Sunday, August 18, 2013
Charred Bacon: Hideous Law School Pigs Face Less Job Security
Welcome to the Barbecue Pit, Filthy Porker:
On August 12, 2013, the Wall Street Journal published Jennifer Smith’s piece, “Law-School Professors Face Less Job Security.” Look at this opening:
“The main body that accredits U.S. law schools is moving to reduce job protections for law professors, who have long enjoyed the security of academic tenure.
The shift comes at a time of plunging student enrollment, and could make it easier for law schools to trim the ranks of full-time faculty, whose salaries consume a considerable share of tuition dollars.
Some law schools that are struggling to balance their budgets have dismissed administrative staff in recent months. Others are offering buyouts to reduce the number of tenured professors or are leaving empty posts unfilled.” [Emphasis mine]
These academic thieves and hustlers never gave a damn about their students or recent graduates. They only cared about putting asses in seats. The swine continued to raise tuition to ridiculous levels, when they KNEW that the overall U.S. job market was GLUTTED and shrinking. Now, these pigs are starting to feel the effects of their rampant, unchecked greed.
Take note of the following admission, later on in the article:
"Law professors and law deans are paid too much," said Kent Syverud, dean of Washington University School of Law in St. Louis, told the ABA's task force on the future of legal education. "Either we have to be paid less, or we have to do more…. The whole problem of costs probably would go away if our salaries were halved." [Emphasis mine]
This statement is from one of the scam participants. It did not come from an angry scam-blogger or a neutral observer. The rat bastards are finally publicly recognizing the truth.
On August 12, 2013, Sam Glover authored a stellar blog entry labeled “Law School Classes Shrinking, Law Professors Losing Job Security.” Check out this opening:
“For a decade, law schools have been jacking up tuition, class sizes, professors’ salaries, and employment numbers, despite the fact that the legal market has been in a slide, if not a freefall, for much of that time. Everyone knew it was unsustainable, but law schools were either oblivious or uncaring.
Finally, the bubble has burst. The pool of applicants to law school is shrinking drastically, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The University of St. Thomas School of Law, for example, received “59 percent fewer applications this year than in 2010.”
Law school is no longer the default decision it used to be for smart college graduates who aren’t sure where to go next, said James Leipold, executive director of the National Association for Law Placement.” [Emphasis mine]
Hell, those with the highest LSAT scores are choosing not to apply to law school at a significantly higher rate than those who scored much lower on the exam. The smarter kids have figured out that, for most people, law school is a losing game.
Glover then states the following:
“In fact, law schools aren’t waiting around for the ABA. Confronted with plunging applicant pools, they are offering buyouts and leaving empty positions unfilled.” [Emphasis mine]
Karen Sloan’s article, “ABA Panel Favors Dropping Law School Tenure Requirement,” appeared in the August 12, 2013 edition of the National Law Journal. Take a look at this segment:
“So long, tenure.
The American Bar Association’s Council of the Section of the Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar on Friday tentatively embraced two plans that would eliminate tenure as an accreditation requirement…
Many council members argued that the existing tenure requirement for doctrinal faculty had driven up the cost of legal education and tied the hands of administrators seeking new ways of running law schools or to oust underperforming professors.
“The biggest financial issues we have right now are our fixed costs, and our fixed costs come from tenured, salaried professors,” said council member Maureen O’Rourke, dean of Boston University Law School. “The solution is not to give everyone tenure, but to give no one tenure. Frankly, we don’t need 200 law schools that look like Harvard Law School and value the same things as Harvard Law School. Somewhere down the line, the students got lost.” [Emphasis mine]
Univer$itie$ and college$ figured this scheme out long ago. As reported in the New York Times by Christopher Shea, back on September 3, 2010: “Nearly two-thirds of all college teachers are non-tenure-track adjuncts.” Apparently, it took longer, i.e. until it was inevitable, for the law school swine to cut back on faculty pay and security.
Conclusion: I understand that most of the Boomer cockroach “law professors” and administrators will end up cashing out and enjoying an early, forced retirement. At least, those pieces of trash will no longer collect $200K+ annual salaries – for merely reciting their same old notes about archaic, parsed cases. You “educator” pigs reap what you sow. Maybe you hags should “Get over it and move to Nebraska!”
In the final analysis, you whiny dung beetles are not entitled to tenure. “Academic freedom” is a silly joke. You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You are as expendable as the rest of us. Many of you have claimed that you could earn more in private practice. Well, now you have your chance to prove that assertion. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature think that cash-strapped government agencies and law firms will be looking to hire 60 year old academic hacks/ass-clowns who have written numerous law review articles about esoteric topics?!?!
Posted by Nando at 5:32 AM