Sources:  Australian Bureau of Statistics, Labour Force, Australia, Detailed, Quarterly, May 2020, catalogue number 6291.0.55.003 and Australian Government, 2019 Employment Projections - for the five years to May 2024, Labour Market Information Portal.

 

Having argued that the legal profession is a ‘winner’ my, perhaps paradoxical, second point is that it makes little sense to pick winners.  This is because the Government is arguably not better informed than the market in picking winners and, more significantly, because the jobs that come out on top today, will differ from those that top the list tomorrow.  Jobs are being created, becoming redundant, and are transforming at accelerating rates.  Meaning that ‘job-ready’ makes little sense.  More important is to support ‘work-readiness’ - readiness for multiple jobs and careers.  This suggests that the focus should be on skills that add value across many current and future jobs, such as critical thinking and communication. 

 

In its submission, the Law Council of Australia (the Law Council) made this point by drawing on Professor Pip Nicholson’s explanation of Why Law Degrees Matter:

 

“A law degree ought to teach graduates to: think analytically, including how to evaluate empirical and logical claims; to marshal arguments; and to succinctly communicate. These are generic skills, imparted through the study of law, which are of as much value in a government policy unit, a business strategy team or a board room, as they are inside a law firm, an in-house counsel office or a barrister or judge’s chambers.”

 

​

2.  High student contributions risk exacerbating social inequities

 

The risk of high student contributions exacerbating social inequities was a point well made in the submissions of the Law Council and the Australian Law Students’ Association (ALSA).  In ALSA’s submission, it argued that:

 

“The prospect of paying or accruing this amount of debt can serve as a real barrier of entry to some individuals who wish to undertake legal education.  Financial incentives and disincentives naturally have a greater influence over more vulnerable members of our community.  Specifically, our concern is that those from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds will be discouraged from studying law.  This may deter already under-represented communities, including individuals from culturally and linguistically diverse, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander backgrounds, from pursuing legal education.  It may also prevent mature-aged students from making a career change.”

​

The arguments of the Law Council echoed those above and pointed out that prospective students from rural, regional and remote areas (RRR) - a particular focus of the Government’s package - will likely feature amongst those discouraged:

​

“Many prospective students from economically disadvantaged RRR backgrounds are already cost-prevented from studying law as a result of significant expenses which cannot be covered by a HECS-HELP loan (in particular the cost of accommodation).  Moreover, increasing HECS-HELP debt is likely to encourage graduates to attempt to optimise their income in order to ensure that their debt burden is under control.  This is likely to drive many graduates toward higher income opportunities generally available in major cities, rather than regional areas.”

​

The Law Council goes on to note current recruitment difficulties in RRR areas, which it argues will worsen if the Bill passes into law.

​

The points made by the Law Council and ALSA are particularly concerning from the perspective that justice is better served by a legal profession that reflects the make-up of those it is representing.  Not by one that continues to be the preserve of privileged or exclusive groups.

​

​

3.  Student contributions are poorly aligned to private benefits

​

The claimed basis for adjusting the contributions sought from students is the private benefits to graduates, as measured by expectations of salaries earned.  The Government has relied upon average salaries earned by occupation class from the 2016 Census.

 

There are two issues with this methodology.  The first is that not all law students go on to practice law.  As argued by Professor Pip Nicolson, that is not a bad thing.  In her previously referenced piece on Why Law Degrees Matter, she points out that, in addition to the transferrable skills gained, a law degree supports an understanding of governments; sustained insight in the ways in which states regulate society; and a deep knowledge of the law and how it is developed.  These can be of great utility whether working as a lawyer or not.  She shares Melbourne Law School’s employment outcome data which finds over two thirds of law graduates surveyed had taken on graduate legal positions, a further 10 percent were employed in graduate programs with government, business and management consultancies, and another 17 percent in legal and general roles that are not part of a formal program.  In other words, a background in law equips graduates with skills valued by a myriad industries and professions.

 

The second methodological issue is that Census data takes no account of when employees graduated.  A better, albeit still imperfect, starting point is graduate salaries.  Here we find that the median salary for law graduates is only slightly higher than that for all fields of education.  In other words, insufficient grounds to place law in the top band for student contributions.

​

Salary outcomes for undergraduates in 2019