I'm not saying that they don't at all Hedek (you're certaintly right that they do and I apologize if I came off saying that) - but that it's very much the exception, not the norm (1 out of 10 perhaps do it, though of course, there is no science to these numbers), so the LLM was never seen as a vehicle to further one's career if you came from top tier schools (with the receipt of a magna cum laude (or in rare cases, summa), at least in the case of H and S, together with being a member of the "elect", being considerably more important and determinative in opening the doors to academia than doing an LLM).
You're right though of course that there has been a decrease since the 1950-60s when more Americans seemed to undertake the LLM than presently :)
Hope for Job in U.S after LL.M? Read This:
Posted May 23, 2009 15:41
0
I'm not saying that they don't at all Hedek (you're certaintly right that they do and I apologize if I came off saying that) - but that it's very much the exception, not the norm (1 out of 10 perhaps do it, though of course, there is no science to these numbers), so the LLM was never seen as a vehicle to further one's career if you came from top tier schools (with the receipt of a magna cum laude (or in rare cases, summa), at least in the case of H and S, together with being a member of the "elect", being considerably more important and determinative in opening the doors to academia than doing an LLM).
You're right though of course that there has been a decrease since the 1950-60s when more Americans seemed to undertake the LLM than presently :)
You're right though of course that there has been a decrease since the 1950-60s when more Americans seemed to undertake the LLM than presently :)
Posted May 23, 2009 15:48
0
l 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?
I'm really sorry to keep harping on this (in particular because you've been so professional in this entire debate) but like I said before, we may have different takes on the issue and, on reflection, it might be a little counterproductive to have a back and forth on an issue we clearly disagree on (and for which, I believe, you have an excellent and well-reasoned perspective, just that I may not necessarily agree with it).
The assumption that "The economic crisis doesn't decrease the value of the LLM" is predicated upon the assumption that the value of the LLM is a constant - that is not necessarily the case; the value of the LLM clearly hasn't dropped vis-a-vis academia overseas and getting cushy jobs back home; I wonder though whether, if the sole aim of getting the LLM is getting a job in NY (it's easy for people to claim "that's not my singular aim" but anyone who has attended an LLM class will know that many students do see any other alternative as a relatively poor alternative to working in NY), the same argument can be advanced with equal force.
But that said, I think your point is a fair one - and I suppose as you mentioned before, you see the glass as half full, and I see it as half empty - we're both reporting our own perspectives on the matter (from our own individual experiences in the States where we have obviously have had rather contrasting experiences), and I'm confident that this entire debate has shed even more light on what one should make on the state of the US legal profession than if we had merely resisted testing each other's ideas :)
Leanord2000 - you're right - all of us (me included) comes into this debate with our own (plainly subjective) perspective of things here, and I do think all of the comments (yours included of course) allows for prospective students to ultimately make more informed choices by understanding the myriad of perspectives that we've provided :)
<blockquote> l 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? </blockquote>
I'm really sorry to keep harping on this (in particular because you've been so professional in this entire debate) but like I said before, we may have different takes on the issue and, on reflection, it might be a little counterproductive to have a back and forth on an issue we clearly disagree on (and for which, I believe, you have an excellent and well-reasoned perspective, just that I may not necessarily agree with it).
The assumption that "The economic crisis doesn't decrease the value of the LLM" is predicated upon the assumption that the value of the LLM is a constant - that is not necessarily the case; the value of the LLM clearly hasn't dropped vis-a-vis academia overseas and getting cushy jobs back home; I wonder though whether, if the sole aim of getting the LLM is getting a job in NY (it's easy for people to claim "that's not my singular aim" but anyone who has attended an LLM class will know that many students do see any other alternative as a relatively poor alternative to working in NY), the same argument can be advanced with equal force.
But that said, I think your point is a fair one - and I suppose as you mentioned before, you see the glass as half full, and I see it as half empty - we're both reporting our own perspectives on the matter (from our own individual experiences in the States where we have obviously have had rather contrasting experiences), and I'm confident that this entire debate has shed even more light on what one should make on the state of the US legal profession than if we had merely resisted testing each other's ideas :)
Leanord2000 - you're right - all of us (me included) comes into this debate with our own (plainly subjective) perspective of things here, and I do think all of the comments (yours included of course) allows for prospective students to ultimately make more informed choices by understanding the myriad of perspectives that we've provided :)
Even in great years, an LL.M isn't a sure bet for a US career. So why would it be any different now? </blockquote>
I'm really sorry to keep harping on this (in particular because you've been so professional in this entire debate) but like I said before, we may have different takes on the issue and, on reflection, it might be a little counterproductive to have a back and forth on an issue we clearly disagree on (and for which, I believe, you have an excellent and well-reasoned perspective, just that I may not necessarily agree with it).
The assumption that "The economic crisis doesn't decrease the value of the LLM" is predicated upon the assumption that the value of the LLM is a constant - that is not necessarily the case; the value of the LLM clearly hasn't dropped vis-a-vis academia overseas and getting cushy jobs back home; I wonder though whether, if the sole aim of getting the LLM is getting a job in NY (it's easy for people to claim "that's not my singular aim" but anyone who has attended an LLM class will know that many students do see any other alternative as a relatively poor alternative to working in NY), the same argument can be advanced with equal force.
But that said, I think your point is a fair one - and I suppose as you mentioned before, you see the glass as half full, and I see it as half empty - we're both reporting our own perspectives on the matter (from our own individual experiences in the States where we have obviously have had rather contrasting experiences), and I'm confident that this entire debate has shed even more light on what one should make on the state of the US legal profession than if we had merely resisted testing each other's ideas :)
Leanord2000 - you're right - all of us (me included) comes into this debate with our own (plainly subjective) perspective of things here, and I do think all of the comments (yours included of course) allows for prospective students to ultimately make more informed choices by understanding the myriad of perspectives that we've provided :)
Posted May 23, 2009 16:00
0
History shows that whenever there is an economic crisis, there is also an inflation of degrees. Between 1945 and 1973, undergrad degrees were enough for virtually any job (except law and medicine). After 1973, MA MBA and MS became nigh mandatory for elite positions.
The benefit of an LL.M doesn't last just one year after graduation. It's there for the rest of your life. Assume someone wants a job in the US and doesn't get one after his '10 LLM. Well he can keep on trying his luck later.
Assume someone defers and the economy picks up in 2010. Instead of being able to take advantage of it, he'll be stuck in law school until may 2011.
When this economic slowdown is over, candidates with LL.Ms will have an edge over the others, no matter whether they obtained it in 2010, earlier, or later. A friend of mine turned down Harvard and Georgetown LLM a few years ago to accept a job offer at Shell. She never regretted that decision. Indeed, retrospectively that was a great decision since she didn't need that credential to get the career she wanted. And by starting working sooner rather later, she got promoted at a younger age, and earned more money sooner.
If you're foreign, and you're doing an LL.M only to get a job in NYC, yes you'll most probably be disappointed when you graduate in may 2010. But if you end up getting a job in NYC in 2014, you'll be glad you earned an LL.M a few years ago.
Odds of getting a job in NYC will increase when the economy gets better and you have have a US LL.M. But they probably won't change if you only have a foreign degree.
In difficult times, unless you have a good job, investing in your education is always the best decision. You might not reap the rewards straight away, the economy might not improve immediately after you graduate, but sooner or later it pays off.
History shows that whenever there is an economic crisis, there is also an inflation of degrees. Between 1945 and 1973, undergrad degrees were enough for virtually any job (except law and medicine). After 1973, MA MBA and MS became nigh mandatory for elite positions.
The benefit of an LL.M doesn't last just one year after graduation. It's there for the rest of your life. Assume someone wants a job in the US and doesn't get one after his '10 LLM. Well he can keep on trying his luck later.
Assume someone defers and the economy picks up in 2010. Instead of being able to take advantage of it, he'll be stuck in law school until may 2011.
When this economic slowdown is over, candidates with LL.Ms will have an edge over the others, no matter whether they obtained it in 2010, earlier, or later. A friend of mine turned down Harvard and Georgetown LLM a few years ago to accept a job offer at Shell. She never regretted that decision. Indeed, retrospectively that was a great decision since she didn't need that credential to get the career she wanted. And by starting working sooner rather later, she got promoted at a younger age, and earned more money sooner.
If you're foreign, and you're doing an LL.M only to get a job in NYC, yes you'll most probably be disappointed when you graduate in may 2010. But if you end up getting a job in NYC in 2014, you'll be glad you earned an LL.M a few years ago.
Odds of getting a job in NYC will increase when the economy gets better and you have have a US LL.M. But they probably won't change if you only have a foreign degree.
In difficult times, unless you have a good job, investing in your education is always the best decision. You might not reap the rewards straight away, the economy might not improve immediately after you graduate, but sooner or later it pays off.
The benefit of an LL.M doesn't last just one year after graduation. It's there for the rest of your life. Assume someone wants a job in the US and doesn't get one after his '10 LLM. Well he can keep on trying his luck later.
Assume someone defers and the economy picks up in 2010. Instead of being able to take advantage of it, he'll be stuck in law school until may 2011.
When this economic slowdown is over, candidates with LL.Ms will have an edge over the others, no matter whether they obtained it in 2010, earlier, or later. A friend of mine turned down Harvard and Georgetown LLM a few years ago to accept a job offer at Shell. She never regretted that decision. Indeed, retrospectively that was a great decision since she didn't need that credential to get the career she wanted. And by starting working sooner rather later, she got promoted at a younger age, and earned more money sooner.
If you're foreign, and you're doing an LL.M only to get a job in NYC, yes you'll most probably be disappointed when you graduate in may 2010. But if you end up getting a job in NYC in 2014, you'll be glad you earned an LL.M a few years ago.
Odds of getting a job in NYC will increase when the economy gets better and you have have a US LL.M. But they probably won't change if you only have a foreign degree.
In difficult times, unless you have a good job, investing in your education is always the best decision. You might not reap the rewards straight away, the economy might not improve immediately after you graduate, but sooner or later it pays off.
Posted May 23, 2009 16:03
0
Great post Hedek :) I would add, however to the phrase "In difficult times, unless you have a good job, investing in your education is always the best decision", the caveat that "once you are sure of your objectives and have studied the vices and virtues of spending what is a considerable amount of money for kind of opportunities that it affords to you and your goals".
Great post Hedek :) I would add, however to the phrase "In difficult times, unless you have a good job, investing in your education is always the best decision", the caveat that "once you are sure of your objectives and have studied the vices and virtues of spending what is a considerable amount of money for kind of opportunities that it affords to you and your goals".
Posted May 23, 2009 16:07
0
In difficult times, unless you have a good job, investing in your education is always the best decision. You might not reap the rewards straight away, the economy might not improve immediately after you graduate, but sooner or later it pays off.
That is indeed the bottom line.
Just don't pursue an LLM degree with the aspirations of finding a permanent position in big law offices in the US. The chances of this happening in this economic climate are very dim. Pursue the LLM with other goals in mind, such as getting into biglaw in your home country, and the LLM will surely pay off.
<blockquote>
In difficult times, unless you have a good job, investing in your education is always the best decision. You might not reap the rewards straight away, the economy might not improve immediately after you graduate, but sooner or later it pays off.</blockquote>
That is indeed the bottom line.
Just don't pursue an LLM degree with the aspirations of finding a permanent position in big law offices in the US. The chances of this happening in this economic climate are very dim. Pursue the LLM with other goals in mind, such as getting into biglaw in your home country, and the LLM will surely pay off.
In difficult times, unless you have a good job, investing in your education is always the best decision. You might not reap the rewards straight away, the economy might not improve immediately after you graduate, but sooner or later it pays off.</blockquote>
That is indeed the bottom line.
Just don't pursue an LLM degree with the aspirations of finding a permanent position in big law offices in the US. The chances of this happening in this economic climate are very dim. Pursue the LLM with other goals in mind, such as getting into biglaw in your home country, and the LLM will surely pay off.
Posted May 23, 2009 16:53
0
Great post Hedek :)Thanks Yasmin. Reading your posts more closely, I don't think we disagree at all: we were simply tackling two different aspects:
You were commenting on the "absolute" value of LL.Ms which indeed has dropped: LL.M grads have fewer chances of finding jobs in the US in 2009 than they used to in 2007, while I was commenting on the "comparative" value of LL.Ms which indeed has improved: the advantage of having a basic degree+LL.M over a basic degree alone has increased.
It's like saying that France's GDP decreased less than the UK's, therefore France performed comparatively better. It doesn't change the fact that, in absolute terms, France declined too.
Since getting a job is only about being better than the others, I chose to give more weigh to the relative value of LL.Ms.
<blockquote>Great post Hedek :)</blockquote>Thanks Yasmin. Reading your posts more closely, I don't think we disagree at all: we were simply tackling two different aspects:
You were commenting on the "absolute" value of LL.Ms which indeed has dropped: LL.M grads have fewer chances of finding jobs in the US in 2009 than they used to in 2007, while I was commenting on the "comparative" value of LL.Ms which indeed has improved: the advantage of having a basic degree+LL.M over a basic degree alone has increased.
It's like saying that France's GDP decreased less than the UK's, therefore France performed comparatively better. It doesn't change the fact that, in absolute terms, France declined too.
Since getting a job is only about being better than the others, I chose to give more weigh to the relative value of LL.Ms.
You were commenting on the "absolute" value of LL.Ms which indeed has dropped: LL.M grads have fewer chances of finding jobs in the US in 2009 than they used to in 2007, while I was commenting on the "comparative" value of LL.Ms which indeed has improved: the advantage of having a basic degree+LL.M over a basic degree alone has increased.
It's like saying that France's GDP decreased less than the UK's, therefore France performed comparatively better. It doesn't change the fact that, in absolute terms, France declined too.
Since getting a job is only about being better than the others, I chose to give more weigh to the relative value of LL.Ms.
Posted May 23, 2009 17:05
0
You're right - we probably differ a lot less than what a third party looking at this conversation might come to conclude and your encapsulation of the discussion thus far is fair, though of course, I should add that my "absolute" position is itself subjective (there is a lot of "absolute" value in an LLM if the aim is to go back home etc etc etc, and yet, a lot less "absolute" value if the aim is to get a job in NY than, say, three years ago - "absolute" value is therefore, relative to the aims and goals of one's future career path), though your observation on the relative value of LLMs especially internationally (and in particular, in the French context as you pointed out) is definitely spot on :)
In a certain sense then, though we both seem to have distinct characterizations of the issue, we both come to the same conclusion (that Santa came to earlier on as well): an LLM is an amazing opportunity to get to know people, network, and get a great job back home (on the assumption that you don't already have one) and I would add "to have a great time in a different country and soak its culture"; but that you shouldn't necessarily come to the US thinking that getting a job here is necessarily going to be easy or possible or with the singular aim of working here or financing your education via loans on the premise that you can only pay it back with a Biglaw salary in New York.
You're right - we probably differ a lot less than what a third party looking at this conversation might come to conclude and your encapsulation of the discussion thus far is fair, though of course, I should add that my "absolute" position is itself subjective (there is a lot of "absolute" value in an LLM if the aim is to go back home etc etc etc, and yet, a lot less "absolute" value if the aim is to get a job in NY than, say, three years ago - "absolute" value is therefore, relative to the aims and goals of one's future career path), though your observation on the relative value of LLMs especially internationally (and in particular, in the French context as you pointed out) is definitely spot on :)
In a certain sense then, though we both seem to have distinct characterizations of the issue, we both come to the same conclusion (that Santa came to earlier on as well): an LLM is an amazing opportunity to get to know people, network, and get a great job back home (on the assumption that you don't already have one) and I would add "to have a great time in a different country and soak its culture"; but that you shouldn't necessarily come to the US thinking that getting a job here is necessarily going to be easy or possible or with the singular aim of working here or financing your education via loans on the premise that you can only pay it back with a Biglaw salary in New York.
In a certain sense then, though we both seem to have distinct characterizations of the issue, we both come to the same conclusion (that Santa came to earlier on as well): an LLM is an amazing opportunity to get to know people, network, and get a great job back home (on the assumption that you don't already have one) and I would add "to have a great time in a different country and soak its culture"; but that you shouldn't necessarily come to the US thinking that getting a job here is necessarily going to be easy or possible or with the singular aim of working here or financing your education via loans on the premise that you can only pay it back with a Biglaw salary in New York.
Inactive User
Posted May 25, 2009 09:44
0
I truly appreciate everyone's arguments and contributions, however WHAT particular job market are you guys referring to? Is it solely about the commercial, corporate law job prospects? Even so, are even 'high street' firms' laying off or deferring future employees like those larger ones?
Not everyone wants to be a business-related attorney....
I truly appreciate everyone's arguments and contributions, however WHAT particular job market are you guys referring to? Is it solely about the commercial, corporate law job prospects? Even so, are even 'high street' firms' laying off or deferring future employees like those larger ones?
Not everyone wants to be a business-related attorney....
Not everyone wants to be a business-related attorney....
Posted May 25, 2009 10:36
0
Not everyone wants to be a business-related attorney....True.
There is a chain reaction effect though: grads who had been aiming for "biglaw" and "NYC" are accepting positions in smaller firms, public interest, and in the government as "default" choices.
As a result, students who were never interested in business related positions, are encountering more competition for jobs lower down the salary scale.
For example, Columbia graduates known for having a "biglaw powerhouse mentality" (i.e most of them aim for one and thing and one thing alone: highest pay in the most prestigious firm) are accepting lower pay jobs more often than before, which a few years ago was considered "shameful" by these same students.
Therefore, even though it's a quantitative mistake to focus our arguments on HYS and the most elite law firms (since only a fraction of law students will end up at either), they are rather accurate indicators of the entire profession.
For example, when you read that Yale JD and Harvard LL.M class sizes were increased to cash in more tuitions and compensate for lower endowments, you can reasonably assume that the situation is similar if not worst at every other law school.
And when you read that elite law firm new hires were offered stipends to accept public interest jobs while waiting for their deferred start dates, you can reasonably assume that it'll be more difficult for graduates who couldn't get a biglaw offer in the first place.
Of course these are blatant generalizations. Not every Columbia grad has this highest pay/prestige mentality, not every law school is facing financial difficulties this year, and not every non business related lawyer is facing more competition for the jobs he was always interested in.
We can only give a general picture, with the constant disclaimer that "individual experiences may vary".
And to the defense of law students, the cost of legal education has become so ridiculously overpriced that many students have no choice but to become business lawyers. If one can afford a $200k JD, or a $70k LLM and work for $25k a year for the UNICEF or Amnesty International, I envy him indeed.
<blockquote>Not everyone wants to be a business-related attorney....</blockquote>True.
There is a chain reaction effect though: grads who had been aiming for "biglaw" and "NYC" are accepting positions in smaller firms, public interest, and in the government as "default" choices.
As a result, students who were never interested in business related positions, are encountering more competition for jobs lower down the salary scale.
For example, Columbia graduates known for having a "biglaw powerhouse mentality" (i.e most of them aim for one and thing and one thing alone: highest pay in the most prestigious firm) are accepting lower pay jobs more often than before, which a few years ago was considered "shameful" by these same students.
Therefore, even though it's a quantitative mistake to focus our arguments on HYS and the most elite law firms (since only a fraction of law students will end up at either), they are rather accurate indicators of the entire profession.
For example, when you read that Yale JD and Harvard LL.M class sizes were increased to cash in more tuitions and compensate for lower endowments, you can reasonably assume that the situation is similar if not worst at every other law school.
And when you read that elite law firm new hires were offered stipends to accept public interest jobs while waiting for their deferred start dates, you can reasonably assume that it'll be more difficult for graduates who couldn't get a biglaw offer in the first place.
Of course these are blatant generalizations. Not every Columbia grad has this highest pay/prestige mentality, not every law school is facing financial difficulties this year, and not every non business related lawyer is facing more competition for the jobs he was always interested in.
We can only give a general picture, with the constant disclaimer that "individual experiences may vary".
And to the defense of law students, the cost of legal education has become so ridiculously overpriced that many students have no choice but to become business lawyers. If one can afford a $200k JD, or a $70k LLM and work for $25k a year for the UNICEF or Amnesty International, I envy him indeed.
There is a chain reaction effect though: grads who had been aiming for "biglaw" and "NYC" are accepting positions in smaller firms, public interest, and in the government as "default" choices.
As a result, students who were never interested in business related positions, are encountering more competition for jobs lower down the salary scale.
For example, Columbia graduates known for having a "biglaw powerhouse mentality" (i.e most of them aim for one and thing and one thing alone: highest pay in the most prestigious firm) are accepting lower pay jobs more often than before, which a few years ago was considered "shameful" by these same students.
Therefore, even though it's a quantitative mistake to focus our arguments on HYS and the most elite law firms (since only a fraction of law students will end up at either), they are rather accurate indicators of the entire profession.
For example, when you read that Yale JD and Harvard LL.M class sizes were increased to cash in more tuitions and compensate for lower endowments, you can reasonably assume that the situation is similar if not worst at every other law school.
And when you read that elite law firm new hires were offered stipends to accept public interest jobs while waiting for their deferred start dates, you can reasonably assume that it'll be more difficult for graduates who couldn't get a biglaw offer in the first place.
Of course these are blatant generalizations. Not every Columbia grad has this highest pay/prestige mentality, not every law school is facing financial difficulties this year, and not every non business related lawyer is facing more competition for the jobs he was always interested in.
We can only give a general picture, with the constant disclaimer that "individual experiences may vary".
And to the defense of law students, the cost of legal education has become so ridiculously overpriced that many students have no choice but to become business lawyers. If one can afford a $200k JD, or a $70k LLM and work for $25k a year for the UNICEF or Amnesty International, I envy him indeed.
Other Related Content
Post-LL.M. Careers in Big Law: Latham & Watkins
Article Jun 18, 2020
With offices or regional teams on every continent and a considerable amount of acclaim behind them, working at Latham & Watkins is a dream for many students currently pursuing an LL.M.
Hot Discussions
-
Oxford 2024-2025 BCL/MSCs/MJUR/MPHIL/MLF
Apr 23 11:06 AM 112,862 634 -
NYU Applicants 2024-2025
4 hours ago 53,840 233 -
LSE LLM 2024-25
Apr 23 01:07 PM 32,408 188 -
Berkeley LL.M. 2024-25-Traditional Track
Apr 22 07:55 AM 16,390 117 -
Stanford 2024-2025
Apr 24 09:40 AM 33,271 116 -
Columbia LLM 2024/25
Apr 16, 2024 25,290 103 -
Yale 2024/25
Apr 06, 2024 14,852 74 -
UCL LLM 2024-2025
Apr 24 01:47 PM 5,862 55
