This profession often attracts mid-academic performer, who could’ve managed the sciences but chose law instead, for reasons ranging from curiosity to rebellion. Now, most of us are locked into a jurisdiction-bound career with limited mobility and few realistic pathways to relocate or transition out. The top-end options are riddled with toxicity and offer little autonomy. Law firm partner tracks hinge on countless unpredictable variables, and client acquisition isn’t a skill one can just “learn.” In-house roles treat you as a cost center, capping your growth and value. An MBA pivot is a high-stakes gamble and even then, the compensation often mirrors top law firm salaries, at least at the start. So essentially, it feels like a dead end. The only real perk? The tax treatment for lawyers.

I understand that you put forth a number of points here which are valid in their own way, but what exactly are you trying to get at? Any profession is a dead end if you look at it with a closed mindset.

Your point about mid-performing individuals isn’t exactly true. The mushrooming of law colleges has attracted objectively mediocre people to law schools, undoubtedly yes, but I see most people from good institutions doing quite well in the profession.

The notion of a “jurisdiction bound career” is also a subjective opinion. I’m assuming you’re contending that you can only practice in India, but there are several ways you can leave and practice in other countries, same as any other profession.

About the client acquisition skill, it is the same as any soft skill which is crucial in other professions. A doctor cannot be rude to their patients, a banker cannot dismiss their big-ticket clients, an artist cannot disrespect their patron. All have to be a certain way to retain their client equivalents.

I see law as fruitful (and risky) as any other profession in this day and age.

This. So much this. Frankly, I'm getting tired of how much hatred people on this website have for law & the legal profession. It also appears to have increased more in the last 4-5 years. Was different before that, or maybe I'm just imagining.

To say that 'client acquisition isn't a skill one can just "learn."' is a very wrong & pessimistic view of looking at things. It absolutely is a skill and you can absolutely learn it.

Completely contrary to the OP, my opinion is that law is the most freeing profession. You can do whatever you want after getting a law degree. You can go in whichever kind of job you feel like.

It is difficult, yes. But to confuse difficulty with limitations is incorrect. All good things, and all things worth pursuing, are difficult. All professions are difficult. I have had to go meet clients on weekends & at midnight because someone got arrested, etc. Though I hate it, I remind myself that doctors have it worse. Even consultants are called in on weekends to work endless hours. It's all fair. The principle is you have to keep moving forward, irrespective of what profession you are in.

This is not to say there aren't genuine problems in the profession — toxic seniors, low pay in litigation, lack of work-life balance, etc. But what OP seems to be suggesting, is not it.

I appreciate the response. I'm not very sure what I was trying to get at, I guess just a particularly weak hour and wanted to vent. Granted that some of the people who work around me are fairly smart and have strong suits of their own kind. I am not questioning their calibre, I just think the professions ends up attracting a section of kids that are smart but don't wish to choose the sciences, for whatever their reason - intended it to be a statement of fact. I don't agree on several ways being there to leave, it isn't as viable and definitely not if you don't come from some level of disposable wealth. Moreso because the circumstances in which you could land a gig overseas which is relatively close to the same cadre of the roles you get at an Indian law firm are low. Sure one could get a compliance or more 'routine' kind of jobs, but not part of the big leagues. At least not as easily. There are definitely people who manage to get such jobs, but they genuinely are top tier of the flock, unlike other fields where a relatively average skilled person can also get their way in. With regards to client acquisition not being a skill, I am sorry that came out wrong. What I meant is that while one can hone the skills needed to acquire clients, it is not as sustainable to go about it without firm backing, having money to spend on trips, etc. A person with 'middle class' means will for sure find it hard to attribute the expense needed to get into rooms where you can get clients.

24 LPA starting salary after an MBA. That's what I started with. And I was the most average in class. That's the difference between law and other fields. The 20L per hearing in law is reserved for the top 1%. Compare that to the 1% of MBA, and you could buy a house in Dubai without blinking.

Lol B tech from IITs and MBA from IIM have 20lpa as just a starting package whereas in law it's the highest. On a PayScale level IB>Consulting>Tech>Law. Except Tech all of them have bad work life balance. So don't be delusional by thinking law is the highest paying profession it's not.

It also not about salary only. The respect which these IIT and IIM guys command is incomparable to what a lawyer from Tier 1 NLUs can get. Law is always seen as a last recourse of someone who couldn't crack IIT or Neet. I agree that many people didn't even wanted to pursue engineering or medicine but the general societal sentiment still remains that only average people not capable of cracking high IQ exams like JEE Mains or Advanced pursue law.

The average pay of some NLUs maybe higher than that of IITs but still the reverence which IIT and their alumni get is unmatchable.