From TIME Magazine @ http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1887270,00.html

Law-School Grads See Promised Jobs Put On Hold
By Matt Villano Thursday,
Mar. 26, 2009


After serving as a 2008 summer associate at Philadelphia law firm Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, Harvard Law School student Juan Valdivieso was offered a position as a full-time associate and was anxiously looking forward to joining the firm later this year.

Then, in an instant, everything changed. On March 12, Valdivieso received a memo explaining that the sagging national economy had forced the firm to defer his position for a year. Suddenly, with two months remaining in his law-school education, the 28-year-old found himself tantalizingly close to a degree and no place to apply it.

"The first thing that went through my head was, 'What do I do now?' " he said earlier this week from Boston. "It was disappointing to learn that I had to change plans and disappointing that I will have to postpone some of the things I was looking forward to." (See 25 people to blame for the financial crisis.)

Valdivieso certainly is not the only casualty of creative downsizing in the legal industry these days. As the nation's economic climate flounders and legal work dries up, a growing number of large and midsize law firms are eschewing layoffs by redistributing or deferring young associates instead.

Some firms, such as Los Angelesbased Latham & Watkins and San Franciscobased Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, have offered $75,000 annual compensation packages to incoming associates who defer employment until October 2010 and find alternate work in public-interest law. Other firms, like Morgan Lewis, have told deferred associates they can earn up to $60,000 per year if they work in public service, plus an additional $10,000 if they continue to study for the bar. Overall, firms estimate that these deferral arrangements could save them $25,000 to $85,000 per employee. (Read "Job Forecast for College Seniors: Grimmer Than Ever.")

"There's no question that all of these firms are trying to make the best of a bad situation," says James Leipold, executive director of the National Association for Law Placement, located in Washington.

For many associates, some work is better than no work at all. The legal industry has seen its share of layoffs in recent months according to industry website Lawshucks.com, at least 2,100 attorneys have been laid off in 2009, bringing the total to more than 3,000 since January 2008.

Ward Bower, principal at Altman Weil, a legal management consulting firm in Newtown Square, Pa., predicts many U.S.-based law firms will earn nearly 10% less in 2009 than they did in 2008 performance that threatens to cause upheaval.

Among those who are still employed, reaction to deferments and fellowship options largely has been harsh. Many associates privately complain about how law firms have betrayed trust by promising jobs they may not be in a position to deliver. On public (but anonymous) websites like Abovethelaw.com, most critics have expressed outrage at what they perceive to be a breach of contract. Still, Sandra Sperino, an assistant professor of law for the Beasley School of Law at Temple University in Philadelphia, notes that because most states provide at-will employment, firms can change the terms of a job offer at any time.

Other criticisms of the current climate have focused on debt, bemoaning that gargantuan loans for law school aren't exactly easy to defray. According to the American Bar Association, the average law-school student who graduates this year will do so with a little more than $73,000 in debt. Larry Kramer, dean of Stanford Law School in Palo Alto, Calif., acknowledges there's a problem. "Something about the way the system works has to give," he says. "If you're going to defer someone for a year, there really needs to be a certain degree of loan forgiveness to ease the burden [on associates]." (See pictures of the evolution of the college dorm.)

One undisputed upside to the current trend is that public-interest and legal-aid firms will finally receive some much needed help. Bob Glaves, executive director of the Chicago Bar Foundation, says these organizations are experiencing a "perfect storm" of dramatic cutbacks and an expanding need for services. "These groups desperately need assistance with a crisis of their own," says Glaves, whose organization is the charitable arm of the Chicago Bar Association. "Programs that help them and provide associates with real-world experience benefit everyone involved."

Ramon Arias, executive director of Bay Area Legal Aid in Oakland, Calif., agrees, noting that he would "emphatically" welcome new associates with open arms. Still, Arias adds that his organization is so understaffed that an influx of young and eager associates could present an already overworked infrastructure with a host of logistical challenges. "A lot depends on our capacity to incorporate these lawyers in an effective way," he explains. "Who oversees employee benefits? What about health insurance? Bar dues? Nonpersonnel costs?"

Many law firms say they are still working out specifics of their public-interest programs, though it appears some firms may cover benefits such as health and life insurance as part of a public-service deal.

Back in Boston, Valdivieso, the deferred Morgan Lewis associate, isn't waiting for anyone. The fledgling attorney said he has started looking into opportunities working for a public-interest group that specializes in civil rights. "It's not what I expected, but I'm excited at the chance to do meaningful legal work," he said. "In this economy, things could be a lot worse."

Here is another article about the same topic: http://theshark.typepad.com/weblog/2009/03/all-the-depressing-info-we-could-find-on-your-future-all-in-one-place.html

Those articles mention the JD situation. For the LLM students is even worse. This year almost nobody get a job at the fairs.

Some people (not me) think that in a few months, January 2010, the economic situation will be better, but, even in thta case, many deferead lawyers will start working, so I don't believe that we will have to many chances to get a job in US.

I agree that the situation is worse for LL.M's since jobs for foreign educated US LL.M-holders are scarce even in "boom" years, i don't see any job prospects for LL.M. holders in the US for the foreseeable future, it will take the market several years not only to re-absorb the tons of exprienced laid-off JDs, the deferred JDs, and the "just outta school" JDs; before anyone even looks at an extremely extraordinary LL.M holder candidate.

I am more afraid of the prospects back home, getting cold feet about quiting my job and drawing upon a $76K loan, if i don't know if i will still be able to get a job (or even get my own job back) when I finish the LL.M.

I guess the timing is a b$@!$%!!! :(

Wow. Scary article....but yeah, definitely consider deferring if the overarching aim is to get a job. I think students with amazing credentials can still get one, but let's be honest, in this market there are not enough jobs for JDs let alone LLMs

Any views on what the situation would be for a 2011 grad?

LOL? Basically you are asking us whether the economy will have boosted in 2010-2011. Which is impossible to say but which we all hope :)

I hear this chorus all day "employers look for JDs first and then when there are spots left they take LL.Ms to fill in the holes".
Well frankly, it doesn't happen like this in a good economy, and I don't see why it would work like this in a bad economy.

There's never been a shortage of JD grads even in the most brilliant economy. If a recruiter wants one he'll always find one, the only fluctuation is how "low" he'll have to dig in the student body. e.g law firm A might recruit top 50% in good years from law school B, top 30% in bad years, and top 75% during spectacular growth years.

And despite all this, every year LL.M grads are recruited nevertheless. Why? Not because employer X found no JD grads, but because he was looking for a more international background for the specific job opening.

Yes LL.M grads are deeply affected by the economic slowdown, but not because "JDs come first", it doesn't work that way. It's because the jobs that LL.M get recruited for typically appear in times of extreme global economic prosperity.

At the same time, just for the sake of giving one optimistic example: the IMF budget has been almost doubled, I'm betting they'll use some of that money to recruit specialists of international trade and finance. And if they're half smart, they'll recognize that an applicant who has an LLB from Europe or Asia and a LL.M from the US is 100 times better than an applicant with "only" a US JD.

I might be overconfident, I might be in a situation where "I want to believe in it" simply because I'm about to make that investment myself very soon, but I also know that in this highly artificial global financial system we live in, going from crisis to prosperity is only a matter of collective hope and morale.

It's our responsibility as students and future workers to keep our morale high, shake things up, and restore what our incompetent elders managed to crash.

It's our responsibility as students and future workers to keep our morale high, shake things up, and restore what our incompetent elders managed to crash.


I LOVE this thought Hedek........I don t like to intervene everytime in here......it s been a long time we ve seen very pessimistic messages and threads here.........Every individuals will have his own chance.........and to get it ....first u gotta be positive and purposive........talkin continuosly about the crisis.....is completely unproductive.

I don't know - I definitely hear what you're saying Hedek but I do wonder whether it would only be fair to give those who are putting in a sizeable investment into coming into the US a fair representation of what is going on right now - like it or not, there really are an extreme dearth of jobs in the US market at the moment; and it's only fair to say that point blank to those planning their future careers (and in particular, whether you want to defer their LLM for one or two years). Optimism, while always a great virtue, should be tempered with a healthy dose of reality and the reality in the present circumstances is not promising.

Think about it this way: if almost every firm, including V-20s are telling their JD hires that they have no space for them to 2010 (and are forcing all of them to defer till late 2009, early 2010 or for some, till late 2010), is it likely that they are going to make an exception and hire an LLM student, however stellar? I daresay the deferral of students would have an impact over the next three years (since the deluge would "spill" over to the upcoming years, making the situation worse, not better, unless the economy turns unexpectedly in a stunning and breathtaking fashion), save for those who they might take on for strategic reasons (e.g. they want to start an office in Sao Paolo and need Brazilians, or they have a tie-up with the local firm you work in).

I suppose my advice would be this: come to the US if you want an excellent experience as well as the POSSIBLE (not PROBABLE) opportunity of working here (i.e. NY) - don't come, however, if the only feasible way you are going to be able to pay off the loans that you are taking to finance your LLM is a $160k a year job in New York.

Yasmin: What you're saying is true during economic growth as well: a 1 year degree isn't a guaranteed investment to land a job in the US. At best, you could argue that it's "more true now".

As for deferring because of the current economic situation. It depends. If someone currently has a job he likes and a decent pay... agreed spending over $100k now (tuition+opportunity cost) isn't necessarily the wisest decision.
If it's deferring just to waste another year waiting and/or doing low to non paid internships, what is deferring going to change? Assume the economy brightens in 3 years, does it matter whether you got your LL.M 2 years ago or 1 year ago?

It's one thing to warn prospective students that if their goal is to permanently live in the US, a JD is the superior choice, and that an LL.M -though three times cheaper- is a risky alternative.
But constantly bringing up the "global economic crisis" to convince us that everything looks gloom and that our future is compromised no matter what we do isn't helping the slightest.

We could also say that chances of finding a job in the US are far better with a LL.M than without one, even in this economy. That statement is just as true.

My advice to prospective students: if you're not able to assess risks and rewards, if you can't take calculated risks, if you allow the elusive promise of a US career eldorado guide your decisions, and if you need random people on the internet to tell you whether your investment is wise or not, then you don't have what it takes to be a lawyer, and not only will an LL.M be a waste of money, it will also be a waste of time.

If you don't match that description, then this kind of threads only end up fueling a general atmosphere of pessimism which benefits no one.

I agree for the most part (unsurprising, since you do raise some amazingly cogent and sensible points) but I do think that if "the general atmosphere of pessimism" mirrors the pessimism that pervades the legal sector at the moment (and from my vantage point, that does, in fact, appear to be the case), it only makes sense to convey the message and portray the situation in its entirety. Sugar-coating the message (to an audience who should be ready to accept the reality of the situation) only serves to exacebate the problem by making it more difficult for them to assess the magnitude of the calculated risk that they might have to make.

That said, I appreciate your point and definitely think it makes perfect sense as well - I just have a vastly different take I suppose (perhaps subconsciously motivated by the fact that I may have, looking back, dispensed somewhat negative advice on the state of the US legal landscape over the past few months, though all of it, as far as I can recall, was well-meaning and the import of which I completely stand by) :)

In my opinion:

Let's just say the chances of LLM students to find a job in an economic recession is VERY VERY low, contrary to times of prosperity where a decent amount (but not everybody) finds a job. On the other hand that doesn't mean you can't be lucky.

In my opinion this has to be taken into account in looking forward and maybe adjusting aspirations for the future to fe. the home country.

I agree for the most part (unsurprising, since you do raise some amazingly cogent and sensible points) but I do think that if "the general atmosphere of pessimism" mirrors the pessimism that pervades the legal sector at the moment (and from my vantage point, that does, in fact, appear to be the case), it only makes sense to convey the message and portray the situation in its entirety. Sugar-coating the message (to an audience who should be ready to accept the reality of the situation) only serves to exacebate the problem by making it more difficult for them to assess the magnitude of the calculated risk that they might have to make.

That said, I appreciate your point and definitely think it makes perfect sense as well - I just have a vastly different take I suppose (perhaps subconsciously motivated by the fact that I may have, looking back, dispensed somewhat negative advice on the state of the US legal landscape over the past few months, though all of it, as far as I can recall, was well-meaning and the import of which I completely stand by) :)

In my opinion there is a HUGE difference between the importance in this economic climate of the LLM to find a great job in your own country and one in the US.

This is just a fact: It will be VERY DIFFICULT to find a job in a US law firm to work in the US with an LLM. On the contrary it will be MUCH EASIER to get job offers from those great US firms to work in your country of origin.

For me personally (from Belgium) the LLM from UVA will have great advantages to find a job in biglaw in Belgium. I however do not expect to find an internship in a US office of a big firm, unless the economic situation changes dramatically (which it won't).

In my opinion this is a justified differentation that makes for some good advice to students wishing to pursue an LLM and does not express an overstated degree of pessimism.

Well........I completely support Hedek's point of view......I know these are facts and your realism is fine. But I think that facing an llm with such a small bag of expectations is not good. I mean the crisis is there.......and difficulties are real but we have to see at such elements in a positive perspective. The job in a big law firm in your home country is an excellent result to achieve but why should a motivated person eliminate an internship or us job offer from his her final objectives?? I m not sayin i m sure i ll suceed, but the crisis is only another aspect to consider. High grades, self confidence, and especially one year of new productive CONTACTS are the main things I will look for. Don t mean my "strategy " is right but I don't see any reason why such a never ending crisis picture ought to be conveyed that way.

Wow this thread has certainly become a lot more animated overnight! (and I see that as a good, not bad, thing)

Hedek thanks again for your comments; as always, they are eminently sensible. I should apologize though for not making my views clearer earlier: to be sure, one should not hesitate to come here to do an LLM if they can leverage on it back home I know loads of people whove been able to do that with considerable success (curiously, Ive actually been in previous contact with at least one of the attorneys you pointed out in your message tis a small world indeed!); my less-than-optimistic views on the legal market under this thread relate exclusively to the prospects of LLMers thinking of coming and breaking into the NY legal market.

Where I respectfully disagree with you is where you mention that The problem here is that we have no choice but to look for jobs in many instances, youre right if one is unable to find a job in London after graduating in the UK, for example, there is little opportunity cost to coming to the US on the assumption one has sufficient funds in their bank to fund the LLM; the same applies if youre already doing the LLM or have committed to doing it; the converse however also applies if you havent yet conclusively determined that is what you want to do, then, if I were that person, I would exercise caution: where he/she has a relatively well-paying and satisfying job back home, then he/she should pause and really consider whether moving over to NY is necessarily for him/her in this economic climate. For those already in the US, it makes perfect sense to try; for those back home and for whom the opportunity cost is high, they would need to be given a good sense of what the US system is like before they make their choice, and my sense is that we (the collective wisdom *cough* *cough* of the people on this forum) would probably be helping them if we calibrate their expectations to what is, in fact, the prevailing sentiment and received wisdom within the law firms at the moment.

As for your other comment on how hiring partners might chance upon this website, I have a slightly different take on that. Lawyers are, by nature, conservative, and, ceteris paribus, Id hire a realistic grounded LLM anytime over an LLM graduate who suffers from "terminal euphoria" and comes into the US without a clear sense of the reality in the US legal market (Id definitely be really cautious to hire one whose sole plan to pay off the enormous loan to come to the US to be get a job in a New York law firm because I would smell trouble). In any event, Id be really surprised if hiring partners predicate any part of their decision on internet website searches on LLMs most of the Biglaw law firms have hiring partners (and indeed, name partners or even international chairmen if you look really closely) who themselves either possess LLMs or have LLM graduates in their management teams. To be honest, notwithstanding my views above, I strongly suspect that if the hiring partner is so out of the loop as to what the merits of an LLM are such that he has to even consider initiating that internet web-search after speaking to you because he doesnt think your LLM is all you cracked it up to be, then youre in all likelihood not going to get the job, whatever comes up through that search.

Santa Couldnt agree more with your entire reasoning, and you express a viewpoint I wholeheartedly and unreservedly share.

Leonard2000 I definitely see your point, and youre right in stating that The job in a big law firm in your home country is an excellent result to achieve but why should a motivated person eliminate an internship or us job offer from his her final objectives? Many, however, come to the US and pay through their nose not with the tempered and realistic perspective you appear to bring but with the misguided belief that working in a white-shoe or V10 law firm is the necessary consequence of an LLM, when, in this particular market, the converse is clearly the case (in fact, as Santa rightly suggests, the job market has all but frozen for LLM grads). Most of the LLM graduates from 2009 (and I daresay 2010) are not going to be able to attain the dream of a position in NY and my posts thus far has attempted to temper the expectations somewhat not because it is not good to dream (hey, we all have aspirations and dreams after all), but because unless youre here living in the States, its hard to get an accurate sense of the pessimistic outlook that appears to currently dominate the legal scene here (to get a rough sense, read the updates at http://www.abovethelaw.com the aim is not to frighten you guys but to give you an accurate feel of what the current US legal milieu is like) and the last thing I want is for some guy/girl 12 months down the road saying "how come no one told me???!!!!" There is a reason, unfortunately, why Time magazine (as the initial post under this thread suggests) and newspapers and websites galore focus on the constant bad news emanating from the US legal scene - it's not because it is all one big conspiracy, but because, for the most part, such less-than-optimistic news do in fact, accurately reflect the realities of the present economic situation.

Santa:

Even for domestic applicants, an LL.M is comparatively worth more now in my opinion. For example, 10 years ago you could get the best tax positions with only a JD, now a tax LL.M from Georgetown or NYU is becoming a minimum.
Assume in great years 80% of NYU and Georgetown tax LLM find jobs and that in bad years it drops to 50%
Pessimistic people will conclude that an LLM has become worthless.
But if at the same time, 60% of JD applicants find tax jobs in good years (20 points difference compared to LL.M grads) and only 20% in bad years (30 points difference), the relevant conclusion is that the value of the tax LL.M has comparatively increased even though overall employment rates decreased.

Likewise, older law professors often only have a JD, now most new hires have at least an LL.M: once again, as competition increases, the LL.M becomes more important.

Of course pessimists will argue that back when a JD was enough to become a professor, an LL.M offered close to 100% chance of landing an academic position, but now that % has decreased, therefore LL.Ms aren't as great as they used to be.

It's the never ending debate of whether the cup if half empty, or half full. Since our economy depends on belief, I choose to say it's half full because believing so will actually fill it up.

Likewise, older law professors often only have a JD, now most new hires have at least an LL.M: once again, as competition increases, the LL.M becomes more important

Dear Yasminm,
this is a debate and it s very nice discussing with u all. Probably I was not clear, but I haven t said I am facing an llm and automatically I am gettin a us job. If your comments on keepin the eyes of the prospective students wide open might be correct, on the other side I trust in people getting a seat in one of the us llm's. I m sure they re informed of a crisis that is widespread all over the planet and I am sure they will take into account many many factors as we did before such a big expenditure. I say this on the assumption that people, even people like me, aiming at an international career, are very well informed of the crisis and are aware of the consequences and upcomin risks. However, they should not be advised as it s gonna be all black for the next generation of lawyers. I would rather say these are risks, workhard, and be ready to live that completely. I am sure people reading this post are enough mature to know whether they can afford it , risky or not. So , why don t we just tell them both of our views, your realistc and mature, and cautious perspective, and mine ( and of the other guys of course) dreaming, motivated, and maybe Incautious and RISKY, but worthy enough in inspiring a person and make you Potentially succesful in your professional path.
Maybe this is the right way. our views are too partial and if your concern relates to the prospective misunderstanding or expectation, then the best thing to do is to tell em both. They gotta be balanced. L.

Yasmin: browsing through HYS faculty bios, I found several professors with a JD and a LL.M, both degrees from HYS. And yes they teach "basic" courses (torts, property, constitutional, etc).

Although it's difficult to predict whether they would have been hired at HYS with only a JD, and how much, if at all, their LL.M helped, I think we can agree they didn't do it to wash the stain from an "inferior" school.

And I found fewer HYS professors with only a post 1990 HYS JD than HYS professors with a HYS LLM + post 1990 HYS JD.

All I'm trying to say in this thread is that the economic crisis does not decrease the value of LL.Ms, all the contrary. Constantly bringing up the crisis to argue that our prospects are bad helps no one.
Even in great years, an LL.M isn't a sure bet for a US career. So why would it be any different now?