Rechtsanwälte
Möchten Sie diese Zusammenfassung auf Ihrer Website? Einbettungscode:
Automatisierungsrisiko
Geringes Risiko (21-40%): Jobs auf dieser Ebene haben ein begrenztes Risiko der Automatisierung, da sie eine Mischung aus technischen und menschenzentrierten Fähigkeiten erfordern.
Weitere Informationen darüber, was dieser Wert ist und wie er berechnet wird, sind verfügbar hier.
Benutzerumfrage
Unsere Besucher haben abgestimmt, dass es eine geringe Chance gibt, dass dieser Beruf automatisiert wird. Diese Einschätzung wird weiterhin durch das berechnete Automatisierungsrisiko unterstützt, welches eine 22% Chance der Automatisierung schätzt.
Was denken Sie, ist das Risiko der Automatisierung?
Wie hoch ist die Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass Rechtsanwälte in den nächsten 20 Jahren durch Roboter oder künstliche Intelligenz ersetzt wird?
Gefühl
Die folgenden Grafik(en) werden überall dort eingefügt, wo es eine erhebliche Anzahl von Stimmen gibt, um aussagekräftige Daten zu liefern. Diese visuellen Darstellungen zeigen die Ergebnisse von Nutzerumfragen über die Zeit und liefern einen bedeutenden Hinweis auf Stimmungstrends.
Gefühlslage über die Zeit (vierteljährlich)
Gefühlslage über die Zeit (jährlich)
Wachstum
Die Anzahl der 'Lawyers' Stellenangebote wird voraussichtlich um 9,6% bis 2032 steigen.
Gesamtbeschäftigung und geschätzte Stellenangebote
Aktualisierte Prognosen sind fällig 09-2023.
Löhne
Im Jahr 2022 betrug das mittlere Jahresgehalt für 'Lawyers' 135.740 $, oder 65 $ pro Stunde.
'Lawyers' wurden 193,1% höher bezahlt als der nationale Medianlohn, der bei 46.310 $ lag.
Löhne über die Zeit
Volumen
Ab dem 2022 waren 707.160 Personen als 'Lawyers' in den Vereinigten Staaten beschäftigt.
Dies entspricht etwa 0,48% der erwerbstätigen Bevölkerung im ganzen Land.
Anders ausgedrückt, ist etwa 1 von 209 Personen als 'Lawyers' beschäftigt.
Stellenbeschreibung
Vertreten Sie Mandanten in Straf- und Zivilprozessen sowie anderen rechtlichen Verfahren, erstellen Sie Rechtsdokumente oder verwalten oder beraten Sie Mandanten bei rechtlichen Transaktionen. Sie können sich auf ein einzelnes Gebiet spezialisieren oder in vielen Rechtsgebieten breit gefächert praktizieren.
SOC Code: 23-1011.00
Ressourcen
Wenn Sie darüber nachdenken, eine neue Karriere zu beginnen oder den Job zu wechseln, haben wir ein praktisches Tool für die Jobsuche erstellt, das Ihnen möglicherweise dabei hilft, die perfekte neue Rolle zu finden.
Kommentare
Hinterlassen Sie einen Kommentar
Plus, a lot of lawyers have strong political connections and a lot of money and influence. No way they'd willingly allow themselves to be replaced by AI.
Ministerial work like estate, wills, estate planning, corporations law, definitely.
Contract law, most likely. Use of standardized language and exploiting vague wording seems like AI forte.
Litigation, nope. Despite what people say it's about critical thinking skills. In many case its the opposite. It's creative BS'ing.
Dealing with people who are can be genuine boneheads or lazy, but may be in positions of authority or needed for your case.
Criminal Law and Family law, don'teven think about it. Both involve real stakes for people's rights and extreme emotions of those involved. Many times requiring subjective evaluation of evidence.
Numerous cases pivot on the attempt to convince a jury, or judge in certain cases, that your version of the facts is accurate. Furthermore, while you will be able to ask an AI about a law, it's unlikely that the AI will be able to interpret the facts from your situation and apply them to the law. This is because interpreting whether the facts of your case apply to the scope of the law often requires inherently human ingenuity and creative thinking.
Also, whether the law applies to your case, or if convicted, whether your sentence should be reduced, can often involve making appeals to morals and the specific circumstances of the case. Some argue that AI will be able to draft commercial contracts between businesses. This may be true, but it would first require someone, ideally a lawyer, to advise you on whether certain agreements you've made will increase your liability or position you more favorably in case of a contractual breach. An AI would simply write the contract, presumably more quickly and with fewer mistakes.
Finally, many seem to believe that the law is black and white. This is incorrect for several reasons and is an area where AI would likely struggle. In countries like the U.K., U.S., India, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, many areas of law are not governed by statute but created on a case-by-case basis. This can result in a lack of consistency in the law and occasional conflicting judicial decisions. Lawyers often argue that these cases can be reconciled, or that, in contemporary society, one decision is more favorable than another.
Even regarding statute law, there are usually many approaches to 'legislative interpretation' (such as textualism, structuralism, or intentionalism). At different points in time, the legal system has preferred one approach over another for certain issues. While AI might be able to explain this, I fear many will not give it the appropriate significance it deserves. This could result in individuals mistakenly thinking they have not committed a tort, traffic offense, crime, etc. due to a particular interpretation method.
Additionally, even when a certain method of statutory interpretation is preferred, a skilled lawyer could argue that a different approach should be applied due to special circumstances in the case, changing societal values, or a discrepancy between Parliament/Congress' expressed intention about the application of the legislation and how the law is currently being applied.
In terms of arbitration or conciliation, the entire point of lawyers in these circumstances is not necessarily to know the law, but to provide impartial advice from someone who isn't emotionally invested in the issue. Clients often do not think rationally due to the emotive nature of the circumstances. However, AI will likely automate 'grunt work' like finding cases, writing letters, and contracts. AI will also likely be beneficial because many commercial and property disputes may not warrant paying expensive fees for lawyers - the same goes for low-level criminal and traffic offenses.
I also don't see many people mentioning that AI itself will likely create more work for lawyers. For example, claims that an AI gave not only bad legal advice, but outright negligent advice, and whether the owner company should be liable. Issues like AI being discriminatory, privacy breaches, and the extent to which AI will be allowed to give legal information or answer legal concerns about specific facts will undoubtedly arise. There will likely be news articles about how someone was negatively affected by using AI. Unlike lawyers, it would be much harder to prove liability for the company that owns the AI. Therefore, the use of AI in relation to the law is likely to be limited - at least for public use.
Even if not limited by the government, I believe a sophisticated AI law robot would likely be locked away behind an expensive paywall that only legal firms and other companies could afford. AI might also not be proficient in law in many smaller countries for a significant period. I've noticed it often doesn't recognize the law or case I referred to, or it completely misinterprets the definition, facts, and decisions of that law or case.
A final issue with the use of AI is that it may often provide incorrect laws. Court cases in many countries refer to cases in other countries or states. Because of this, the AI might read the case name mentioned and provide a plethora of decisions from completely different jurisdictions.
Hinterlassen Sie eine Antwort zu diesem Beruf