming a part of this noble profession. Or do you really see them as fresh hunting ground to lure them into the financial debt game via Sallie Mae; just like the mortgage industry did with home loans. How about improving the statistics of CURRENT unemployed minorities instead of trying to rope more into the dizzying maze of professional no-where-land.
“Miles to Go” finds that African-American representation in law is less than other professions, like teaching and medicine. Wow, this makes me feel better. Medicine is more lucrative, characterized by hard science and you practically help (well ideally) others improve their health. I’ve heard for years that education field need more teachers (primary), and even a call for reform regarding teachers’ salary.

WASHINGTON (NNPA) – A report by the American Bar Association has found that the proportion of minorities, including Blacks and Hispanics, enrolling in law schools has decreased in the past two years. One way to keep your risk of living in this country at a decent level.

”Minority representation among law students has dropped for the past two years, from 20.6 percent in 2001-2002 to 20.3 percent in 2003-2004,” said the findings in the third edition of “Miles to Go: Progress of Minorities in the Legal Profession,” published by the ABA’s Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Legal Profession.

In addition, the report contends minorities are less apt than Whites to head to private law firms after leaving law school, more likely to resign from firms after three years there and ”continue to be grossly underrepresented in top level jobs, such as law partner and corporate general counsel.” Interesting, but where are the statistics on unemployed minority attorneys, you know the majority?

The report’s author, New York Law School Professor Elizabeth Chambliss, deemed the finding of reduced enrollment ”extremely troubling,” and, in an interview, discussed the under-representation of minorities in the profession. Yes, you believe that the legal industry has not tapped into a potential lucrative resource that will increase your yearly salary and boost your probability of obtaining tenure. It’s not troubling for minorities who have figured out your game and know that they will be treated like second class citizens throughout law school and after with ‘professors’ having such racist proclamations as “You went to law school?” They’re saving themselves from additional psychological damage from overt racism that professors and others guise as a form of wit with such back handed compliments. Minorities aren’t stupid enough to believe you have a genuine ‘concern’ that they’re not attending law school

”The legal profession already is one of the least racially integrated professions in the United States when all four minority groups [African-American, Hispanic, Asian American, Native American] are aggregated,” she said. ”African-Americans, too, are represented at lower levels than in many comparable professions. In 2000, African-Americans made up only 3.9 percent of all lawyers, compared to 4.4 percent of physicians, 5.6 percent of college and university professors, 7.8 percent of computer scientists and 7.9 percent of accountants and auditors.”

Chambliss discussed the implications of such findings.

”The low level of Black representation in the profession may discourage promising Black students from considering law and limit Black lawyers’ chances to find mentors and role models within the law. And, to the extent that Black lawyers are more likely than others to be concerned with racial justice, discrimination, community development, and the like, the dearth of Black lawyers contributes to an already unequal access to lawyers in the United States.” Yes, discourage them, save them from a lifetime of Sallie Mae harassments, unemployment, the grits, the taunting, the presumptive “you’re here because of affirmative action.” How many decades have passed before you realized the false hope of upward mobility via law school. [See Life’s Mockery’s post for comments on legacy admissions, minorities, and chances for upward mobility: [University of Michigan Law Journal: Preserving a Racial Hierarchy: « Life’s Mockery]

The dean of admissions at a prominent area law school acknowledged a decline in the number of minorities enrolling in its program, while another said the number of Black applicants was declining. This is encouraging and tragic at the same time.

At the George Washington University Law School, Robert Stanek, associate dean for admissions and financial aid, said enrollment declined at the highly competitive school, which, according to the ABA, received more than 11,000 applications in 2004.

”Two, three and four years ago, we admitted a certain number of minority candidates, and usually the numbers that enrolled constituted about a third of the class,” said Stanek. ”Last year, our same number of offers of admission resulted in a much lower percentage registered. We didn’t see an application decline. We saw a decline in the numbers accepting our offer of admission.”

Stanek said school officials are still trying to ”digest exactly what [has] happened,” and, subsequently, have not initiated any new recruitment efforts for minority students. Minorities became weary of seeing their parent, sibling or spouse attend law school, saddle with debt, with little to no job prospect in the legal industry and the social environment of racism that permeates most law firms. I hope that clarifies it for you. Simply put, one gets tired of running into a brick wall, all the while expected to keep a smile on their face though the soul silently protests.

But Reginald McGahee, dean of admissions at Howard University Law School, perhaps the premiere African-American law school in the country, said the number of applicants applying to Howard Law and many other higher education institutions across the country has declined, especially among Black males.
Though most HBCUs (Historically Black Colleges & Universities) are supported by minority attendance and this is a little daunting; but at the same time understandable. Though the social and educational experience is likely different than at other law schools, many have learned that a long-term strategy regarding standard of living and career is more of a priority.

”There is a universal drop in African-American males that are applying to law schools, and more specifically, higher education in general. And we’re seeing that same decline,” he said.

Law officials discussed obstacles that might preclude Blacks from pursuing careers in law, such as a growing disinterest in the profession and the LSAT (Law School Admissions Test), which many feel is biased against Black law school applicants. Why must you assume that it is the LSAT that is discouraging minorities and not the legal industry itself, especially in light of a previous article stating that minorities actually have increased their LSAT scores over the past few years [Law School Admissions Lag Among Minorities January 6, 2010 « Life’s Mockery] it is this presumptive racism that Blacks don’t want to deal with.

Lawrence Baca, chair of the ABA Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession, said law schools can increase the number of minorities by having Black law school graduates reach out to Black students. If any Blacks do, I hope it is to be honest and warn them of the true reality of the legal industry in the United States.

”Any law school that wants to increase minority participation, or, particularly, Black participation, is going to have to get out and do some outreach work,” Baca said. ”The first thing that I would do if I was a law school is I would find my graduates of color, whatever racial or ethnic group it is, and ask them for their assistance in helping me identify folks and convincing folks to apply.” Outreach to Blacks? Why would they lower themselves to interacting with Black people, oh but then again the legal industry is a business so to repeat in Black Like Me: “We’ll do business with you…” Please spare us the ‘real concern’ facade and I hope 0Ls don’t fall for the attorney encouraging them to attend law school. This false prestige is disgusting, that’s why so many attorneys are so phony in their interactions because they’re deluded and continue to try to convince themselves and others about the industry. So the legal industry suggests using minority lawyers as the agent by which to their bidding and lead unwitting 0L sheep through to law school slaughter.

Baca said he believed a major reason Black students are not considering careers in law is because they lack role models in the profession and do not hear about positive things lawyers have done with their careers.  [emphasis mine]. Exactly, which is why for the most part they should not go.

He also said lawyers have not been pictured in a positive light in the media, possibly deterring students from considering law careers.

”The legal trade for one reason or another has not had the best reputation in the press, and to the extent that it may be causing students to not apply to law school, the way to get past that is for our folks to go into the law schools and say, ‘I don’t care about what you wrote about in the paper. Here’s what I did last week with my career,”’ said Baca. Yes, honesty in what has happened to their legal career, that would be great, please note that it won’t get the result you want, but will simply deter more potential students (hopefully) from enrolling.

But a major concern voiced by many future Black lawyers, as well as those advocating increased diversity in the profession, is the hurdle the LSAT poses to Black students.

”One of the main barriers to increasing diversity among law students is law schools’ heavy reliance on the LSAT. African Americans and other minority groups score lower, on average, than Whites, on the LSAT, yet law schools’ reliance on this measure of aptitude has increased markedly over time,”

Chambliss said in a statement. ”One point differences on the LSAT can make the difference between admission and rejection by law schools, even though such differences are not statistically significant, and even though the LSAT does not predict success as a lawyer, however measured.”

Stanek agreed that the LSAT is quickly becoming the most important factor in law school admissions.

”Is it overriding all other factors? I don’t think so — yet,” he said. McGahee said some currently believe the LSAT is biased.

”The main thing that we have to realize [is] that there’s a lot of debate out there right now that there are some inherent biases that go along with the LSAT. Being at Howard, we’re more sensitive to that than some other institutions in the countries may be. But what we can’t get away from [is] that, right now, there is no other test to properly evaluate and predict whether a student will or won’t do well in law school,” he said.

McGahee said Black students should take time to ensure they are prepared for the LSAT. But according to Chambliss, law schools shouldn’t rely as much on the standardized test.

”Law schools concerned with increasing the diversity of their student bodies need to focus less on the LSAT and more on other measures of achievement, including undergraduate grades and work history,” she said.

Although the LSAT is important, I sincerely hope that the media and the legal industry stop characterizing it as some unbeknown reason why this is likely an issue for minorities. One is having access to prepatory materials, which I would say 6-10 years ago was more difficult than now. Information technology has decreased the barrier of access and some may not understand how important the LSAT is in paving the path to their legal career. It’s more of an issue of preparation and not lack of ability or intelligence.

But Kim Keenan, president of the National Bar Association, a group representing thousands of Black lawyers, discussed the possible ramifications the underrepresentation of African Americans in law will have for the Black community in the future.I agree and discussed this here [Law School Admissions Lag Among Minorities January 6, 2010 « Life’s Mockery]

”Ultimately, at some point, you will not be able to find lawyers of color,” said Keenan. I hope you do not think this is by happenstance.

Is China America’s Mirror?: Newsweek: Smart, Young, and Broke: White-Collar Workers are China’s Newest Underclass

All Rights Reserved

Melinda Liu and Marjie Vlaskamp, p. 40, June 28 & July 5, 2010; online version: China’s New Underclass: White-Collar Workers – NewsweekAnd you thought it was bad here. Must we wonder why globalization may not be such a good idea? Because when a bunch of countries jump on a bandwagon, say the proliferation of higher education, there’s little to no room for recovery, and no I’m not referring to fleeing to another country, well not necessarily!

“Guo and an estimated million others like him represent and unprecedented and troublesome development in China: a fast-growing white-collar underclass. Since the ‘90s, Chinese universities have doubled their admissions, far outpacing the job market for college grads.” [emphasis mine] My word, does this sound familiar? I know these blogs are dedicated to the law school (graduate level) industry, but I am sure that American undergraduate universities have been doing the same thing. I’ve read commentators and some bloggers suggest leaving the U.S., should you be that desparate—choose wisely!

I wonder if the author’s been reading these blogs, then again just the sad, universal reality of university systems here and abroad:  This year China’s universities and tech institutes churned out roughly 6.3 million graduates.  Many grew up in impoverished rural towns and villages and attended second- or third-tier schools in provinces, trusting that studying hard would bring them better lives than their parents had.  Interesting, we see that the promise of upward mobility is not only promoted here as the American Dream, but in other countries for hope as well. I wonder how their medical and legal fields are doing?

They may be smart and energetic, but some are starting to ask if the promise of a better life was a lie. If you have to ask, then you likely know the answer.

They’re known as “ants,” for their willingness to work, their dirt-poor living conditions, and the seeming futility of their efforts.  “These ants have high ambitions but virtually no practical skills”…

The similarities between those Chinese graduates in the tech field and American law graduates is simply astonishing. It’s a potentially explosive situation. It sure is. Just imagine how many millions of unemployed, educated persons who were deluded will lose patience with the current trend. Someone commented before about potential riots and living near concentrated urban areas.

The discontent rising among the ants is even more worrying. Blue-collar wages have actually soared recently, while white-collar pay is shrinking. This resonates so deeply right now I’m confident we can superimpose attorney with computer programmer and change the geographic region and we will have a sufficient description of the American legal industry.

…the government admits that at least one in eight is permanently unemployed. And those who get jobs don’t always find work in their chosen fields. Ditto. College grads have far higher expectations than the migrant laborers who have fueled China’s growth for three decades.  “Ants are educated. They speak foreign languages. They’re Internet-savvy.  It’s that potential for trouble that has the government worried,” he says.  “If they aren’t satisfied with their living conditions and want to start a movement, like the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, it becomes a huge problem.”

This is an interesting take, the Chinese government is concerned about the educated persons becoming unruly. In a way it makes sense. People who lived in poverty most of their lives and chose not to attain higher education and debt are accustomed to a lower standard of living. Those who work hard, with aspirations of attaining a “better life” are crudely disappointed with the all-encompassing economic reality. Thus, the former, really did not have any thing to lose, while the latter has invested time, money, effort and sacrificed aspects of normal social living based on societal and other assurances that it will be compensated for upon completion. Very interesting. Though it’s not simply black and white, of course there will be poor people who are willing to cause harm and take what’s not theirs, but I think this article shed some light (at least for me) on how we compartmentalize (poor vs. middle class or wealthy, educated vs. uneducated, etc) but the variables may cross depending on the circumstances.

This guy gives some ideas on how an uprising would occur. Is it just me or do governments tend to look at suppressing uprisings, stemming tides of frustration but oft-times do not offer or work with those affected to create solutions to the circumstances that originated the frustrations?

The ants don’t seem to be organizing in any big way so far. But they clearly have the necessary technical skills and a sense of common backgrounds and objectives.  “it’s like I’ve joined an army,” says Wang Lei, a young University of Innder Mongolia graduate who has found steady work as a computer programmer after months o searching.  “For the rest of my life, I’ll meet former Tanjialing inhabitants and have strong ties with them because of our shared experience.” Comments like this make China’s leaders nervous, not least because the ant tribes are so fluid and difficult to monitor.  If they were somehow to make common cause with other restive rural-born Chinese, such as landless farmers or migrant workers, they’d be extremely hard to suppress.”

This wouldn’t happen in America, we’re too individualistic, judge people by their clothes and there’s too much racism and haves vs. have-nots. In China, although there are ethnic Chinese and others, they’re more homogenous than Americans. So, it’s not just bad here for educated folks, just look around you.

A New Way to Discriminate: Latest Trends in Employment Ads and its Effects on Black Americans

All Rights Reserved

Yes, this is controversial and since this particular manner of advertising for vacancies is an emerging trend I won’t deny this post may not be totally accurate. Recently, another blog posted an article from CNN Money concerning those who are unemployed aren’t desired as potential candidates for a particular vacancy. Here’s the original article: Out-of-work job applicants told unemployed need not apply – Jun. 16, 2010. Yahoo decided to further expand on the issue here:

2010 Unemployment Extension Jobless Woes: Unemployed Need Not Apply – Associated Content – associatedcontent.com The first portion which seems to draw fire to the hiring practice is:

“It may seem as discriminatory as “Blacks Need Not Apply” or “Women Need Not Apply” or “Irish Need Not Apply”” — and it is, but in a more general and less inflammatory sense — but it is commonly used, blatantly printed in online and newsprint ads and classified sections. Instead of discriminating via age, gender, race, or ethnicity, businesses discriminate on whether or not you’re currently employed.” [emphasis mine] Hmm, you don’t say? First, let’s disband comparing Irish to Blacks. Although Irish had difficulty when first arriving to the U.S. years and years ago, they were eventually “Anglos-ized” into the broader “white” category as with other Americans who were descendants from other European countries. This was, is not and will never be the case for Blacks.  The other interesting part is where the author states: “more general and less inflammatory.” However, the author makes it appears that using the filter “Unemployed Need Not Apply” is better than saying outright “Blacks Need Not Apply” or rather those old Jim Crow signs “No n******, no jews, no dogs” though it has the same economic impact.  Since the highest percentage of the unemployed in the U.S. are Black Americans, with an overall unemployment rate remaining steady at 25% towering above the national average with no apparent signs of decreasing.  You’re right it is not as inflammatory, just more insidious.

Although some in the employment sector argue that these employers crafted these vacancies because of suspicion of performance issues, I think many of us in the legal industry would like to have more information. Since most attorneys work contractually (general counsel, staff attorney, direct hire, contract attorneys) and many positions are at will or short term, this line of reasoning doesn’t seem to be applicable for these types of cases.

Anyway, we all know that discrimination which has a disparate impact on a suspect class is subject to strict scrutiny. One is unable to argue that the applicant was not qualified because his or her application/resume would not even be considered for review because the applicant is already unemployed.

I am not dismissing the fact that some whites and others have been affected by the economy especially unemployment but what I am referring to are those who are the most affected are also a minority and thus a ‘suspect class’ (p.s. have you ever wondered why “suspect” was the designated term, just saying).

So, now we have the highest percentage of unemployed in America who are black, who will be unable to qualify for jobs, not because of lack of experience, job skills, or education but because they are unemployed. Between the employment practices in the current economy and the current Congressional stalemate  regarding unemployment compensation it is becoming apparent that Blacks are put in the game of “can’t win for losing.”

The practice contributes to the jobless rate that the U. S. Department of Labor places at 9.7% of the workforce (although some estimate that the number is closer to 22%). The estimate is that 15 million Americans are unemployed, most due to no fault of their own. Many have exhausted their benefits, their life’s savings, taken part-time and lesser paying jobs to help make ends meet. [emphasis mine] Yet, they are punished for actually wanting to get back on their feet, wanting to live as a decent man and woman by working and earning a quality living; yet are thrown in the perpetual cycle in which the onlookers gawk and “blame” them for taking handouts, though what they did receive in benefits does not cover most of the basic necessities…

As the jobless find their income options becoming increasingly limited, such as those hoping for Congress to pass the 2010 Unemployment Extension Bill, they also see that job openings are being filled by passive job seekers, the term recruiting companies use to label those already employed looking for a job. The jobless are being actively marginalized by the job market itself. So this country has given up on those who desire work and recycles those in one job into another, increasing the lack of skills of the former as well as unemployment gap on their resume while the already employed continue to gain more and more experience and continue to be favored while the former is unable to get the job experience in the first place because jobs won’t hire him or her for being employed in the first place. We call this a country of democratic ideals.

For the millions of unemployed attempting to find a job, the business practice of not hiring the jobless may only reinforce what they had already suspected. Not being able to find a job leads to its own special mental state of paranoia and seeming besiegement by forces beyond one’s control. Regardless, the news cannot be anything but discouraging…Many of the unemployed, who found themselves in that state due to no fault of their own, are finding that they are remaining in a jobless state through no fault of their own. It is a number that, in accordance with the “growing trend” to openly and secretly discriminate against the unemployed, may not see much of a decrease for some time. In other words, it’s not fair, it’s not likely to change as the private sector pretty much runs the country. At least we can realistically prepare–for the worse.

A Short Article: ‘Thinking about law school?’

subject to copyrighthttp://www.unews.com/thinking-about-law-school-1.1259408

Thinking about law school? By Evan Helmuth Published: Monday, March 8, 2010

The author of this short piece is basically warning 0Ls to not go to law school in particular and to think twice about any other graduate school program. Everyone in my generation, and I suspect others, has been socialized to think of an M.B.A., a J.D. or any number of different graduate degrees as being both prestigious and valuable.

Reality sometimes has a rude way of intruding on our notions that conflict with it.

The financial melt-down of 2008 changed a lot about the legal industry, along with a lot of other industries…

So so true. Attorneys’ families are still unable to understand how an attorney isn’t working, on the verge of homelessness or otherwise not living the ‘high life.’ Generations X, Y and whoever else inherited the debt of the earlier generations. The earlier generations lost their retirement, IRA funds and social security due to corruption and the economy. One cannot reasonably convince themselves in the midst of all this evidence that getting into excessive educational debt will benefit you long term. Maybe the U.S. job market will just turn all the department, convenient stores and restaurants into one huge educational campus. Many intelligent youth have been told by their parents how special they are, that they will make it big, and make “us proud,” that the smack of reality is probably causing nervous breakdowns across the country. Some of the educated stated “I did everything right.” Well, I also noticed a woman on one of these talk shows last year say the same thing. She stated that she waited to get married to have children, her and her husband obtained “good jobs” and they waited until the time was right to get a house. Guess what? Unfortunately, they lost everything. I don’t want to say that it doesn’t matter whether one “does things right.” I will say just know that the system doesn’t care too much and as you have witnessed or experienced, the rug will be pulled right from under you.My favorite quote in the column:

“It makes little sense to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on an M.B.A. or J.D. if there are no transactions being done for attorneys to write and no businesses for M.B.A.’s to consult or manage.”

Touché.  Learn a foreign language, relocate abroad (somehow), pay off your consumer debt (though I have no solutions concerning those wretched student loans). It’s done. The younger generations should consider themselves graced they even get the warning, the children born during the later 1970’s didn’t.

University of Michigan Law Journal: Preserving a Racial Hierarchy:

Preserving a Racial Hierarchy: A Legal Analysis of the Disparate RacialImpact of Legacy Preferences in University Admissions. [108 Michigan Law Review 577 (2010)] Katherine Ladewski

This is a note in the University of Michigan’s Law Journal. I would like to link this back to a previous post which discussed an article in the Stanford Journal concerning blacks receiving preferential treatment. It’s 2010 and one still has to make academic arguments that this isn’t the case. The article’s topic demonstrates another form of excluding Black Americans from IVY League institutions. Just by looking at this title, isn’t this just another form of discrimination against blacks? It’s when I read articles like this I am truly baffled as to why blacks are blamed when a white person isn’t admitted to an IVY League, especially when you likely had generations of head start in economic, social and educational arenas. Oh because blacks and poor people are the root of America’s problems [sarcasm definitely intended]. Anyway, here we go.

The article first discusses how universities originated legacy admissions to exclude Jews who were recent immigrants. First thought, replace one unpopular group with another, Blacks, who are ironically more indigineous to this country then the former. This article touches on the notion (which some of the other blogs have mentioned) that younger generations of Americans sought education, owning a home to achieve the American Dream as part of upward mobility. However, legacy admissions have a disparate impact on Black Americans and other minorities. One of the articles I list on this blog points out that during the most recent economic recession Black Americans were affected the most and the attempt to obtain future employment is marred by the lack of connections that educated Blacks have in different arenas, so multiply this by a graduate or professional education where the door is tougher to wedge through and it should not be surprising how difficult it is for Blacks to navigate through the employment sector. The same lack of connections may be applied to the precursor for professional employment, that of a quality, top tier education.  Historically, with rare exception some (the “black” heirs of their mother’s -wealthy paramour-usually by rape and the ability to “pass” or be light-skinned enough) were granted elite mentorship into private schools. Although to note most mixed children were house servants of their slavemasters.

The article further argues that legacy admissions increases the prospects of alumni donations and fundraising, provide better employment opportunities for legacy graduates as previous generation of alumni (parents and the inner circle) will hire someone who graduated from the same law school as they. Thus, as whites are more likely to have legacy admission, legacy employment, blacks and other minorities are likely to be left outside of the cold of such education and employment prospects. Sounds like common sense, but not for those people who continue to claim “We’re losing everything to blacks.” I remember Chris Rock was espousing this sentiment and his response was “losing it to who…it ain’t us, I’ve looked around this [here]” [he used an expletive]* And yes he did this particular show in Washington, D.C.

However, the author states “Because the negative impact of legacy preferences on minority applicants is based on past patterns of attendance at American universities and the underrepresentation of such racial groups over that period, the negative impact of legacy preferences on racial minorities should decrease over time if the student bodies at American universities continue to diversify.”

Which is non-sensical based on her prior premise that the legacy admissions were historically racist and continue the same modis operandi which benefits whites and are to the detriment to Blacks. Perhaps she meant it as a recommendation. Though I doubt these universities have any incentives to change their methodology as they were doing this for decades with Federal funding and no consistent objection by the government.  Even if you were to take the current blacks who made it to IVY League law schools and BIGLaw, it is a known fact that in this recession that Blacks were likely to be let go first, thus affecting their standard of living, income, influence for fundraising and donations to their alumn. What’s interesting as some blogs have noted about education in general being promoted as a source of upward mobility, but taking this particular sub-section of legacy admissions, there is little or no chance for Blacks to even create future generations based on legacy and IVY League education.

Anyway, the author goes into further details and statistics on disparate impact of legacy admissions, rate of donations and fundraising and the lack of correlation between continuing legacy admissions the way they currently stand and the latter two factors. “A post-legacy residual of zero would indicate that eliminating legacy preferences had no effect on university fundraising outcomes.” [589]

Full text of the article can be found: http://www.michiganlawreview.org/assets/pdfs/108/4/ladewski.pdf

Just imagine the chances for upward mobility for a Black American who not only didn’t attend IVY League but a non-top tier school. One shouldn’t wonder why voices of dissent espouse the reality of systemic discrimination.