Does having a master’s degree improve earning potential for lawyers?

[1298]

In other words, does having a masters degree equate to a higher average base salary for lawyers in Canada?

[mistertubby]

no

[MapleLeafs]

A JD/MBA would improve your earning potential, but not as a lawyer. If you get an MBA from a top school, you can pursue IB and earn more. 

[LMP]

I don't see why it would. 

[1298]

5 minutes ago, LMP said:

I don't see why it would. 

I ask because in some professions, having a masters degree bumps you up in the pay scale - as is the case with teachers in certain provinces, as well as a handful of other provincial government employees. 

[HammurabiTime]

Just now, 1298 said:

I ask because in some professions, having a masters degree bumps you up in the pay scale - as is the case with teachers in certain provinces, as well as a handful of other provincial government employees. 

This is not the case for lawyers. I have a graduate degree and it has been at best useful as something to talk about in interviews.

[BlockedQuebecois]

1 hour ago, MapleLeafs said:

A JD/MBA would improve your earning potential, but not as a lawyer. If you get an MBA from a top school, you can pursue IB and earn more.

This is a bit like saying a JD/M.Eng would improve your earning potential because you could go be a software engineer at Google. 

Sure, it's technically true, but it's not really what OP was asking about. 

[Vizslaw]

I can only speak for the firms I know, but the pay scale factors are pretty much: (1) your year of call; and (2) how much revenue you generate. Sure there can be other intangibles or prestige-like factors, but I dont think an MBA and LLM fits that description.

If you do an LLM right after graduating, you're still going to be paid as a first year associate because your LLM doesn't add anything beyond another year (or two) of schooling. It's not like you're starting your career with a client roster or an extra year of trial experience.

Same goes if you do an LLM after several years of practice. I'm going to be starting one next year. I've been in practice for 8 years. I always wanted to do one after 5 years but life got in the way... It's not like I'm going to broadcast that I'm working on my LLM to clients or or during consultations. The only place it'll be relevant is our letterhead and my firm bio. It's a pretty esoteric pursuit that won't really translate into more billables. Sure, maybe doing your LLM helps elevate your profile or is part of some larger networking effort, but any value that brings is probably offset by fact that you'd also - presumably - be billing fewer hours while doing the degree. It's probably a wash.  

So - my own view as a lawyer who is going to do one and the owner of a small firm with some lawyers who have/don't have LLMs - a Master's degree doesn't really make you any more valuable to your clients or the firm. I fully support and encourage people who want to do them for the sake of pursuing ongoing education. Firms might even value LLMs to the extent that they may help you pay for them, but I don't think it puts you in a class above a lawyer with the same relative experience/profile, just without the LLM. Going back to school part-time over 2 years (or full time over 1 year or whatever) isn't really a reason to increase your rate.

It's also worth considering that a number of lawyers already do the things that happens in an LLM. Ok, not exactly the same, but if I publish a few academic articles or case comments in any given year, that's not really a basis to increase my hourly rate or annual salary. The firm may value that kind of non-billable work and reward it by way of a bonus, but it's not really a basis to increase your rate or annual salary unless there is a direct connection between your academic work and billables/revenue generation.

 

 

[GreyDude]

1 hour ago, 1298 said:

I ask because in some professions, having a masters degree bumps you up in the pay scale - as is the case with teachers in certain provinces, as well as a handful of other provincial government employees. 

An MA or Ph.D. increases your income as a teacher, because it is an education-based field and, at least in principle, the higher your education, the greater your value as a teacher. For example, in collective agreements in my province, the pay scales for teachers are based on a combination of education and experience. In most other fields that I'm aware of, the education is a base qualification and only greater experience generates higher pay. Sometimes education is recognized in the form of experience on the pay scale. 

And yes, a great many lawyers are unionized where I live, so the reference to collective agreements is pertinent. The lawyers (and all others) covered by one public-sector contract I just looked at would be bumped up by 1.5 years of experience on the pay scale by getting a Master's degree. That hardly makes it seem like something you'd do for the money. 

Edited December 5, 2021 by GreyDude
Heh. I wrote "the collective agreement of a labour contract." Which was bad.

[1298]

2 minutes ago, Vizslaw said:

I can only speak for the firms I know, but the pay scale factors are pretty much: (1) your year of call; and (2) how much revenue you generate. Sure there can be other intangibles or prestige-like factors, but I dont think an MBA and LLM fits that description.

If you do an LLM right after graduating, you're still going to be paid as a first year associate because your LLM doesn't add anything beyond another year (or two) of schooling. It's not like you're starting your career with a client roster or an extra year of trial experience.

Same goes if you do an LLM after several years of practice. I'm going to be starting one next year. I've been in practice for 8 years. I always wanted to do one after 5 years but life got in the way... It's not like I'm going to broadcast that I'm working on my LLM to clients or or during consultations. The only place it'll be relevant is our letterhead and my firm bio. It's a pretty esoteric pursuit that won't really translate into more billables. Sure, maybe doing your LLM helps elevate your profile or is part of some larger networking effort, but any value that brings is probably offset by fact that you'd also - presumably - be billing fewer hours while doing the degree. It's probably a wash.  

So - my own view as a lawyer who is going to do one and the owner of a small firm with some lawyers who have/don't have LLMs - a Master's degree doesn't really make you any more valuable to your clients or the firm. I fully support and encourage people who want to do them for the sake of pursuing ongoing education. Firms might even value LLMs to the extent that they may help you pay for them, but I don't think it puts you in a class above a lawyer with the same relative experience/profile, just without the LLM. Going back to school part-time over 2 years (or full time over 1 year or whatever) isn't really a reason to increase your rate.

It's also worth considering that a number of lawyers already do the things that happens in an LLM. Ok, not exactly the same, but if I publish a few academic articles or case comments in any given year, that's not really a basis to increase my hourly rate or annual salary. The firm may value that kind of non-billable work and reward it by way of a bonus, but it's not really a basis to increase your rate or annual salary unless there is a direct connection between your academic work and billables/revenue generation.

 

 

This really helps clear it up - thank you very much. I’m embarrassingly new to the whole idea of law school, and I wasn’t entirely sure how a masters degree would translate in the lawyer world. I completed my masters (MA) for free last year, so although it is a bummer it won’t help me financially as a lawyer, the bright side is that I don’t have education debt (yet). Thanks again for your help. 

2 minutes ago, GreyDude said:

An MA or Ph.D. increases your income as a teacher, because it is an education-based field and, at least in principle, the higher your education, the greater your value as a teacher. For example, in collective agreements in my province, the pay scales for teachers are based on a combination of education and experience. In most other fields that I'm aware of, the education is a base qualification and only greater experience generates higher pay. Sometimes education is recognized in the form of experience on the pay scale. 

Yes, this makes complete sense. Thanks for the clarity!

[Vizslaw]

Nothing to be embarrassed about at all. It can still help you network and be the subject of conversations with firms one day, so you never know when it'll come in handy.

 

 

[infoinfoinfo]

What should be noted, however, is that large financial institutions (ie Banks) will often consider each year spent on a Master's Degree as a year of experience and therefore, you would need less experience to apply to a given position.

At a private law firm, completely useless, both in terms of salary and knowledge. 

[tiktok]

i heard a masters is required for taxation. i dont know about the other fields. 

[BlockedQuebecois]

14 minutes ago, tiktok said:

i heard a masters is required for taxation. i dont know about the other fields. 

Not to be a tax lawyer at any of the three Chambers band 1 tax firms: 

https://www.blakes.com/people/find-a-person/s/caroline-sanders

https://www.dwpv.com/en/People/Ryan-Abrahamson

https://www.osler.com/en/team/andrew-boyd

Edited December 6, 2021 by BlockedQuebecois

[Jaggers]

Lots of tax lawyers do LLMs, but that's because they are usually weird nerds who love to study, but it's definitely not any sort of requirement.

[Deadpool]

19 minutes ago, tiktok said:

i heard a masters is required for taxation. i dont know about the other fields. 

You might be thinking about the CPA in-depth tax program. A lot of notable tax lawyers I see have done this, and the firms even pay for you to do it. Some do an LLM in taxation at NYU or Osgoode, some have a master's in economics or their CPA designation, and/or some clerk at the Tax Court of Canada; but none of these are prerequisites to working in the field. One thing I have noted is that most tax lawyers performed well in law school and were on the dean's list. I would think that your performance in law school and a demonstrated interest in tax matters the most to employers in this field. 

[Rashabon]

You don't need an advanced degree to be a tax lawyer but anecdotally yes, the tax lawyers I know generally did very well in school. Also it depends on what type of tax lawyer you are. Lawyers that do transactional planning need a lot of familiarity with the tax act and a good grasp of math is a benefit. Lawyers that just litigate and do things like assessments, objections, taxpayer relief, etc. need less familiarity and expertise with the actual statute.

[Conge]

At my old firm, if you did an advanced degree (LLM, BCL, MPhil, etc.) between JD and articling, or the year after articling, the firm would recognize it as a year of practicing law so that your salary keeps up in lock step with your peers. But I think you had to negotiate for the recognition. That is the most monetary benefit that I've ever heard of anyone getting out of graduate degree in law.