Remember the bit in Esquire about "if your grad degree involved a lot of memorization"?

GLOBAL BUSINESS: "Call My Lawyer … in India: Call-center jobs were first; now U.S. companies are looking to offshore for their legal work too," by Suzanne Barlyn, Time, 14 April 2008. p. G1.

We're looking at 29k legal jobs shipped abroad by the end of 2008 and maybe 80k by 2015. India is simply moving up the service ladder, just like China does on the manufacturing ladder. You go from call centers (lower-value business process outsourcing) to knowledge process outsourcing (KPO). Engineering and medicine comes under assault too, as these KPOs act more and more like "branch offices of U.S. companies."

India's advantages are clear: English speakers and a common law background.

Comments

[VoteWithTroops]

Won't US energy companies just move off shore too where carbon cap and trade laws don't apply? Could they just move out to let us fend for our own homesteads?

[Brent Grace]

I wonder, will the ABA embrace all their new (global) members, or howl in protest 'cause "They took our jobs!" Or some combination of the two?

[William R. Cumming.]

Always remember that when hiring legal talent you are paying for two things: First, information, which with lexis and other legal research tools can be obtained often even by non-lawyers. For example, many large firms in major cities for years have billed clients for research services by their skilled law librarians who often are better at searching legal data bases and other data bases than lawyers. Second, you pay for judgment. This often is a factor of education, training and experience. Here is what typically results in your getting exactly what you pay for. Judgment often inversely proportional to cost, perhaps unfortunately.

[Jarrod Myrick]

Jindal/Tata leading overseas Indians. The world is divided into two types people: those who've seen the Taj Mahal and those who haven't.

[VoteWithTroops]

Tom points out that as off shore expertise rises, US companies will capitalize on those lower cost capabilities. There are other good reasons to move off shore. Haliburton comes to mind because they moved their headquarters about a year ago. "Dubai's friendly tax laws will add to Halliburton's bottom line." http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Business/story?id=2942429&page=1&...

After being legislated out of their primary business function in the US (i.e. drilling for oil and profit), over environmental concerns, Haliburton pulled up stakes and flew the coop. Cause and effect, no mystery here. Those US jobs were driven out of the country by legislation.

Clinton and Obama have both promised to push a "windfall profit" tax on big oil companies. I think even McCain joins in a carbon cap-and-trade plan to regulate US producers of energy and manufactured goods. As these companies suffer at home, they will either move overseas too or downsize domestic jobs and pass increased costs on to consumers. We need business freindly policies if we expect to retain any (and keep costs down).

[Dan Harris]

This India thing is overrated. We have used lawyers in India and have found we are better off using US contract lawyers who typically charge out at a similar hourly rate. There are countless really good stay at home mom-lawyers and lawyers trying to transition into other jobs available right here in the US. It is not enough just to speak English and come from a common law country.