BLS: 74,800 New Lawyer Jobs by 2026, Turnover of 22 Percent

On October 24th, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released its employment projections for the next cycle, 2016-26.

For 2016, the BLS Employment Projections program (EPP) estimates that there were 792,500 lawyer positions (as opposed to discrete lawyers) in the United States. This figure includes self-employed lawyers. In 2014, the EPP found 778,700 lawyer positions, so there has been some growth between the two years. According to the BLS’s Current Population Survey (CPS), in 2016, 1.133 million people worked as lawyers in the United States. The discrepancy between the CPS and the EPP has existed for some time. In their respective contexts, both figures are correct.

The BLS projects future employment trends in part to help job seekers evaluate career choices, and the projections play a significant role in the BLS’s Occupational Outlook Handbook. Here is an illustration, from various sources, of law-school graduate and lawyer growth since the 1980s.

Click here to read more:

The 2016-26 Data

According to Table 1.10, between 2016 and 2026, the BLS estimates a total 419,000 net lawyer jobs will be created (41,900 in the average year). Of those, 74,800 (18 percent) can be attributed to economic growth over the decade, up to 867,400 lawyer jobs total in 2026. The amount of new job growth is higher than the 2014-24 cycle (43,800). The remaining lawyer jobs, 334,000, consist of “occupational separations,” which includes 165,000 lawyers leaving the workforce and 180,000 lawyers transferring to different jobs. Like all other occupations, lawyers leaving the labor force may be retiring or temporarily exiting for personal reasons, and lawyers transferring to other occupations may be moving up or down the occupational ladder, e.g. judges or retail clerks.

For the 2014-24 cycle, the BLS estimated that only 157,700 lawyer jobs would require replacement. The large discrepancy between those projections and the current one (334,000) is not due to a sudden shift in the legal profession’s employment prospects; rather, it reflects the new methodology the BLS adopted for estimating occupational replacements. From the 1991 to 2024 projections, the EPP used a “cohort-component” methodology for estimating job openings due to replacements. For example, if in 2016 there were 50,000 lawyers in the 56-65 age cohort, and 60,000 lawyers in the 46-55 age cohort, then it would project that 10,000 lawyers between those two cohorts would leave the occupation and would require replacement by 2026. Add together the differences among all the age cohorts, and one has the net replacement rate.

The BLS abandoned this methodology because it suffered from sampling errors for small age cohorts and assumed that the only workers who needed replacement were older workers. Starting this year, the BLS adopted an “occupational separations” methodology for estimating job openings. It uses historical data on workers who have left the occupation, identifies common characteristics among them, regresses those characteristics, generates a probability of separation for the whole occupation, and then applies that to the occupation. As a result, the EPP now detects lawyers who change occupations before middle age. While the results give a higher number of annual job openings than before—especially as compared to the number of new law-school graduates or bar admits—they also indicate a substantial amount of turnover in the legal profession: 180,000 out of the base 792,500 (22 percent) lawyer jobs.

Here are more links for information on the EPP’s methodology for estimating occupational replacement needs and occupational separations and openings.

Evaluation of the BLS’s Separations Methodology

After I first discussed the BLS’s new methodology for measuring occupational separations, I found the agency’s prototype data that distinguished replacement jobs as either “labor force exits” or “occupational transfers.” I found that one in four lawyers would switch occupations between 2012 and 2022. The EPP now includes this information in its regular tables (Table 1.10), and I think it’s important to compare this information, at least this time, against occupations requiring similar amounts of education because it is no longer prototypical and it illustrates the reliability of the data, one way or the other. These are sorted by occupations’ 10-year cumulative separations as a percentage of their respective 2016 employment levels.

OCCUPATION SOC CODE EMPLOYMENT 2016 (THOUSANDS) EMPLOYMENT 2026 (THOUSANDS) EMPLOYMENT CHANGE (THOUSANDS) OCCUPATIONAL SEPARATIONS (THOUSANDS, ANN. AVERAGE) OCCUPATIONAL OPENINGS (THOUSANDS, ANN. AVERAGE) PERCENT OF 2016 EMPLOYMENT
LABOR FORCE EXITS OCCUPATIONAL TRANSFERS TOTAL TRANSFERS EXITS TOTAL
Astronomers 19-2011 2 2.2 0.2 0 0.1 0.2 0.2 50.0% 0.0% 100.0%
Forestry and conservation science teachers, postsecondary 25-1043 2.2 2.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 45.5% 45.5% 90.9%
Biochemists and biophysicists 19-1021 31.5 35 3.6 0.7 2.1 2.8 3.2 66.7% 22.2% 88.9%
Medical scientists, except epidemiologists 19-1042 120 135.9 15.9 2.4 8.1 10.5 12.1 67.5% 20.0% 87.5%
Anthropology and archeology teachers, postsecondary 25-1061 7.1 7.8 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.6 42.3% 42.3% 84.5%
Health specialties teachers, postsecondary 25-1071 233.5 294 60.5 9.7 10.1 19.7 25.8 43.3% 41.5% 84.4%
Nursing instructors and teachers, postsecondary 25-1072 67.9 84.2 16.3 2.8 2.9 5.7 7.3 42.7% 41.2% 83.9%
Physicists 19-2012 17.9 20.5 2.6 0.4 1.1 1.5 1.7 61.5% 22.3% 83.8%
Library science teachers, postsecondary 25-1082 6 6.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5 33.3% 33.3% 83.3%
Business teachers, postsecondary 25-1011 104.2 123 18.9 4.2 4.3 8.5 10.4 41.3% 40.3% 81.6%
Psychology teachers, postsecondary 25-1066 46.9 54 7.1 1.8 1.9 3.8 4.5 40.5% 38.4% 81.0%
Criminal justice and law enforcement teachers, postsecondary 25-1111 17.3 19.4 2.2 0.7 0.7 1.4 1.6 40.5% 40.5% 80.9%
Social work teachers, postsecondary 25-1113 14.9 16.3 1.5 0.6 0.6 1.2 1.3 40.3% 40.3% 80.5%
Biological science teachers, postsecondary 25-1042 62.3 71.7 9.4 2.5 2.6 5 6 41.7% 40.1% 80.3%
Political science teachers, postsecondary 25-1065 21.2 23.4 2.2 0.8 0.9 1.7 1.9 42.5% 37.7% 80.2%
Law teachers, postsecondary 25-1112 21.2 23.8 2.6 0.8 0.9 1.7 1.9 42.5% 37.7% 80.2%
Geography teachers, postsecondary 25-1064 5 5.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 40.0% 40.0% 80.0%
Foreign language and literature teachers, postsecondary 25-1124 35 39.1 4.1 1.4 1.4 2.8 3.2 40.0% 40.0% 80.0%
Chemistry teachers, postsecondary 25-1052 26.3 28.9 2.6 1 1.1 2.1 2.3 41.8% 38.0% 79.8%
Engineering teachers, postsecondary 25-1032 47.6 54.6 6.9 1.9 1.9 3.8 4.5 39.9% 39.9% 79.8%
Physics teachers, postsecondary 25-1054 17.6 19.4 1.8 0.7 0.7 1.4 1.6 39.8% 39.8% 79.5%
Agricultural sciences teachers, postsecondary 25-1041 12.6 13.6 0.9 0.5 0.5 1 1.1 39.7% 39.7% 79.4%
Education teachers, postsecondary 25-1081 74.5 82.2 7.7 2.9 3 5.9 6.6 40.3% 38.9% 79.2%
Communications teachers, postsecondary 25-1122 34.1 37.5 3.4 1.3 1.4 2.7 3 41.1% 38.1% 79.2%
Mathematical science teachers, postsecondary 25-1022 60.9 66.6 5.6 2.3 2.4 4.8 5.3 39.4% 37.8% 78.8%
Economics teachers, postsecondary 25-1063 16.5 18.2 1.8 0.6 0.7 1.3 1.5 42.4% 36.4% 78.8%
Philosophy and religion teachers, postsecondary 25-1126 31.8 35.7 3.9 1.2 1.3 2.5 2.9 40.9% 37.7% 78.6%
Social sciences teachers, postsecondary, all other 25-1069 15.3 16.8 1.5 0.6 0.6 1.2 1.3 39.2% 39.2% 78.4%
Area, ethnic, and cultural studies teachers, postsecondary 25-1062 11.5 12.7 1.2 0.4 0.5 0.9 1 43.5% 34.8% 78.3%
Postsecondary teachers, all other 25-1199 236.5 258.7 22.2 9.1 9.4 18.5 20.7 39.7% 38.5% 78.2%
Sociology teachers, postsecondary 25-1067 17.9 19.6 1.7 0.7 0.7 1.4 1.6 39.1% 39.1% 78.2%
Computer science teachers, postsecondary 25-1021 39.7 42.8 3.2 1.5 1.6 3.1 3.4 40.3% 37.8% 78.1%
History teachers, postsecondary 25-1125 26.9 29.7 2.8 1 1.1 2.1 2.4 40.9% 37.2% 78.1%
English language and literature teachers, postsecondary 25-1123 84.6 92.9 8.3 3.3 3.4 6.6 7.5 40.2% 39.0% 78.0%
Recreation and fitness studies teachers, postsecondary 25-1193 20.6 22.6 2 0.8 0.8 1.6 1.8 38.8% 38.8% 77.7%
Atmospheric, earth, marine, and space sciences teachers, postsecondary 25-1051 13.1 14.4 1.3 0.5 0.5 1 1.2 38.2% 38.2% 76.3%
Architecture teachers, postsecondary 25-1031 9.5 10.5 1 0.4 0.4 0.7 0.8 42.1% 42.1% 73.7%
Environmental science teachers, postsecondary 25-1053 6.9 7.6 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 43.5% 43.5% 72.5%
Clinical, counseling, and school psychologists 19-3031 147.5 168.4 20.9 4 6 10 12.1 40.7% 27.1% 67.8%
Podiatrists 29-1081 11 12.1 1.1 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.7 27.3% 27.3% 54.5%
Judicial law clerks 23-1012 14 14.8 0.8 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.8 35.7% 14.3% 50.0%
Audiologists 29-1181 14.8 17.8 3 0.4 0.3 0.7 1 20.3% 27.0% 47.3%
Administrative law judges, adjudicators, and hearing officers 23-1021 15.4 16 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.7 19.5% 19.5% 45.5%
Physical therapists 29-1123 239.8 299.8 60 5.2 5.6 10.8 16.8 23.4% 21.7% 45.0%
Pharmacists 29-1051 312.5 330.1 17.6 7.4 6.2 13.6 15.3 19.8% 23.7% 43.5%
Lawyers 23-1011 792.5 867.4 74.8 16.5 18 34.4 41.9 22.7% 20.8% 43.4%
Judges, magistrate judges, and magistrates 23-1023 28.4 30 1.6 0.6 0.6 1.2 1.4 21.1% 21.1% 42.3%
Veterinarians 29-1131 79.6 94 14.4 1.6 1.4 3 4.5 17.6% 20.1% 37.7%
Optometrists 29-1041 40.2 47.1 7 0.7 0.6 1.3 2 14.9% 17.4% 32.3%
Dentists, all other specialists 29-1029 6.4 7.2 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 15.6% 15.6% 31.3%
Orthodontists 29-1023 6.6 7.7 1.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 15.2% 15.2% 30.3%
Oral and maxillofacial surgeons 29-1022 6.8 7.9 1.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 14.7% 14.7% 29.4%
Psychiatrists 29-1066 27.5 31.2 3.6 0.4 0.3 0.8 1.1 10.9% 14.5% 29.1%
Surgeons 29-1067 45 52.6 7.6 0.7 0.5 1.3 2 11.1% 15.6% 28.9%
Dentists, general 29-1021 132.8 156 23.2 2.7 1.1 3.8 6.1 8.3% 20.3% 28.6%
Internists, general 29-1063 49.8 58.2 8.4 0.8 0.6 1.4 2.2 12.0% 16.1% 28.1%
Obstetricians and gynecologists 29-1064 21.7 25.5 3.9 0.3 0.3 0.6 1 13.8% 13.8% 27.6%
Family and general practitioners 29-1062 134.8 157.1 22.2 2.1 1.6 3.7 6 11.9% 15.6% 27.4%
Physicians and surgeons, all other 29-1069 372.4 422 49.6 5.8 4.4 10.2 15.2 11.8% 15.6% 27.4%
Anesthesiologists 29-1061 33 38.9 5.9 0.5 0.4 0.9 1.5 12.1% 15.2% 27.3%
Pediatricians, general 29-1065 29.6 34.8 5.3 0.5 0.4 0.8 1.4 13.5% 16.9% 27.0%
Chiropractors 29-1011 47.4 52.4 5 0.8 0.4 1.2 1.7 8.4% 16.9% 25.3%
Prosthodontists 29-1024 0.9 1.1 0.2 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Two things jump out to me. One, the occupations’ separation rates tend to clump together by job type. Medical professionals are at the bottom. Legal professionals are near the bottom, and nearly all the rest are postsecondary instructors of one type or another. Scientists are at the top. Two, I personally don’t see some of these turnover rates as plausible. Is there really this much churn in astronomers? Three, the rate of occupational transfers looks high overall. Do 11 percent of all surgeons switch jobs every ten years? I would think these rates would be much lower, but maybe there’s more to professional work than I know about.

‘Strong’ Competition

Concurrently to the employment projections, the BLS published its biennial Occupations Outlook Handbook (OOH). I’ve tracked its statements about job prospects for the legal profession going back more than two decades. It’s almost always negative, but this year—despite the employment projections depicting more job openings than before due to the new methodology—the OOH has not changed its position. It even appears blunter than in the last several years. I’ll copy the text in full.

Despite the projected growth in new jobs for lawyers, competition for jobs should continue to be strong because more students are graduating from law school each year than there are jobs available. According to the American Bar Association’s National Lawyer Population Survey, a compilation of data collected by state bar associations or licensing agencies, there were over 1.3 million resident and active attorneys as of December 2016. Some law school graduates who have been unable to find permanent positions turn to temporary staffing firms that place attorneys in short-term jobs. These firms allow companies to hire lawyers as needed and permit beginning lawyers to develop practical experience. Many other law school graduates and licensed lawyers end up finding work in other occupations or industries due to the difficulty in finding jobs with traditional legal employers.

Because of the strong competition, a law school graduate’s willingness to relocate and his or her practical experiences are becoming more important. However, to be licensed in another state, a lawyer may have to take an additional state bar examination.

While many new lawyers are hired each year by law firms, this does not guarantee stable employment in the profession. Newly hired lawyers, known as associates, must either advance within their firm or may be forced to leave, a practice commonly known as “up or out.” Those who leave law firms may find work as in-house counsel with companies, with government agencies, or as self-employed lawyers.

(Emphasis added.) The last paragraph in particular contains new material with a different message: Even biglaw isn’t safe.

Editorial

First of all, it’s notable that the BLS predicts faster growth of new lawyer jobs than in the 2014-24 cycle, 74,800 versus 43,800. True, the employment projections have tended to offer rosier outlooks than the invisible hand has deigned to produce. In 2006, the EPP projected 844,000 lawyer jobs by 2016, which is high by 50,000 jobs (-6 percent). But I will acknowledge good-sounding news when it arises.

Beyond that, the evidence in this post should close the debate on the impact the BLS’s new occupational separations methodology has on law-graduate employment: none. BLS estimates are dependent variables; law-graduate employment is an independent variable. Changing the methodology doesn’t change trends in real-world employment outcomes.

Why? One, 2016 law grads’ employment outcomes are not markedly better than before. If the change in methodology showed better outcomes, then more than 63 percent of law grads would have found full-time, long-term work in the profession.

Two, although the new occupational separations methodology may not be very precise, it nevertheless indicates significant turnover in the legal profession. Now, we don’t have data on where these lawyers end up, but this is a risk prospective law students should know about given the debt they incur for their legal educations. The legal profession is seen as a terminal career choice, so the onus is on law schools to demonstrate that post-law careers are equally worth the pay off. And don’t get me started on JD-advantage jobs again.

Finally, the OOH is not deterred by the change in methodology. Its analysis doesn’t differ much from before, and where it does differ it rejects the JD-advantage argument and cautions against biglaw.

My comprehensive explanation of the various measures of law-school grads and lawyers can be found on this page (updated!). It also should contain any links I may have omitted in this post.

Past Coverage

End.

2 comments

  1. The 43% exit rate for lawyers on the BLS table above over 10 years is pretty staggering, given that only 63% of law grads get full-time, permanent JD-required jobs out of law school. Not everyone can use the law degree to start and the turnover is very high, at least compared to doctors, who are in the 20s somewhere, while lawyers are at 43%. The doctor numbers are what one would expect based on people voluntarily retiring at older ages. The lawyer figure reflects a pretty unstable legal profession. A few lawyers go to high powered jobs in other areas, but not 22% over 10 years.

    As you say, the numbers really call into question whether these expensive JDs deliver good value, even to the 63% who get first year legal jobs.

    The up or out caveat is really important and goes along with these sobering numbers. Prospective lawyers just don’t understand that up or out often means being unable to use one’s law degree to practice law.

    From the standpoint of educational planning, you have a huge chance of washing out as a lawyer long before you want to retire.

    The only question is why the DOE is not wiser to these awful numbers and capping the flood of wasted educational dollars for law schools.

    Clearly the effect of the lawyer oversupply is to force many or most lawyers in mandatory retirement from law, or at least from the legal profession, at a very early age. The first year lawyers are actually much better off in terms of job availability than experienced lawyers.

    The disclosure of the awful longitudinal oversupply in law and its effect of ending many or most legal careers early on is not well known, but it should be. The length of time a person can use a degree like this is one of the most important factors in choosing a career.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s