Why you should consider moving interstate to kick start your legal career

Starting your legal career will be one of the biggest struggles of your life. In your penultimate year of law school, dozens of applications may or may not lead you to a clerkship. If you miss out, you might do another hundred applications to get a graduate job. Once you have secured a job, you will likely experience long working hours, new areas of law, and colleagues who may edge towards the “so functional they are dysfunctional” edge of the spectrum. Just surviving at work feels like a massive accomplishment. Why on earth would you add an extra level of complication like moving interstate away from your friends and family? In this blog post I explain how moving interstate could be the best way to kick start your legal career. It is time to get comfortable with being uncomfortable.

Why should I consider moving interstate for a legal job?

1.       You live in a state with a slow economy

This is the number one reason you may have to move interstate. There are significantly more legal jobs in Sydney and Melbourne, and in the graduate market where it is often a case of getting in enough applications, you may find moving interstate is your only option. If you manage to get a job locally, you may have to move interstate after a year or two to progress your legal career. I am from Adelaide but moved interstate to study at the University of Sydney. Most of my friends who stayed in Adelaide and went to law school at the University of Adelaide either moved interstate immediately on graduation or had to move interstate for career progression two or three years into their careers.

The states with the highest unemployment rates are South Australia (6.9%), Tasmania (6.5%), and Queensland (6.4%). The ACT and NT have the best employment rates at 3.8% and 4.1% respectively. These are general employment figures and are not specific to the legal sector, but give you an idea of the relatively poor employment prospects in SA, Tasmania and Queensland.

2.       The area of law you would like to practice in requires you to move interstate

If you are set on a career as a lawyer in the Commonwealth government, you will likely have to move to Canberra. You might as well move there immediately post-graduation so you can to build your networks and reputation. In Australia, legal jobs in mergers and acquisitions are practically non-existent outside of Sydney and Melbourne. Lawyers specialising the mining sector may have to move to WA or commute every single week. If you are interested in working in the community legal sector, you are more likely to get a job in Melbourne than Sydney. Identify the area you would like to work in and go for it, regardless of where it is located.  

3.       Your firm has offered to place you on an interstate project

If you are working at a national or global firm, you may be placed interstate for six to twelve months to assist busy teams on larger projects. You may be “asked” whether you would like to relocate, but in reality if you do not take this opportunity you need to consider whether you are serious about your career. Working on large projects is fantastic for your resume, and can help you justify pay rises and promotions. You will also have the opportunity to network with lawyers and clients interstate and learn about the law in new jurisdictions.

4.       You practice across jurisdictions and need to develop your legal knowledge

It is not uncommon for practitioners to operate across jurisdictions, and if you work in state based employment law or property you may want to work in a different jurisdiction for a while to enhance the services you can provide to clients who operate across jurisdictions.

5.       You are in your mid-20s and still live at home

A typical scenario is as follows: You were born in Sydney, went to school in Sydney, went to university in Sydney, got a graduate job in Sydney, have never moved out of home and still live with your parents despite being in your mid 20s. Living at home is a nice cushy experience when you are working long hours. It is pretty convenient to come home to dinner every night, have your bills paid for and never run out of clean socks. You are best friends with your parents and are secretly scared your Mum will never let you move out. If you fall into this category it can be difficult to move out and your life can begin to feel stagnant. Moving interstate is a fantastic excuse to move out of home without causing offence or fuss. Even if it is just for 12 months, your family will get used to the new state of existence and you can move back to your home city (if you want to after experiencing the intoxicating pleasures of interstate life) without being pressured to move back home.

6.       You want to get outside your comfort zone

Moving interstate to a city where you know no one to start a new job where you know no one is intimidating for most people. This is a good thing – see next paragraph.

The flow on effect of getting outside your comfort zone

Conventional wisdom is that making easy incremental adjustments is best for long term change. Moving interstate is the complete opposite of this approach. You will be making many massive life changes at once. Starting a new job, moving house, and having to make new friends are some of the most stressful situations a person can live through. You have to put the effort in or you just are not going to be a success. For me, the “shock” of dealing with all of these new situations at once had an amazing flow on effect on other aspects of my life. The extra effort I had to put in at work and into starting a friendship group from scratch when I moved to Melbourne meant I also put extra effort into other aspects of my life. It helped me think more clearly about where I want to go as a lawyer, make a long term career strategy and be a hyper organised individual. Getting outside your comfort zone will not only make you a better lawyer, but have a positive flow on effect to other areas of life. After you conquer moving interstate, your confidence will gradually develop and other obstacles in your life will seem easy to overcome.

Is it difficult to get a legal job interstate?

The difficulty of getting a job interstate will depend on the recruitment market in your target city (Adelaide, Hobart and Brisbane have average economies and relatively stagnant recruitment markets) and the type of law you would like to practice. Prior to moving to Melbourne I applied for jobs in four different states. There does appear to be local favouritism to some extent as I received many more interviews in Sydney where I was living than in Melbourne. The smaller the city, the more there appears to be bias towards recruiting locals. However, where you are passionate about moving because the job is your dream job, you will likely be one of the best candidates. The fact you are willing to move interstate for this job speaks volumes about your commitment.  

Don’t hold back

Moving interstate to a new city is not a life-long sentence. If it does not work out you can move back to your old life and get a job in your home city. But if you never take the opportunity and never try to get that dream job, you might miss the opportunity to kickstart your legal career.    

Scared? Good. Now back yourself and make the move. No one else can do that for you. 

Law graduate who can’t find full time legal job sues law school - Is the United States trend of law graduate law suits about to come to Australia?

In the United States, disgruntled law graduates who have been unable to secure legal jobs have been bringing claims against their law schools under state consumer laws, which vary from state to state. Anna Alaburda’s case against the Thomas Jefferson School of Law (TJSL) which is currently before the San Diego Supreme Court could be more successful than other cases, as the consumer laws in California are believed to be more favourable to consumers than consumer laws in other states. Australian law graduates have been facing similar challenges to their American counterparts, with an increase in the number of law students graduating and a sluggish legal recruitment market creating an increasingly desperate situation. Could the trend of law graduates suing their law schools spread to Australia?

Previous cases in the United States

There have been a number of previous cases in the United States where law students have claimed their law school provided misleading statements on employment prospects for their law graduates. In the 2012 New York Supreme Court case of Alexandra Gimez-Jiminaz, et al v New York Law School, nine graduates of New York Law School brought a case claiming the entering classes of 2005-2010 had been misled as by graduate outcome statistics provided by NYLS, as facts were omitted that would have given prospective students a more accurate picture of post-graduation employment prospects. The 90% employment outcome advertised included graduates working in part time jobs and those working in jobs that did not required law degrees. The damages sought were the sum equal to “the difference between the alleged inflated tuition they paid because of the allegedly misleading statements and what they characterise as the “true value” of a NYLS degree, together with certain expenses incurred”. Many of the plaintiffs had successfully started their legal careers, including:

1.       Alexandra Gomez-Jimenez who had her own thriving immigration practice;

2.       Scott Tiedke who worked as a legal compliance officer at an investment management firm;

3.       Gergana Miteva who worked as a contract attorney for some time before finding full time legal employment; and

4.       Geoffrey Corsideo who worked at a New Jersey law firm.

Justice Schweitzer dismissed the case, citing the legal principle caveat emptor “buyer beware”, and that prospective law students are “are a sophisticated subset of education consumers, capable of sifting through data and weighing alternatives before making a decision regarding their post college options”.

Anna Alaburda’s Case

Anna Alaburda is a 37 year old TJSL graduate who completed her three year Juris Doctor in 2008 and had a student debt of about $150,000 on graduation. Alaburda struggled to find full time employment as a lawyer and felt misled by the employment prospect figures she claimed were decisive to her enrolling in the JD program at TJSL. In 2011 she filed her initiating application, claiming the TJSL statistics about alumni employment outcomes were misleading and had been inflated and that she would not have studied the JD at TJSL if she had known the true statistics. The matter took until 7 March 2016 to get to the San Diego Superior Court, as the law school made a number of applications to have the matter dismissed. Alaburda, who is currently 37 years old, has a student loan debt of about $170,000, as the interest rate on the loan is 8%.

What is the real issue?

While we can all feel sorry for Alaburda and her colleagues, the law suit distracts from the real issues. First, there needs to be some degree of personal responsibility, as people are not forced to enrol in postgraduate law. Second, there is currently a large surplus of universities offering undergraduate law and postgraduate law courses, and the quality of many of these courses is questionable. Steps need to be taken to prevent even more surplus positions at law schools becoming available and to ensure all law schools offer a quality education.

1.       Ranking and reputations of law schools

The first thing to note about Alaburda’s case is her choice of law school. TJSL ranks extremely poorly in comparison to other universities offering the JD course in the United States. The law school rankings given to TJSL are so poor that the US News Law Ranking system do not publish the rankings for TSJL and a number of other poorly performing universities (presumable to protect themselves from defamation claims). Students are aware of the ranking and reputation of their law school prior to enrolling. Students studying law are also aware that it is difficult to get a job as a lawyer and that not all graduates work as lawyers after completing their JD. Getting a job as a graduate lawyer in the United States is difficult and employment rates are far from 100%. For example in 2014, 40% of law graduates across the United States did not secure a job in the law within 12 months of graduation. While this would include graduates who do not wish to practice law, this 40% would also include a large number of graduates who want a legal career.

Similar cases to Ms Alaburda’s never made it to trial in states like Illinois and Michigan as the judges managing the cases in those states concluded law students chose to have a legal education at their own risk. Alaburda would have been aware of the difficulties of obtaining employment in the law prior to starting her JD. While Alaburda had solid grades and graduated near the top of her class, even top students would struggle to get a job after attending a law school with such a low ranking reputation. Further, while Alaburda has yet to find a full time job in the law, she failed to make the most of opportunities that arose.

2.       Not taking opportunities

On graduation, Alaburda sent her resume to 150 law firms. This is not out of the ordinary for a law graduate given the state of the legal market, though other students take the approach of quality over quantity of applications. She received several interviews and one job offer. This is more success than a number of law graduates have. She turned down the legal job as the salary ($60,000) was less than for non-legal jobs she had applied for. To me, this is a clear case of a graduate choosing a non-legal path. I have no sympathy, and neither should the courts, for law graduates who turn down an offer other law graduates would do anything for, and then later claim they could not get a legal job. The starting salary for law graduates can be relatively low, as a law graduate must be trained before they become self-sufficient and useful. Salaries quickly rise for competent graduates.  Alaburda later worked in a series of part time, temporary legal positions mainly reviewing documents for law firms, found this work unsatisfactory, could not get a full time position and filed an initiating application against TJSJ.

3.       Realities of working as a junior lawyer  

It is not unusual for junior lawyers to do copious amount of document review, discovery and due diligence related work as graduates. The reality of working as a junior lawyer is that most of the work will be less than exciting, especially when working at a large law firm, but quickly becomes more engaging as you are trusted with more complicated legal work and the next generation of graduates take on the more boring work. Alaburda had a series of part-time document review roles and found this boring. However, this kind of work is the reality for most law graduates.

Will the trend of law graduates suing their law schools spread to come to Australia?

Many of the factors leading to law graduate law suits in the United States are currently present in the Australian legal market:

1.       Increasing number of law schools offering sub-par courses

The number of law schools offering undergraduate and postgraduate law has increased significantly in the past 10 years. In NSW alone, the following law courses were accredited:

·         JD at the University of Sydney (2010);

·         JD at the University of NSW (2009);

·         JD at the University of Technology Sydney (2007);

·         JD at the University of New England (2005);

·         JD at the University of Newcastle (2013);

·         JD at the University of Notre Dame (2006);

·         LLB at the University of Notre Dame (2005);

·         LLB at the Australian Catholic University (2013); and

·         LLB at the Top Education Institute (2014).

The pattern in other states is similar. Law schools are easy to establish and tend to be high profit earners for universities, as they are low cost compared to other degrees. It is not just the increase in educational institutions offering law courses that is problematic but the quality of the courses, especially given the significant expense of postgraduate courses in particular.

2.       Increasing number of law graduates

The increasing number of law schools and expanding of programs offered by existing law schools has created a large excess of law graduates. I personally have several issues with the number of law graduates churned out of law schools. However, growth in the number of law graduates is unlikely to change, as the Productivity Commission’s Review into Demand Driven Funding System recommended that law schools’ numbers not be limited.

3.       Increasingly competitive to get a job as a lawyer

At the same time the number of law graduates has increased, the legal markets has stagnated and large law firms that traditionally employed large numbers of graduates have either reduced or maintained the number of graduates they employ. New entrants into the legal market, such as LegalVision are offering new opportunities for graduates, but there is still a significant gap between law graduates wanting to work as lawyers and positions available.

However, there are a number of factors that might prevent the spread of law graduate law suits in Australia:

1.       Less financial pressure

Law graduates in the United States face significant pressure on graduation to begin paying off their $150,000 loans, which usually have an interest rate of 8%+. Australian students do not face the same pressures, as a Commonwealth supported undergraduate combined law student will graduate with a debt of about $50,000 which need only be repaid in increments once the student has graduated and is earning a significant amount of money. Australian graduates therefore do not face the same financial pressures as their counterparts in the United States and are more likely to be able to survive part time and paralegal work for some time before securing a full time legal position, not succumbing to the temptation to accept a higher paying non-legal job. In the United States, graduates face more pressure to get a high earning job immediately to pay off their loans, even if the job is non-legal.

2.       Less focus on graduate outcomes during student recruitment

Law schools in Australia are generally very careful with statistics regarding employment prospects. Students are normally lured via alumni success stories and a university’s reputation rather than a focus on statistics. There is also a lack of statistics on law graduate outcomes available. Graduate Careers Australia undertakes an annual survey of short term outcomes for graduates 4 months after completion of qualifications (http://www.graduatecareers.com.au/research/researchreports/gradstats/). These statistics are for all graduates and do not provide university by university data. A response of “full time employment” includes full time employment not related to the person’s degree. There is a breakdown by bachelor degree, and in 2015, 74.1% of law graduates who completed the survey were engaged in full time work at the time they completed the survey, about 4 months after the completion of their qualifications.   

3.       Difficulties bringing a claim under Australian consumer law

Even if a law graduate did wish to commence legal action, it would be very difficult to bring successful action under Schedule 2 to the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, as the lead possible cause of action being misleading or deceptive conduct (s.18 Australian Consumer Law) requires the conduct to be “likely to mislead or deceive”. The test requires the identification of the audience, in this case, relatively intelligent, well-educated persons considering enrolling in undergraduate or postgraduate law. It would be difficult to mislead or deceive this target audience, as potential law students would generally consider several law schools and be aware of the general reputation and quality of the law school. The test is objective, so the fact a student was actually mislead or deceived will not be determinative if the relevant population segment would not have been misled or deceived.

It is unlikely the trend of law graduate litigation will spread to Australia. However, if the number of law graduates continues to increase and the legal graduate market fails to improve, we could see law graduates take legal action against their law schools in the future. 

Law graduate job market 2016 – what will the new year hold for graduate lawyers?

The years 2013 to 2015 were not good years for law students to graduate. The law graduate job market retracted at the same time that the number of law students graduating and job hunting increased significantly. Will 2016 offer improved opportunities for law graduates trying to get their foot in the door? While the downward trajectory in legal demand continues, there are some positive signs for graduates trying to get their first job as a lawyer, particular if law graduates are looking in the right places. In this blog post I have drawn from my own experiences and understanding of the legal market as well as the Melbourne Law School and Thomson Reuters’ Australia: State of the Legal Market 2015 available here.   

Traditional commercial law firms

Demand for commercial legal services in the Big 8 Firms (Allens, Ashurst, CU, CCW, HSF, KWM, Minters, Norton Rose) and larger firms has been on a downward trajectory for the past five years and the trend continues, with demand falling 2% in 2015 and a 3.8% decline in the number of lawyers employed in commercial legal services. The decline in demand is particularly prevalent in the industry’s three biggest practice groups – dispute resolution, banking & finance and general corporate advisory. Some Big 8 and large firms have continued to use offshore low-cost legal process operations in places like India for work like discovery, due diligence and document management services. While some of this work would ordinarily be given to graduates, most of this work is very basic and is more likely to effect the number of paralegals and administrative/support staff a firm employs than the number of graduates.

The outlook is not all doom and gloom for law graduates seeking a career in commercial law. Large law firms have been conservative in the number of graduates they have recruited the past three years, and in some cases, have under recruited. This could lead to an increase in graduate positions offered in 2016. Demand for legal work in some practice groups increased in 2015 including:

1.       Mergers & Acquisitions;

In 2015 there was a 2.1% increase in demand for M&A work. The weaker dollar has caused an increase in international investment in Australia, as investment is cheaper and there is a reduced risk of currency fluctuation for bidders. Australia is the second largest M&A region in the Asia/Pacific, second only to China. There is indication that these conditions for M&A will continue in 2016. There is potential for even greater growth in M&A, with the imminent review of the Foreign Investment Review Board. Large firms will look for graduates who have a keen interest in M&A, as this is a growth area in an environment where demand in other traditional areas of commercial law are in the decline.

2.       Real estate, property, constructions and projects;

In 2015 there was a growth in real estate and projects work, especially among the Big 8 firms.

3.       Intellectual property; and

4.       Tax law.

If you are interested in a career as a GST lawyer look out for a spike in recruitment if the rumoured GST reforms take place.

If you have a keen interest and/or experience in one of these growth areas, you have a stronger chance of obtaining a graduate position at a large firm. These growth areas could also lead to large firms engaging in strategic hiring – that is hiring graduates to settle directly into a team rather than undertaking the traditional rotation training program. These opportunities will usually be advertised separately to the ordinary graduate program and sporadically throughout the year, so make sure you regularly check your target firm’s website. Demand for services of Big 8 and large firms increases significantly in November to December (before the January slow down). Firms anticipate this and often recruit extra graduates in September/October. Law graduates applying at this time of the year are usually required to start work immediately. If you missed out on a position earlier in the year, or finish half way through 2016 make sure you watch out for these opportunities.

Law graduates keen for a career in commercial law should also look at medium sized firms that are rapidly growing such as Mills Oakley and HWL Ebsworth. In the past three years HWL Ebsworth increased its revenue from $102m to $219m. More growth means more jobs for graduates. Note that medium sized firms that have seen rapid expansion may not have had a formal graduate program before, so you will probably experience a few teething issues, such as less comprehensive formal training than if you were working as a graduate at a large firm. However, the benefit of working at a rapidly growing firm is that you will likely be given more responsibility earlier on and will always have enough work and billable hours. Medium sized firms are more likely to hire graduates on shorter term contracts, such as 6 months and 12 months, but don’t let this put you off. Any experience in the legal sector is better than none.  

New law

The last two years has seen the rise of the unconventional law firm, which commonly use technology and pricing structure to differentiate themselves. Examples of new law firms include HiveLegal, Nest, LawPath, and LawCentral. New law firms are increasingly seen as a threat to traditional small and medium sized firms, as they are able to contain pricing through use of digital solutions. Many are experiencing double digit growth.

What can these new law firms offer law graduates? You will be surprised that some new law firms, such as Legal Vision, regularly recruit graduate lawyers. These positions generally offer very interesting work and a young, upbeat and relatively relaxed working environment, so are perfect for law graduates who would like to work in commercial law but are not so keen on a strict corporate environment.

Government sector

Obtaining a job as a government lawyer at the Commonwealth level has been difficult the past few years as graduate programs were cut and an APS freeze was in place on new permanent ongoing employees. This freeze has now been lifted, so prepare for an increase in law graduate positions in 2016, particularly at AGS, which has survived its movement into the Attorney-General’s umbrella and is once again thriving. At the state level, getting a position as a graduate lawyer has been cut-throat for some time. For example, NSW Crown Solicitors are rumoured to take on only three graduates a year. However, the programs remain in place, and are up for grabs. Remember that government recruitment processes take much longer than private sector, so start applying at least 6 months before you would like to start a government job. Formal graduate recruitment programs often recruit 12 months in advance.

In-house lawyers

The trend towards having larger in-house teams continues and is likely to continue in 2016. Companies are performing an increased amount of legal work internally, relying less on advice from external law firms and briefing barristers directly instead of through law firms. Some in-house teams are large enough to constitute their own law firm and recruit graduates and junior lawyers. Companies to watch out for include Telstra, Lend Lease, Woolworths, Coles Myer, Microsoft, Google and Yahoo.

Multi-disciplinary practices (MDPs)

Consultancy and business advisory firms are expanding their portfolio to include legal.  PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), KPMG, EY and Deloitte have all indicated they will grow their legal capacity. Each of these firms already has over 1,000 lawyers working for them and the numbers continue to increase. These positions are predominantly in tax advisory law. If you have an interest in this area, it could be a good alternative to working at a Big 8 law firm.

Community legal sector

Community legal centres have been under severe financial strain for years, mainly due to government funding cuts. In December 2014 the Productivity Commission released its Access to Justice Arrangements report. The Productivity Commission looked at a broad array of factors effecting access to lawyers and legal services including the level of demand for legal services and the economic and social impact of the costs of accessing justice services and securing legal representation. The Productivity Commission recommended an immediate increase in government funding for legal assistance services of $200 million per year. A full twelve months after the report was released the Productivity Commission is still to receive a formal response from the government and the community legal sector continues to operate on the verge of collapse. Community legal centres can barely afford to pay their current employees, let alone employ and train graduates. Law graduates keen for a career in the community legal sector may have to obtain initial experience elsewhere and volunteer at a community legal centre until they can work in their dream job full time. 

Paying for a graduate position – is paying $22,000 to join a start-up law firm like adlawgroup worth it?

Would you pay $22,000 for a graduate job? That is what a new breed of start-ups is asking “employees” to pay in return for a two year contract, mentoring experience and legal work. They claim they are giving admitted law students who have no current employment prospects in the legal market an opportunity to obtain the crucial two years of legal experience. The reality seems different. To me, it seems these start-ups are preying on vulnerable graduates who already have a $50,000+ HECS debt from a combined law degree plus their admission to practice course. One of the biggest problems of paying $22,000 to work as a lawyer is that after you have finished your two year contract at the start-up, it will be just as difficult as before to find a real legal job, as a graduate may be seen to have “paid” for this legal experience. In this blog article I examine adlawgroup, a start-up launching in July 2015 asking graduates to pay $22,000 for their position. Graduates should think carefully before joining such a program.

What is adlawgroup?

Adlawgroup is a start-up to be launched in Adelaide in July 2015, advertised as a new “law firm” targeting graduate lawyers. They will be taking-up around 15 graduates initially and another 15 in September, with a view to gradually expand the size of the program. “Employees” pay $22,000 upfront to be part of the “getting started in law program”. The program runs for two years, though graduates can leave the program at any time if they obtain a legal job they want to pursue.

How do they advertise?

Adlawgroup advertises positions as though they are offering a normal paid graduate position. This is far from the truth. In the below advertisement, there is no mention at all that you have to pay $22,000 for the position.

How is the $22,000 two year fee justified?

Adlawgroup claim that the $22,000 covers the cost of a practising certificate plus the comprehensive continuing education program they offer. The cost of an annual practising certificate in NSW is $816. Over two years this would be $1,632. That means about $20,368 of the $22,000 is allocated to the “getting started in law” program which includes mentoring and continuing legal and professional development. Mentoring will be conducted by a panel of senior members of the legal and business professional. Adlawgroup claims that the firm will be self-funded through client fees, which implies none of the $22,000 is going towards running the firm. One must ask where the $22,000 is going? If it is going towards paying mentors, that is a very expensive mentoring experience when there are a host of free mentoring opportunities available during and after university.

How is the relationship characterised?

Is adlawgroup an employer or an education provider? Adlawgroup claims it is a hybrid between employment and higher education. This is all very good, except in the eyes of the law, the business will need to be characterised in one of the categories. The adlawgroup website claims that graduates will receive their pay through the fees charged to clients. It is rare for junior lawyers to be paid on a commission basis. Junior lawyers working at traditional law firms are paid a fixed rate, which is set at Award rate or above. If the lawyers working at adlawgroup are characterised as employees, they will need to be remunerated by at least the Award rate. It is possible that adlawgroup will pay employees the Award rate plus commission based on fees charged, but at this point it is difficult to tell. To me, the relationship appears to have more “educational” characteristics, as graduates pay a fixed fee of $22,000 to receive mentoring, a learning program and professional development.

Other problems that may arise from paying for your graduate position:

1.       Ratio of experienced lawyers to graduates

Adlawgroup will be predominantly staffed by junior lawyers supervised by expert senior practitioners. This is very different from the traditional graduate experience where you will be the most junior in a team of five to ten more senior practitioners who all have the experience to mentor you and guide your legal development.

2.       Who will the clients be?

There are quite a few mentions on the adlawgroup website that graduates will be engaged in providing “quality and value” to clients. The firms is said to offer a full range of legal services at competitive rates, but that gives little indication of who the clients will be. There is some indication the clients will be individuals, as it is stated “young people, in particular, will be targeted to encourage them to seek professional advice and support in a timely manner”. This would not be ideal if you are aiming to work in commercial practice where clients are medium to large sized companies. As a graduate it is very important to know what kind of clients and what areas of law you will be working in, as your next employer will look at the clients you were working for to see whether you have the requisite experience for that job. For example, the difference between working for individuals, small companies, large companies, and public sector clients is vast and leads down very different career paths. The website is almost solely targeted at recruiting graduates, which very little information on clients, which is concerning. The website of a normal law firm is targeted almost solely at clients, with a very small section on recruitment.

3.       Reputation

There is a risk adlawgroup graduates would be perceived as having “purchased” their graduate jobs. In addition to adlawgroup being a start-up which is new to the industry, graduates from adlawgroup will have to do a lot of explaining in any job interviews they can get afterwards as to what adlawgroup is and why they could not get a traditional position after university. Adlawgroup is taking students from a variety of academic backgrounds. This could lower the general reputation of graduates from adlawgroup given the traditional emphasis on grades at law school in the job market up to five years post-graduation.

4.       Getting a job post adlawgroup

Adlawgroup claim that their graduates will have an advantage in a tight legal market. While it is true that after 2 years you will be eligible for an unrestricted practicing certificate, I query whether traditional law firms will consider the two years experience at adlawgroup commensurate to two years experience working at a traditional law firm. For example, if you are competing for a position as a junior lawyer advertised as a 2yr PQE job, an employer is much more likely to choose a lawyer who had been working at a traditional law firm with medium and large sized companies than a lawyer who has paid for their initial experience at a law firm with mixed clients.

The fact start-ups like adlawgroup exist is part of a wider problem

Those in the legal industry are well aware that in some Australian states such as South Australia and Victoria, the number of law graduates is in excess of the number of graduate lawyer positions available. Universities make a significant profit on law degrees, and have increased the number of positions available, due to the demand driven Commonwealth funding system. There is no easy answer to the problem of excessive law graduates. If numbers in law degrees was set to just above the ability of the legal industry to absorb graduate lawyers, students who want to study law but not practice law would miss out. However, the current system, which produces a large excess of law graduates does produce desperation to the extent that junior lawyers would be willing to pay $22,000 for a first job.

Prospects for Law Graduates – is it as hard as graduates are saying to land a legal job?

If you are a law student or law graduate you would no doubt have heard about the difficulties of landing a graduate job. It is anecdotally acknowledged that this is the hardest time since the recession in the early 1990s for law graduates. Lawyers Weekly have reported on the difficult legal recruitment market in numerous articles. In recent years, even the mainstream media have commented on the difficulties law students face in finding employment in the law after they graduate. But is this speculation actually true?

In July 2014 the Law Society of New South Wales established a working group to investigate and report on the employment prospects for law graduates. The resulting report titled “Future Prospects of Law Graduates: Report and Recommendations” was released this week and can be found at https://www.lawsociety.com.au/community/forlawstudents/LawGraduatesReport/index.htm  

The most shocking thing about the report is that the data analysed appears to show that NSW law graduates are not exceeding new entrants into the legal profession, suggesting there is not an oversupply of law graduates.

Data used to determine if there is a law graduate oversupply

The working group established a model to track the movement of NSW law students through the system. The model assumes that the Class of 2013 were admitted in 2014 and commenced practicing as lawyers in 2015. If we take the Class of 2013, the model shows there were 2,555 law graduates that year. 2,267 went on to be admitted. 2,970 new practising certificates were issued to lawyers who were admitted within the last 12 months. From this data it appears there were sufficient opportunities for law graduates to obtain employment as a lawyer and that graduates are not exceeding demand.

It is interesting to note the reduced number of law graduates from NSW universities in 2012. The number dropped from 2,245 in 2011 to 1,945 in 2012. I was at university at the time and knew several people who delayed their graduation because of the perceived terrible graduate job market. If enough students delayed their graduation by under loading subjects, this would explain the increase in graduates in 2013 and the perceived oversupply of graduates in 2014 and 2015. However, the data used by the working group shows that even for the 2103 cohort, there were sufficient legal opportunities. 

(Table taken from page 10 of the report)

It is acknowledged in the report there are several issues with this model. I also add my own observations:

·   1. Not everyone follows the pattern of graduating one year, being admitted the next and starting practice the year after. A substantial amount of graduates would be admitted and obtain a practising certificate the year after graduation. A substantial number of graduates may go through the process at a slower rate.

·    2. It is assumed that a graduate would not obtain a practising certificate unless they were working as a lawyer due to the expense of obtaining the practising certificate. It is assumed new practising certificates issued equates to graduates converted to employed lawyers.

·   3. The figures show practising certificates issued to solicitors admitted for one year or less. Not all practising certificate holders will have recently graduated.

·    4. Quite a few graduates from interstate come to NSW to work and this practising certificate figure could include non-NSW graduates. The admission figures could also include non-NSW students who study College of Law in NSW with an eye to being admitted and being employed in NSW.

Common complaint: JD students have flooded the market

A common complaint among undergraduate law students is that the introduction of JD courses in NSW has “flooded” the current legal market and that JD students have “stolen” jobs traditionally taken by undergraduates. The working group’s data also debunks this myth, as JD students were included in the above table and the data suggests there were sufficient legal jobs for all graduates from NSW law schools. The table below shows all the accredited law degrees in NSW.

(table taken from page 12 of the Report)

The proliferation of JD courses in the past 10 years is apparent. However, the number of students the JD courses have added to the total number of law graduates is less than 350. This is less than the increase in the number of law undergraduates the past few years. The report includes a useful table showing the increase in student numbers. The worst culprits for the increase in student numbers appears to be the University of Sydney and University of Western Sydney undergraduate courses.

(table taken from page 13 of the Report)

Then why is there anxiety about graduate prospects?

I am not 100% convinced by the data used by the working group. The difficulties of law graduates finding employment seems real. However, if there are sufficient graduate law jobs than what has caused all the anxiety?

The working group found that there was significant anxiety amongst the legal profession about the lack of employment opportunities for law graduates. The level of anxiety among law students themselves was found to be very high. Even if employment prospects are high, obtaining a graduate job can be stressful, so it is difficult to tell if the level of stress among law students has increased in the last few years due to increasing difficulty of obtaining a graduate job or if law students have always found it stressful obtaining a graduate job. Again, more data is needed.

Conclusion

One of the working group’s key recommendations is that more accurate data is obtained to track law students’ graduate destinations both within and outside the legal profession. The last time an in-depth study on the employment of law graduates was done was in 1989 when the Centre for Legal Education published a detailed study on graduate career destinations. The working group also recommended that a national approach be taken, especially given increasing concerns about excessive law student numbers in Victoria and Queensland.

My favourite recommendation is that it is important law students are provided with accurate information about the state of the legal market. Anecdotal evidence and uncertainty does not help law student anxiety. Solid evidence and an in-depth study will not only aid in the transparency of universities taking on more law students but assist in reducing stress associated with obtaining graduate employment. If it the data from the working group’s report is proven correct and there is not an oversupply of law graduates, this will help reduce the stress law students feel about their future.