However, if I am invited on an interview and it is subsequently canceled that only counts as .10 in my rubric, and a full-on interview where it is made clear there is no actual position counts as .50.

So my interview chart from March to October, after sending out hundreds upon hundreds of cover letters and resumes, looked something like this:

Bloomberg Legal Analysis Position, NY (1 Point)- Since I left the door open during the interview to the possibility of returning to law as an actual practicing attorney, I did not fit the profile Bloomberg was looking for (which my hunch is that it requires the interviewee to exhibit at least a slight disgruntled attitude towards law school). (Full Post)

Small Litigation Boutique, DC (1 Point)-  Although, I was invited back for a second round interview at this small boutique litigation firm —the ultimate candidates selected had more experience and more pedigree (one had a degree from Yale Law School, was a special prosecutor, had several prestigious government posts, and had fought in the Iraq war).

Solo Practice, NY (1 Point)- After waiting in an un-lit messy office while the interviewer ignored me and did work he had piling up from the day- a high stakes special task was designed to test my knowledge of obscure court rules.  I gave up any chance at a second round interview by giving this gentleman a piece of my mind in a sharp-witted e-mail response to his task. (Full Post)

Part Time Contract Position, NY (1 Point)- After being told there was plenty of work available and meeting the partners was just a formality, I was then told after the interview by the firm’s managing partner “ I hope we can be in touch soon with a few projects.” “Soon” never did come, as I was never contacted about available projects and subsequent e-mails from me were completely ignored. (Full Post)

Small Real Estate Boutique, NY (.10 Point)-  After applying to a post that required 3 years of substantive experience (which is more than I have), I was called to come in for an interview that day. My suit was being dry cleaned so I scheduled the appointment instead for early the next week. I was called the very next day and told the position had already been filled and there was no need to come in after all.

2^nd Appellate Department, NY (.50 Point)- After completing a customized, quite lengthy, and complex writing sample I was invited for an interview before a panel of supervisors only to be told: “I hope my secretary informed you there aren’t actually any positions at this time.” (Full Post)

Most of these experiences have been explored in detail elsewhere on the blog, but for those who aren’t avid readers, these 4.6 interviews came only after a great deal of elbow grease and desperation.

I signed up for legal specific job boards (both pay and non-pay), I scoured craigslist regularly, I spammed every person I knew that in any way shape of form had some connection to the legal industry (and even many who didn’t). I went on informational interviews, I contacted my career services office, I worked with recruiters, I attended networking and alumni events, and I attended bar association events. And all of these efforts led to the 4.6 dead-end interviews I listed above.

To say the least, this whole process has a tendency to discourage. I know many of my readers are going through similar struggles day in and day out and are getting worn down. Right now the job search process, more so than ever and especially the legal job search process is arduous and tedious. But at the end of the day, this is still the process that eventually leads to positions. It is imperative to stay active to continue submitting your resume to continue reaching out to contacts in whatever way you can. I know at times it feels as though these efforts are futile—especially when thousands of resumes are submitted and not even a simple confirmation is received let alone any inclination that an offer to interview may be on the way. The truth is 99% of the time your efforts probably are futile, but perseverance is the key it only takes that 1%.

During November however, I decided to beef up my efforts, to work on what I considered weaknesses in my approach and to give what I considered a last ditch “surge” before the beginning of the New Year.  My “job search surge” was actually a huge success. I kid you not, during the month of November I received more interview offers than the 8 months of unemployment prior to this time.

I would like to say that I believe this indicates a loosening in the legal markets, unfortunately after speaking with others in the same boat– they have not been having increased luck. However, every day positions are being obtained and interviews are being granted– yes they are in smaller amounts, and more competitive than ever but this means the more attention you put into presenting yourself as a complete impressive package the more it will payoff.

I received 6 NY offers to interview in total.

Breaking down the interviews: 2 were for branch offices of large nationally ranked AmLaw firms (ELF firms, if you will), 1 was for a boutique commercial litigation boutique, 1 was for a small mass torts/civil rights firm, 1 was for a medium sized firm specializing in health care law, and one was for a 1 year full-time IP “internship” for experienced lawyers, with NBC.

Of the 6 interviews offered I went on 5 of them (so far), of the 5 interviews I went on I received a second round interview with 4 of the firms. All in all over the past four weeks I was interviewed by 19 attorneys. (Given this recent interview blitz I have had occasion to reflect on legal interviewing questions and skills, stay tuned for my next post which will be on lessoned learned for legal interviewing.)

And where did these 6 jobs Interviews come from you ask?

• 4 were from School Specific Job Boards
• 1 was from Lawjobs.com (make sure to filter out recruiter posts under the advanced search)
• 1 was from Craigslist

For those interested of the total 10.6 jobs I interviewed for this is where the postings came from.

• 1 directly from the employer’s Website
• 1 from Lawcrossing.com
• 1 from Lawjobs.com
• .5 from the NY Courts Website
• 1 from a Response to a Craigslist Ad (as offerree)
• 2.1  from Craigslist postings
• 4 from School Specific Job Boards

For now though, I would like to focus my attention on my (tried and true) tips for how I created a successful legal job surge.

1- Cover Letters Should be Short and Sweet

First, I shortened my cover letter drastically to 128 words (6 sentences) including the greeting and salutation. In my first two sentences I explained that I was applying to position “X” and listed very generally what in my background led me to believe I would be a good addition to the firm’s team. In my third sentence I explained where I graduated law school and where I was previously employed. In my fourth sentence I briefly listed three high-profile cases I worked on for my previous employer. In the fifth sentence I stated what I was attaching to the e-mail and in the sixth I thanked the recipient for their consideration.

Prior to this I was using a cover letter that was typically 500 words that went into much greater detail about my job history, law school activities, grades, etc. This letter, although well-written, was long and cumbersome- I believe now, that it did too much reiterating of my resume and probably turned the reader off when they were exposed to its length. I know it is hard to cut content from a cover letter, but unfortunately, as I have come to learn, 80%-90% of this material, despite what you may tell yourself or want to believe, is not going to be read. So by, creating a short and very to-the-point cover letter you assure that a much greater percentage of what you do write will be read. I know for instance that even someone skimming my new 128 word cover letter, because of its compactness and spacing, will get nearly the same effect from the letter as one who reads it word for word.

2- Get access to as many School Specific Job Boards as you can

Just because a position is posted on a specific school’s job board that does not mean the employer will only consider graduates from that school. Knowing about the posting is half the battle. By tapping into the vast resources of several different school specific job boards you will greatly enhance the quantity and quantity of your job search. Since school job boards are not powered by user fees, a desire to sell advertising, a desire to generate a commission or even employer posting fees. There is no incentive for those running the board to inflate the number of posts available, to open up the service to recruiters, to create fraudulent posts or to perpetuate expired ones.

In sum school specific job boards are a unique breed of job posts and by expanding your reach of these types of posts you will put yourself ahead of the game. Reach out to friends, friends of friends, family and friends of family to try to accumulate access to as many of these job boards as possible. If you are finding it difficult to locate others who are willing to share their log-in information—see if they are willing to search the board for you (say once a week or once every two weeks?) and send you postings that fit your experience and geographic specifications.

3- Find an Ally Within: Try to Avoid Apply Directly to a Posting

Once you find a handful of postings that describe positions of interest to you. Research the firm’s website for any alumni from either your undergraduate or law school alma matters. If there is a partner or senior level attorney you can find that matches, reach out to them either with a call or e-mail. Ask them for career advice during your “transition” and inform them that you have located a position that interests you within their firm—ask if they have any advice for applying. The same is true if you have any personal friends at the firm, or even any other prior co-workers, reach out for their advice on how you should approach the application before submitting any materials on your own. Often times they will know the person that handles the hiring, and they can either forward the resume along for you or at least give you the name of the right person who should receive it.

Of course you will find that this is not possible at every firm, or even practical. The smaller the firm is the more likely this approach will not be effective. However it is a powerful tool to use when you run the risk of having your resume added to a pile with 1,000’s of others. Of the 6 positions I applied to I was able to use this strategy on 2 of them.

4- Mind the Gap

Something looks better than nothing. In fact, anything looks better than nothing. Try to fill your resume gap in any way possible when applying for new full-time positions. Are you doing contract work? Freelance work? Volunteering? Attending trainings? Or working Part-time? Whatever you are doing to fill up your time, if it is in any way legal related find a way to incorporate it into your resume to bridge the unemployment gap. Of course we are going through bizarre times and most employers will understand the gap, you still want to do everything in your power to minimize the effect of the gap and to show how you are keeping your legal skills fresh during this down period.

From time to time I worked on little projects for a friend’s law firm that he started on his own, although this work was sparse I was still affiliated with the firm. I was also hired to do free lance work by a Professor that I TA’d for while in law school. I also attended pro-bono training sessions provided by the local bar associations and was recently admitted to the veteran’s bar. I made sure to include all this information on my resume in the best light possible, as to allay any concerns about how I was keeping busy during my period of unemployment. Do not utilize over the top puffery, or misrepresent your experiences but do highlight every legal related experience you have been occupying your time with in order to address, head-on, the resume gap issue.

5- Have your Resume Reviewed (and Re-reviewed, and re-reviewed again)

During the process to choose a reviewer for the joblesslawyer.com service I had all potential reviewers work on a test case, and evaluated their performance on this “test case” before advancing them to the next levels or the evaluation. The test case was in part my own resume. Despite how polished I thought my resume was, the reviewers presented me with alternative organization, and phrasing that I felt really added immediate strength to the presentation of my resume.

For instance, since I was seeking a litigation position, one of the final reviewers, suggested I subdivide the job explanations into more detailed categories under each of my prior employment descriptions: “discovery” “research and writing” and “pro-bono” and then to carry these sub divisions through all job description where they applied. I also decided based on the reviewers suggestions to include and list my achievements from the first law school I attended (as I transferred after my first year), and to leave off my GPA for both schools. I was very pleased with the final version of my resume after I incorporated these changes, and although I do not know for sure have a suspicion this was one of the driving factors in my new found job search success.

Whether you use the resume service provided here, another service or you have a confidant, colleague, consultant or career counselor edit the resume for you. Have your resume reviewed regardless of how well put together you think it is- chances are it can be improved. Please don’t get me wrong, having your resume reviewed isn’t going to be a panacea for fixing your unemployment woes… but having a polished, well-organized resume, that displays the right information and does so for maximum impact, when used in conjunction with my other tips, will certainly enhance the job search process.

6- Be Proactive With Addressing Weaknesses

I knew that being laid off has been, since day 1, a huge encumbrance to my candidacy. I have written about this before but despite the economic times we are in, despite a 10% unemployment rate and a 20% true unemployment rate being laid off will always carry with it undertones of  being “damaged goods.” It is a question that will be raised, without fail, in every post-lay off interview. After a layoff there is an unspoken heavy burden of increased explanation. Difficult questions will always linger. Like what criteria did the firm use? Why do you feel you were not included in the group that was not laid off?

I decided to tackle this issue head on. I was fortunate to have an excellent relationship with the recruiting director at my previous firm, I never burned any bridges and was gracious and polite during the whole process despite what was being done. This paid off. I reached out to some of my acquaintances at my old firm. They were more than happy to root for me and speak on my behalf. I provided them with a list of the places I had submitted a resume and the contact individuals for each. I had them place unsolicited calls in advance, addressing the layoff procedures and my work product.

I know the fact that these calls were made helped my candidacy because they were specifically mentioned in 4 of the interviews. I was told that such support really says something about my character and all of the interviewers were impressed with this effort of others on my behalf. I suggest you reach out any of allies you may have at your prior firm and call in whatever favors you can. You’d be surprised but they probably genuinely want to help you.

7- Be Creative with References

I created a separate document with the contact information of 4 references (2 supervisors and 2 professors). I had called upon these references earlier to write LLM recommendation letters and clerkship recommendation letters.

I felt that the effect of these recommendations were not being used to their full potential. I wanted every potential employer to see these statements not just those that had specifically requested recommendation letters. I realized that although some of the statements were specific to the letter that was written other comments were general accolades that applied to all situations.

Since the reviewers were kind enough to send copies of their letters to me to review. I extracted 4 or 5 key quotes from the letters they wrote and listed them on the references page in a box directly under each individual’s contact information. I explained the origin of these quotes in an introductory paragraph at the top of the page and encouraged reaching out to the references listed if any clarification was desired.

I felt this was an effective way to parlay the stellar comments made in a specifically tailored recommendation letter to general employers who would nonetheless be interested in assessments of my work product and ethic as observed by past employers.

I believe this method paid off as I was told by the partner of a prestigious Texas mega-firm that my presentation of the references was a “great idea.”

Of course, there are no givens in the current market, but you are hearing right from the horse’s mouth, from the Jobless Lawyer that tried it all—these tips, they worked for me!

PLEASE VOTE FOR US AND WIN A FREE HUMOR PRINT !!

(instructions below)

We received this in an e-mail yesterday:

Congratulations. Your blawg has been selected as one of the ABA Journal’s Blawg 100. Our annual list of the best of the blawgosphere appears in the December issue of the magazine, and was posted online today.

The ABA has invited readers to vote for their favorite blogs from among the top 100 in each of 10 categories. Voting ends December 31. Winners will be featured in the February issue of the Journal.

Please show your support and vote here: http://www.abajournal.com/blawg100/2009/careers !

To show our appreciation for your vote we are giving away a free humor print for every 50 votes we receive (max 5). Those who sign up to vote for the Top 100 Blogs are eligible for the drawing, winners will choose which humor print they would like to receive. To participate send a screenshot of the “Enclosed is your activation code” e-mail sent from “webmaster@abajournal.com”  after registering to vote on the ABA website (free) on or before December 31, 2009 to joblesslawyer@gmail.com.

The little leaguer, who gets crowds to cheer, gets pats on the back from his parents and a welcoming feeling from his teammates will likely make efforts to seek out opportunities where they can achieve that same fulfillment, and perhaps pursue a career in sports.

For me whether it was negotiating to stay up past my bedtime or trying to persuade my way out of a punishment, I received my feelings of reinforcement from advocacy at an early age. Those were the types of activities that excited me and those that I sought out. I wasn’t an athlete, I wasn’t an artist, success in math and science did not come easy, and although I spent many years in the school orchestra my musical aptitude was lacking. But I did successfully represent Oedipus Rex on trial for hubris during English class, I wrote a winning moot court speech on the bus ride to the competition (standing in for a sick team member), made a student witness break down on the stand during a mock trial on toxic waste dumping, was on a semi-finalist debating team and was elected president of the student body my last year of high school. During college the trend continued, my best grades came from law related classes, receiving an A in every law class I ever took (psychology and the law, internet law, consumer law and protection, business law, the nature functions and limits of law, children and the law, etc), an A+ in “speech and debate,” and my worst grade in calculus. My progression towards law school was a natural one and one where no other path really made sense for me.

I differ from some of my blogging colleagues at  Temporary Attorney and Bitter Lawyer, in that I don’t and never will regret my decision to go to law school. Of course I see the same problems with the profession that they do. The current dismal market for lawyers, the unpopular reputation lawyers receive in society, poorly ranked law schools admitting students by the hundreds (see humor print #4), unaccredited and on-line law schools that are clearly in existence only to make a buck. But I look past that, and those of you who have dreamed of being a lawyer since you can remember, you should be able to look past it too. Don’t ignore these problems, because they are serious problems that affect the job prospects of many lawyers, but don’t let them stand in the way of what you truly want to do with your life.

 Since the 16^th century (and probably before then) there have been complaints of the quantity and roll of lawyers, Shakespeare famously wrote “[t]he first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers” in Henry the 8^th. Since then they have done okay and they will continue to.

Lawyers, more so than any other profession, ironically take up residence, almost paradoxically, at both the bottom and the top of the societal hierarchy. For instance an esteemed group of nine lawyers make crucial decisions affecting the lives of every American, similarly lawyers are involved in the efficient governing and operation of nearly every fortune 500 company in existence, and law has been the occupation of choice for twenty five of the forty four Presidents of the United States. Yet, lawyers are also regularly referred to as “ambulance chasers,” “vultures,” and “bottom feeders.” “Greedy” medical malpractice lawyers are blamed as being a main component of the country’s current health care woes, and there are probably enough lawyer jokes around to fill every book in the library of congress… twice over. 

Why this dichotomy? The reality is everyone likes to make fun of lawyers until they need one. Once a person’s rights are contingent upon the outcome of a legal process these lawyers become “sharks,” “brilliant jurists,” and “creative thinkers.” It’s all a matter of perspective.

I think Joseph Choate explained the role of lawyer’s most accurately when he explained:

“I believe a man could be of greater service to his country… in the foremost ranks of the Bar than anywhere else. To be a priest in the Temple of Justice to serve at her altar and aid in her administration, to maintain and defend those inalienable rights of life, liberty and property upon which the safety of society depends, to succor the oppressed and to defend the innocent to maintain constitutional rights against all violations whether by the executive, by the legislature, by the relentless power of the press or worse of all by the ruthless rapacity of an unbridled majority. To rescue the scapegoat and restore him to his proper place in the world – all this seems to me to furnish a field worthy of any man’s ambition, Law.”

One of my hobbies is collecting legal memorabilia (statutes, prints, desk ornaments, music boxes, etc). I have this one piece that hangs in my room called “A Glimpse of the Past through Law.” It is a plaque that has 32 postal stamps of famous lawyers on the front and an inspirational saying.  It says:

“The law profession is very well represented among the who’s who in the United States from the very early days to the present. A very wide cross section of people who have been lawyers also had prominent positions, especially political, and positions from which their contributions have been keenly felt in the fabric of our society. Those in the profession of law seem to be in very good company.”

During a time when it easy to believe no-one values the J.D. any longer, it is easy to lose sight of the reasons we all went to law school. It is important not to, a law degree is one of the most versatile degrees one could achieve and one that comes only after much blood, sweat and tears (well not literally for most, but you get the idea).

 It is largely impossible to have any interest in attending law school without receiving some glossy brochure from a law school touting the benefits of “thinking like a lawyer.” What does it mean to “think like a lawyer” and why are those skills valued anyway? At its core law school equips students with an unmatched skill set of critical thinking, incredible attention to detail, and the ability to cogently and logical articulate a position based in evidence.

I read this account at a civil procedure blog called “Stay of Execution”  the blogger  puts across a great account of “thinking like a lawyer”:

“Thinking like a lawyer is a kind of precision of thought that’s a wonderful and unique skill. You learn to parse a question down into its component parts, to carve away the emotion and the confusion and leave only the essence. You learn to forget people and think about principles. You learn how to allocate responsibility. You don’t get distracted by the problem until you understand whose problem it is, and whether it really needs to be decided now or might turn out only to be a problem later. You become comfortable with life’s unfairness, and think instead about the allocation of risk. You focus a lot more on process than on result — what questions will we have had to answer before we get to the final answer? What are the rules for answering those questions?”

I saw an example of admiration toward lawyerly thinking, anecdotally, when I was listening to an oral argument of Maryland v. Pringle at oyez.com for a class on criminal procedure during my second year of law school.

Here is a little background on the Pringle case: the defendant (Pringle) was a passenger in the front seat, of a car pulled over for speeding. He was arrested when cocaine was found behind the backseat arm-rest (in a four door sedan). There were three passengers in the car. Pringle’s argument was that there was no probable cause for the arrest particular to him. In other words he was arguing there was no proof that he personally was tied, at all, to the cocaine, and that therefore he should not have been arrested. He in a sense argued he was being improperly treated as “guilty by association.” The court ultimately ruled that it was “an entirely reasonable inference” by the police officer “that any or all of the car’s occupants had knowledge of, and exercised dominion and control over, the cocaine.”

However, during oral argument the judges pushed the boundaries as to whether this type of rule could be dangerous and in what circumstances. Here are some choice exchanges from the case (note Mr. Blair was arguing for the petitioner):

——

Justice Stevens: What if there had been four people in the car?

Mr. Bair: I don’t know that four people would change things.

Justice Stevens: How about six?

Mr. Bair: I think within the…

Justice Stevens: Or what if it was a minivan and there were eight in the minivan?

———–

Justice Ginsburg: How about if it had been a bus?

Now, we’ve gone from the sedan to the minivan, how about the bus?

Mr. Bair: I think a bus is different, Your Honor.

I think a bus changes things significantly in the… in the context of, of course, the numbers of people are much greater, and then there’s…

Justice Scalia: Are you talking about a public bus or you’re talking about a chartered bus?

————-

Justice Scalia: What about five? You’re going to arrest all five? Even… I mean, you know, it gets worse and worse…

Mr. Bair: Well, of course.

Justice Scalia: 10 percent chance, there are 10 of them now…

Mr. Bair: And… and…

Justice Scalia: so the chance that any individual one did it is 10 percent. That’s still enough?

———

Justice Stevens: But if you had to reduce it to a percentage figure, what would you call the percentage required for probable cause?

Mr. Bair: I don’t know that I could, Your Honor. I really don’t know that it’s useful to…

Justice Stevens: But it’s less than 50, though, I gather?

Mr. Bair: Yes. Your… the cases of this Court has said…

Justice Stevens: So that takes care of the two people in the room, but when you get down to 33-1/3 with three people?

Mr. Bair: I think… I think three people clearly would be…

Justice Stevens: And with four people it would be 25 percent. Is that enough?

Mr. Bair: Probably, probably.

Justice Kennedy: Probably.

Justice Souter: You… you agree… you agree that at some point the probability is… when the numbers of people present keep increasing, at some point the probability is going to be too slim?

Mr. Bair: Yes, I agree with that.

—————

The questioning continued:

“What if the drugs were found in the trunk?”

 ”What about a door pocket only accessible to the driver?”

“What if two of the passengers were hitchhikers?”  

Having been through a year and a half of law school at the time, the above exchanges to me were par for the course. This is exactly the type of reasoning and questioning a law students become accustomed to after sitting through countless hypotheticals in law school classrooms, reading cumbersome and complex appellate decisions, weathering the Socratic method, preparing for moot court presentations, and the like.

But to a layman this type of exchange can be eye opening. Most people believe a law is a law. They believe laws come from well educated law makers who get their power from the people, and have carefully thought  of the situations covered by the law. The very thought that there can exist many situations the legislature or the legal system never contemplated, can be shocking to the majority. How could there be so much uncertainty to a law? How could there be so many fringe situations never thought of by those passing it that could directly implicate the law?

I was listening to the case while I was home on a school break at my dining room table, and my father a non-lawyer overheard the argument. He explained to me he couldn’t believe all the examples the Justices were coming up with, and said he had a “new respect” for the law just after listening to the exchange.

Some may see this example as “typical lawyering” where hairs are split over the minutest of details but the reality is that rules have to be crafted clearly and how they are applied, to all members of society fairly, is of crucial importance to the efficient functioning of a modern nation. Like it or not, these detailed questions focusing on the minutia of a situation are the very questions that must be asked to effectively govern, and lawyers are trained to ask them.

Micheal C. Dorf a noted constitutional law scholar, now at Cornell Law School, wrote an article on “thinking like a lawyer” where he echoed some of my above sentiments:

 “the law often requires much greater precision than is needed in other spheres of life. A person’s ability to avoid going to prison or to keep her fortune can turn on exactly what a word in a statute or contract means, and accordingly lawyers must learn to pay careful attention to nuance.”

Given the unique skill set lawyers have, shouldn’t there be a greater demand for lawyers hired to think about these types of important issues? Especially in a climate of regulatory change like we have coming about currently? One would think, yes. Though compounding the jobless problem however, may be a simple case of supply and demand.  Are there too many lawyers? Time magazine asked this exact question in 1991, but the upshot in legal activity from early 2000, proved the question may have been a bit premature.

During periods of economic downturn it is natural to ask about the role of any profession, especially when the ranks of joblessness reach lows the profession is not used to. According to informal sources, typically lawyer unemployment sits at about a quarter of the national mark, at times it has even been stated to be in the 1% range. But now in 2009, during the current “top down” economic recession it has been reported by the New York Times that:

“white-collar unemployment rose faster in the past year than in any other recession dating to at least the 1970s, even the devastating downturn of the early 1980s.”

And that was in January; since then things have only gotten worse.  So in many respects it is not fair to judge a profession at its worst. A rough period of unemployment is not enough to sound the death knell for prospective law students, nor should it. However, any system of supply and demand dictates that market forces control, if periods of unemployment are prolonged or if the legal sector rebounds more slowly or less completely than other sectors, a shift in the number of students enrolling in law school on a yearly basis—especially those law schools with lower employment prospects will likely be seen.

The bottom line I think, however, is there will always be room for good lawyers who have a passion for what they are doing. There will always be opportunities to make a lucrative living by studying the law. At times it may be harder than others, and at times it may cause young lawyers to seriously doubt our career choices, but if your commitment to the law is a true one, this jobless lawyer is convinced, things will eventually look up.

 In 2005 after I had just been admitted to law school, I was invited back to my old high school as the graduation Key Note Skeapker to give a speech to the graduates. I spoke at length about the importance of choosing something in life for “work” that makes you happy. Something you can enjoy each and every day that you get up and go do it. For many this excludes the law for some (like myself) it most definitely includes it (and maybe little else). But regardless of where you fall on the law fondness spectrum, the advice is sound. I was reminded of it when I came across a print out of my old speech over the weekend. I offer it up here in hopes of encouraging those affected by the economy to never lose sight of the importance of doing what you love and what will make you personally happy. Even if you most compromise your values in the short term- make to do all you can to never lose sight of them.

Excerpt to graduates from my 2005 speech.

Remember that Jim Henson’s Kermit the frog started out as his mom’s coat and two ping pong balls, Steven Spielberg’s first film was financed from a tree-planting business he started when he was 12, JK Rowling’s Harry Potter was born on a grease stained napkin in a 24 hour diner, as a teenager Calvin Klein spend hours sketching women in suites and dresses simply because it fascinated him, and Oprah Winfrey learned to read aloud and performed recitations by the age of 3! All of these people followed their dreams they engaged their passions—they all do what they feel they were meant to do, what they knew they’ve always wanted to do. So follow your heart and do what you’ll love. And if you don’t want to listen to me, maybe you’ve heard of a guy named Confucius, Confucius once wisely said “Choose a job you love, and you will never work a day in your life”. My goal today is to inspire each and every one of you to ‘never to work a day in your life’, and no I’m not encouraging you to sit on the unemployment rolls, I’m talking about work in the Confucian sense where if you do what you love it cannot be considered work at all.

 To quote one of the famous artist works of our time, Katie Holms in “Batman Begins” says “it’s what you do that defines you.” So when it comes time, choose what you will do carefully, for it will define you– and make sure that definition is something you’re proud of, something you’re good at, something that isn’t truly work for you– because you love it and you couldn’t think of doing anything else but it!

In this humor print, a law school pops out newly minted attorneys in record rates with little concern for job prospects but with absolute concern for their bottom line. Click here to view larger version or buy a print.

In this humor print, an attorney who recently passed the bar exam and faced with a doom and gloom economy finds solace at a different kind of “bar.” View it here.

October Cartoon

October Caption Vote

Voting will continue until the first of either 1) 200 votes are received, or 2) November 13th is reached.

(polls)

Provide the best caption and win a free print with your caption displayed !

Details:

1) Provide your caption by submitting a comment below, make sure to use a valid e-mail address.

2) Once we receive 10 unique quality submissions are received, or two weeks pass whichever occurs sooner, we will have a poll and users will vote on the best caption.

3) The winning caption will receive a free print of the comic with their suggested caption.

4) Only one submission per person, and no profanity will be allowed.

Good Luck!

I asked each if they found work, how long it took them if they did, what approach they used and how their new salary compared.

While, I was surprised to learn some had landed ably on their feet, many had either relocated far from where they wanted to be, taken positions offering insulting rates of compensation, had gone back to law school, or were still actively looking for work.

Here is a quick look at how the class fared based on my very unscientific and informal poll:

• One of my colleagues is doing public interest immigration work at the U.S. Mexico border.

• One of  my colleagues is now an investment banker.

• One of my colleagues after not getting a single interview in New York or D.C. tried to expand their search to the South and Midwest, and although had better luck there, is still trying to find the right position.

• Two of my colleagues found small to medium sized firms in the New England area. One is doing primarily medical malpractice and personal injury law making what he described as a salary that was more than unemployment but close to “disgraceful.” The other does civil litigation at a boutique.

• One worked as a part-time intern, and at the 6 month mark was offered an in-house position making “significantly less” than they had previously earned.

• Three of my colleagues have gone to work for the government.

• One colleague found work for a medium sized firm paying a Big Law comparable salary.

• Four of my colleagues were actually welcomed back to Big Law and Big Law salaries; two at east coast firms one at a west coast firm. Proving there is a glimmer of hope to climb back to the top, however slim it might appear to be.

• One of my colleagues traveled to Luxemburg and was able to find legal employment there.

• Nine of us have been keeping busy on freelance projects, temp work, taking various bar exams, or have gone back to school but have not been offered full-time legal employment of value.

Those who had found positions explained they had found their positions without fail through contacts and networking and on average it was at the 6 month mark that a position was found if a full-time job was at all found. Many of those who found positions were also willing to relocate away from the New York legal market. This may indicate that things just could be beginning to turn around? (The glass is half full right?)

The other 8-12 associates I was either not able to get in contact with or they were not interested in participating in the survey. I suspect however, that many of these attorneys fall into the last bullet point.

If you were a first year at the firm and would like to be included in these statistics please e-mail me.

This print has many hidden details in its characters and colorful environment. The major theme depicted is the struggle of the young lawyer in today’s economic downturn. Click here for an explanation of the key features.