Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress: BLS Student Audit 2012 – Part I – PSG Cuts; Tuition Hikes
Last week, a few representatives from the American Bar Association set up in the Moot Court room from 5:00 – 6:00 PM on a Monday. They wanted to hear students’ opinions of our law school. How many of us showed up? I don’t know—7? 8? I know that when I arrived I was the 4th.
I used this opportunity to lobby for a napping room, and for a broad mandate to all law schools that class sizes must be reduced if the legal market can ever hope to be fixed. BLS may or may not already be implementing such a mandate—and the size of next year’s 1L class should help determine that. I also mentioned a brief story about the public service grant from last year.
If you were here, perhaps you remember the one day “push” to get a petition signed by as many students as possible. Perhaps you remember our argument—that we had counted on the $5,000 being there for the summer for which we applied—and to remove it with the simple explanation that “the government cut our funding,” when there are plenty of other ways to make up for an $800,000 shortfall (the approximate cost of providing $2,000 extra per student), does not indicate a willingness on the part of the administration to really help students manage the cost of law school.
BLS may, or may not have inflated their “9-months after graduation employment” numbers. Big whoop. So has everyone else. BLS participated in the merit scholarship “scheme” where falling beneath the 40% mark in your class meant a reduction in your scholarship. Big whoop. Some schools are even tougher—33% was my barrier everywhere else. BLS may, or may have not, participated in “scholarship stacking,” which is a vague practice that involves packaging all of the highest “scholarship earning” students in the same section, or same larger section, first year. This is more evil than fair, but difficult to prove (though not impossible). And I do know that Section 16 from last year was a powerhouse.
New York Law School’s case is getting dismissed. Brooklyn’s case is getting dismissed (I’m calling it right here) because they can’t allege anything truly audacious—their only hope is the “scholarship stacking” argument—but even that might fly as a reasonable business judgment. BLS is a 501(c)(3) and it should not care about profits. But this is the #65 law school in the nation, and keeping such a high public profile costs a lot of money. The cleanest way to make up for the shortfall without harming any existing funding or expenses is to raise tuition.
Tuition increased from $46,610 to $48,416 this year. 3Ls did not bear the cost of the increase—but 2Ls did. And 1Ls find themselves in the fortunate position of a smaller class by 100 students, and the unfortunate position of being the final class to have the 40% scholarship renewal barrier imposed upon them.
It is worth noting that I have not seen any student movement to reinstate the $5,000 summer PSG. It is a fact of life that we accept. I would like to argue that it is not unreasonable for us to seek this additional funding. With the new system, students may be tempted to work 25 hours per week at the internship and 15 hours at some other place that might pay and make up for the shortfall. This may include non-legal work like in a restaurant or something, and the school is not exactly encouraging students to do this, but they should know that students will be doing this, and that these sorts of jobs are not going to make them look any more attractive to prospective employers. Thus, students are left with a choice – work 40 hours a week at one place – 15 of those for free – or try to make up the difference. The school should not force students to make such a Hobson’s Choice when it is clear that other funds may be easily diverted to the cause (look, for example, at BLSPI, and how they fund scholarships….by getting students drunk and convincing them it’s a really good idea to spend $900 to have dinner with Geraldo, or $3,000 with the commissioner of the NHL….). The result is that students need to think more creatively and do even more legwork to best avoid financial disaster. But I hate students that complain about how busy they are. We all are. Get over it.
BLS is not the only law school to hike its tuition, and it has to stay competitive. We cannot blame BLS for everything, but we can try to urge it to be different from other schools and implement some really original policies. It’s my hope that the change will be coming soon.
Christopher J. Knorps is a 2L at BLS. He enjoys studying bankruptcy law. You may find his other work at flyinghouses.blogspot.com. Like Jamie Moyer, he believes that people should never count themselves out. You may fail, and fail, and fail, and people may call you a freak and a loser who doesn’t know when to call it quits, but when you are still pitching at age 49 in the Rockies starting rotation, you will have the last laugh.
Two Comments:
1) The Auction
For the record, an alumnus spent $3,000 for the NHL commissioner at the BLSPI auction, and he was recruited by Dean Gerber. The deans don’t love the idea of students spending their own money for something that should come out of tuition, but up until now, that has been the only viable option for this school. Perhaps Dean Allard will consider what the Auction represents and fight for some of Wexler’s ~ $750,000 salary to reinstate more helpful things for the students and the school’s reputation (ie: public interest/work study grants).
A public interest fellowship has been presented by a student-run organization for the last 22 years, and this same organization brought last year’s leaders against the public service summer grant reduction. While this year’s $3,000 grant has been “accepted,” it is by no means taken sitting down.
2) The ABA’s Visit
The ABA’s student meeting was never going to be a cure to the school’s ailments, but it could have been something if students had actually encouraged each other to attend or engage in some kind of action other them publishing grumbles in this newspaper. How about reinstating the BLS Alliance for Transparency And Accountability group and actually putting some teeth in it? Going to the ABA, New York Law Journal, and/or AbovetheLaw? Jack, I invite you to be the one to do this.
Two Comments:
1) The Auction
For the record, an alumnus spent $3,000 for the NHL commissioner at the BLSPI auction, and he was recruited by Dean Gerber. The deans don’t love the idea of students spending their own money for something that should come out of tuition, but up until now, that has been the only viable option for this school. Perhaps Dean Allard will consider what the Auction represents and fight for some of Wexler’s ~ $750,000 salary to reinstate more helpful things for the students and the school’s reputation (ie: public interest/work study grants).
A public interest fellowship has been presented by a student-run organization for the last 22 years, and this same organization brought last year’s leaders against the public service summer grant reduction. While this year’s $3,000 grant has been “accepted,” it is by no means taken sitting down.
2) The ABA’s Visit
The ABA’s student meeting was never going to be a cure to the school’s ailments, but it could have been something if students had actually encouraged each other to attend or engage in some kind of action other than publishing grumbles in this newspaper. How about reinstating the BLS Alliance for Transparency And Accountability group and actually putting some teeth in it? Going to the ABA, New York Law Journal, and/or AbovetheLaw? Jack, I invite you to be the one to do this.
Didn’t J.Gaffney get drunk and spend $3k on the NHL prize? Pretty sure he’s still lurking around the halls of BLS as a student, at least for 2 more months.
He was bidding on behalf of an alum who could not be there. Gerber called the alum his “ringer.”
As the newly elected Co-Chair of BLSPI and one of the two Auction Co-Chairs for this year’s event, I find it prudent to respond to this post. I was also one of those who attended the ABA meeting on April 2nd. I will also be receiving the $3,000 stipend from the school this summer.
I am surprised by this assessment of the BLSPI Auction. This event is not unique to BLS – indeed, most law schools across the nation have student-run auctions to raise funds for public interest summer scholarships – and it is a testament to the passion and compassion of our school’s community. This event is made possible because of the outpouring of support from alumni, faculty, administration, staff, and, yes, students. And that is a good thing. It is a positive sign that our community recognizes a need and responds to ensure that those who choose to take on unpaid summer jobs are supported and encouraged. It is important to emphasize that the funds raised at the Auction do not come solely from students; alumni and faculty have been remarkably involved in the Auction on a yearly basis, by donating items and attending and bidding at the Auction.
I feel I must also clarify a few discrepancies. The purchase of lunch with Dean Gerber and the NHL Commissioner was made by proxy bid by a BLS alum. There was no more alcohol at this year’s event than last year and there was a measured effort to ensure that the event was safe. Our Committee worked closely with the BLS administration during winter finals to come up with solutions that ensured the integrity of the event while also not allowing things to get out of hand.
Jack, you ask that students get creative about funding their summer internships. I contend that the BLSPI Auction is one of those creative solutions. This Auction was the collaborative effort of over 70 dedicated students who wanted to ensure that their peers were able to do good public interest legal work for the summer and I believe that the BLSPI Auction achieved that goal with flying colors.
I was not in any way denouncing the auction. I myself paid $450 for the Geraldo dinner.
I also felt that it was an extremely successful event and feel that, sometimes I need to put things rather bluntly, or ridiculously, or in very few words (due to my word limitations) and that sometimes inappropriate inferences may be drawn.
I apologize if you felt offended by my post. It had nothing to do with BLSPI, but with tuition hikes, and ways to make up for the Public Service Grant in the future. BLSPI does its own thing to help a dozen or so students, and that is great.
Innerestin’
That was about JG; not sure why it didn’t follow the reply above.
JK: Again you have inaccurately referred to BLSPI’s efforts. BLSPI’s auction raises funds for public interest programming at BLS as well as a fellowship for 20 students (not “a dozen or so”) and another 15 graduating students with a bar review grant. You would not have this weekly column but for BLSPI funding the start of this newspaper.
Aside from paying $450 for a dinner with the Geraldo’s, you seem to be quite bitter with BLSPI, and that is proved through using your limited words to attack BLSPI.
You are entitled to your opinions, but get your facts straight before you make any more statements that create what you believe to be “inappropriate inferences.”
I’m sorry. I have no idea what I am talking about. Once again, I apologize.