Generation Y and job loss

March 11, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Is the Generation Y/ “highly praised” generation taking job loss worse than other attorneys or even others their same age in different professions?

You definitely have to have a certain type of personality and work ethic to become an attorney: hard working, type-A, detail oriented, go-getter kind of person. Combine your personality with the fact you grew up constantly hearing how great you were at everything you did (and probably got a trophy for something even if you didn’t actually win the competition), and attorneys from this generation who can’t find a job may be taking it harder than others.

The fresh out of law school students and young associates under the age of 30 could answer this question better than I can since I am not an associate looking for a job. But being around that age, I can understand the theory that people our age may be more affected mentally by the rejection. You’ve worked hard to become an attorney and expect to get a job out of school or hold on to the one you’ve got, so not having a job is a major blow to the ego and self-esteem. Suddenly, no matter how hard you work, you can’t get the results you want. Plus, if you’ve been in school since the age of 6, you haven’t really had to deal with rejection and struggles like finding a job.

Does this theory have any weight to it? As someone who grew up on the cusp of the “highly praised” generation, I can see how handling rejection can be more difficult for us than someone 10 or 15 years older, especially if we were told we could do anything we wanted and we did everything great.
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Oh please. I\'m a young associate and have never experienced the high praise to which you refer.
    I also doubt that many young associates or law students have made it out of law school without taking at least one serious knock to the ego. The reality for young lawyers is the same as lawyers (and people) of any generation. It is scary and unnerving to be without employment. Plain and simple.

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. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT