Class of 2011 faced 'brutal' entry-level job market

June 8, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

NALP has released its employment profile for law school graduates from 2011 and the numbers aren’t great. In fact, they are some of the worse NALP – The Association for Legal Career Professionals – has seen in years.

The overall employment rate for new law school graduates is 85.6 percent, the lowest it’s been since 1994. Nine months after graduating, only two-thirds of new attorneys are employed in a job that requires passing the bar.

NALP Executive Director James Leipold described the entry-level job market for these graduates as “brutal.”

“When this class took their LSATs and applied for law school, there were no signs that the legal economic boom was showing any signs of slowing, and yet by the time they graduated they faced what was arguably the worst entry-level legal employment market in more than 30 years,” he wrote in a commentary on NALP’s findings, which were released Thursday.

Less than half of employed graduates are in private practice; only once before 2011 in the 38 years NALP has been collecting employment data has this number been below 50 percent. About 18 percent were employed in business, 7.5 percent in public interest, and 9.3 percent as judicial clerks. Graduates also said they were employed in academic areas, the military and other government jobs.

As of Feb. 15, 2012, nearly 10 percent of graduates were still seeking a job, 2.5 percent weren’t looking for work, and 2.3 percent decided to continue their studies full-time. Nearly 12 percent had jobs that were considered part-time.

“I am often asked if there are signs that the entry-level job market is recovering. Certainly the employment outcomes data for the Class of 2011 document a very distressed job market. This class may represent the bottom of the employment curve for this economic cycle,” Leipold said.

Notre Dame Law School reports that of its 190 graduates from 2011, 174 are employed – 172 full-time and only two part-time. A little over 40 of those employed are working only for a short term, the highest number in four years. Only 15 graduates in 2008 reported working for a short term.

Of those employed, 162 jobs require a law degree and nine have a JD advantage.

At Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, 87 percent of 252 graduates reported being employed, with 193 of those finding work on a permanent basis. Of those employed, 145 have jobs that require a law degree, and 23 have jobs where having a law degree is an advantage.

Nearly half are employed at law firms; “business or industry” is the next largest employment area at 22.82 percent. Of those working at law firms, 51 work in firms with two to 10 attorneys; six reported starting their own practices.

Indiana University Maurer School of Law and Valparaiso University Law School did not have 2011 class statistics posted (or where I could easily find them) on their websites.

You can view the select findings on the Class of 2011 on NALP’s website.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT