No job? Just sue your school

August 10, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Can’t find a job? Sue your school! That’s what one graduate in New York City has decided to do. She thinks it’s her school’s fault she can’t find a job because its office of career advancement hasn’t provided her with leads and the career advice it promised.

The Monroe College IT graduate wants her $70,000 in tuition back. The college claims it helps graduates in their careers and argues the lawsuit is without merit.

When I first heard this story and before I knew what her degree was in, I thought this story had to be about a law student. But perhaps a law student would know this kind of action may end up being deemed frivolous or quickly tossed out.

It took me more than 6-months to find a full-time job after graduating, and it wasn’t even in my major. When my bank account was running low and my student loans were coming due, it would have been nice to have the university reimburse me for the money I paid. After all, I went there to become skilled in a specific field with the goal of working in said field. It took me longer than I thought it would to score a full-time journalism job.

But I want to know how a graduate who hasn’t found “gainful employment” since graduating has the money to hire an attorney. If she’s not working, who’s paying the attorney? I doubt an attorney would take on this case pro bono, but maybe one has. Perhaps the grad is proceeding pro se in order to save money.

I know you can’t be guaranteed a job after graduating because jobs are dependent on so many factors (qualifications, economy, competition, etc.). It’s not the school’s fault she can’t find a job. Perhaps it could be more helpful in trying to find leads, but it’s up to each individual to score employment. For those of us who struggled for months or years to find a job in our field, wouldn’t it be great if you could sue your school and get back that tuition if you couldn’t find a job in your major within a certain time period?

I know that would in essence give some a free education and reward them for being jobless, while graduates who found jobs would still have to pay for their education. But when you’re broke, sitting at home all day (possibly at your parents’ house), or working at the same job you did in high school, getting back your tuition, even through a lawsuit, would be a nice dream, wouldn’t it?
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. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT