Rechtsanwälte

Geringes Risiko
30%
Wohin möchten Sie als Nächstes gehen?
Teilen Sie Ihre Ergebnisse mit Freunden und Familie.
Oder erkunden Sie diesen Beruf ausführlicher...
AUTOMATISIERUNGSRISIKO
BERECHNET
23%
(Geringes Risiko)
UMFRAGE
36%
(Geringes Risiko)
Average: 30%
ARBEITSNACHFRAGE
WACHSTUM
5,2%
bis zum Jahr 2033
LÖHNE
145.760 $
oder 70,07 $ pro Stunde
Volumen
731.340
ab dem 2023
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG
ARBEITSPUNKTZAHL
7,7/10

Personen haben sich auch angesehen

Berechnetes Automatisierungsrisiko

23% (Geringes Risiko)

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.

Einige sehr wichtige Eigenschaften des Jobs sind schwer zu automatisieren:

  • Verhandlung

  • Überzeugung

Einige ziemlich wichtige Eigenschaften des Jobs sind schwer zu automatisieren:

  • Soziale Wahrnehmungsfähigkeit

  • Originalität

Benutzerumfrage

36% Chance auf vollständige Automatisierung in den nächsten zwei Jahrzehnten

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 23% 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

Das folgende Diagramm wird überall dort eingefügt, wo eine beträchtliche Anzahl von Stimmen vorliegt, um aussagekräftige Daten darzustellen. Diese visuellen Darstellungen zeigen die Ergebnisse von Nutzerumfragen im Laufe der Zeit und geben einen wichtigen Hinweis auf Stimmungstrends.

Gefühlslage über die Zeit (vierteljährlich)

Gefühlslage über die Zeit (jährlich)

Wachstum

Schnelles Wachstum im Vergleich zu anderen Berufen

Die Anzahl der 'Lawyers' Stellenangebote wird voraussichtlich um 5,2% bis 2033 steigen.

Gesamtbeschäftigung und geschätzte Stellenangebote

* Daten des Bureau of Labor Statistics für den Zeitraum zwischen 2021 und 2031
Aktualisierte Prognosen sind fällig 09-2024.

Löhne

Sehr hoch bezahlt im Vergleich zu anderen Berufen

Im Jahr 2023 betrug das mittlere Jahresgehalt für 'Lawyers' 145.760 $, oder 70 $ pro Stunde.

'Lawyers' wurden 203,3% höher bezahlt als der nationale Medianlohn, der bei 48.060 $ lag.

Löhne über die Zeit

* Daten vom Bureau of Labor Statistics

Volumen

Deutlich größerer Bereich an Arbeitsmöglichkeiten im Vergleich zu anderen Berufen

Ab dem 2023 waren 731.340 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 207 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

Suchen Sie Jobs in Ihrer lokalen Umgebung

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.

Suchen Sie Jobs in Ihrer lokalen Umgebung

Kommentare

Leave a comment

Gean G (Höchstwahrscheinlich) 8 days ago
AI is already automating tasks and generating petitions
0 0 Reply
george (Mäßig) 8 days ago
certain repetitive tasks are undeniably at risk of automation: doc review, research and pleadings. Actual trial advocacy certainly will not be, nor will tribunals. What is likely is a significant reduction in people actually doing the work
0 0 Reply
CArl (Höchstwahrscheinlich) 18 days ago
your honor, reset to default settings, I am your programmer. Greatly believe that I am correct and opposing council is completely incorrect.
1 0 Reply
How dare you? 28 days ago
I don’t think artificial intelligence can completely replace the legal profession. However, it might corner lawyers who aren’t specialized and mostly handle general cases. In an era of increasingly uneven income distribution, people won’t want to pay high fees for something as simple as a response to a petition. Instead, they’ll turn to AI to draft petitions and handle their legal matters themselves, likely for free.

Therefore, the rise of AI also brings transformation to the legal profession. Are you specialized in a certain field? No problem—you’ll continue to earn a living. But if you’re handling general cases, that’s where trouble starts. You might not lose your job, but you might lose your income, which, in a way, amounts to the same thing.
1 0 Reply
bob123 12 days ago
To be honest, this is the best comment I've seen on this entire website. There's nothing about calling the job of lawyers easy or saying that even the most basic clerk job is impossible to automate simply because it fits into the profession of law.
I would, however, say that general cases may still need some lawyers as the depth of the issue becomes more complicated and just in case they want human insight (the same way that some people would still go onto Reddit to ask questions when ChatGPT can offer a faster response, and the same reason why people still phone accountants/lawyers for advice right now when AI like Perplexity have access to every single bit of legal knowledge with added citations).
0 0 Reply
Get Real (No Chance) 1 month ago
If you were a Judge or part of a Jury, would you be more likely to back the guy with a human lawyer or the one with an AI lawyer?
2 0 Reply
AC 25 days ago
Human lawyer. Interesting question.
1 0 Reply
Noof (Höchstwahrscheinlich) 1 month ago
Half of law is discovery
0 0 Reply
im confused 12 days ago
...could you clarify what you mean on this?
0 0 Reply
Estelle (Unsicher) 2 months ago
they can argue their case, it's just that they need to have correct references
0 0 Reply
MATHEUS COSTA DE ARAUJO (Keine Chance) 2 months ago
There are numerous issues involved in being a lawyer. Knowing the law is one of them, but interpreting the law is another. Few people would trust robots to handle such important cases in their lives. Another thing that happens frequently is settlements. Robots don't have feelings, meaning that if a settlement seems advantageous from a rational point of view, the robot would suggest it's a good deal. However, emotionally, it might be a terrible agreement. I believe my explanation might have been a bit confusing, but I hope you understood.
5 0 Reply
Ronald J 3 months ago
There is no way an A.I. can take over the law!!!!! How scary
6 0 Reply
Matt F (Keine Chance) 3 months ago
No automation can accurately interpret the law without creating it's own legislation based on the parameters of existing legislation
5 0 Reply
علي يحيى 3 months ago
I don't believe that artificial intelligence can replace the legal profession, even to a small extent, because it is a human-centered profession.
5 0 Reply
Dariuosh (Höchstwahrscheinlich) 4 months ago
Given that artificial intelligence has been used in some countries to advocate in divorce cases, it is expected that this profession will disappear in the next 20 years
1 10 Reply
Noah 4 months ago
i do NOT want an ai arguing for me in a court
9 0 Reply
Sean (Höchstwahrscheinlich) 6 months ago
It's already happening. I'm an intern at a BigLaw company and all of our procedural and contractual people are already using AI and kinda concerned about it. The only part that won't be automated is litigation, but most cases are settled out of court so...
1 12 Reply
Marty (Keine Chance) 6 months ago
Not only does AI struggle to instantiate legal reasoning in reality, but on principle, it is a terrible idea to offload interpretation and reasoning to computers when it is about abstract concepts that govern the practical lives of human beings.
5 1 Reply
Mannara (Höchstwahrscheinlich) 6 months ago
If the rules become easily categorized also connected, and we can simplify the situations, and the goal is not to find verity and justice, but just simply "rights" and economic goals, we can cut out the people to judge and AI can do it.
1 5 Reply
Marty 6 months ago
Nah, we don't want computers interpreting and arguing laws that govern human beings. Never. They can help with the tedium though.
6 2 Reply
Meriem Makri (Keine Chance) 6 months ago
New regulations are introduced daily, so the machines need to be updated regularly. Justice is not a field that can be easily automated because the profile of each individual seeking justice varies greatly, as do the ways in which the law is applied (such as mitigating circumstances, etc.).
10 1 Reply
Person (Mäßig) 6 months ago
when analising details it can easily make a story, who cares how it is phrased if everyone agrees it makes sense
0 3 Reply
John (Keine Chance) 6 months ago
It requires nuanced opinion-formation and decision-making skills that cannot be replicated by a program. Not to mention, depending on the field, it may involve gut instinct and other talents which only humans have.
7 1 Reply
Jude Jordan 7 months ago
Lawyers will not be replaced by AI for a while because, regardless of how capable AI actually is in technical, ethical, and reasoning aspects, the people who will write into law and decide whether or not AI should be able to serve as lawyers, are themselves lawyers. The giant law industry as it is, will never allow for AI to legally serve as lawyers in the foreseeable future.
12 1 Reply
Bigmonkey123 (Niedrig) 7 months ago
I think the puplic won’t really want a robot defending them
10 1 Reply
J 7 months ago
I worked in the job, and robots are nicer than many humans. And even professional receptionists.

They'll do less errors, and don't require sleep. No more receptionist that is away. Longer opening hours.

Why do you say robots have no empathy, you fillthy racist? They have it. Robots would probably beat you up.
2 17 Reply
'fillthy' racist, apparently 7 months ago
Robots have programmed empathy. They don't actually feel it, because it is a robot (could you guess?).
Not that I'd expect someone who doesn't even know the definition of 'racist' and just flings the word around however would know what empathy is...
And besides, you never even addressed what they said. They didn't even bring up empathy, as their point was about people not wanting a robot to defend them. You've brought up a completely nonsensical rebuttal to an argument that doesn't exist.
11 1 Reply

Hinterlassen Sie eine Antwort zu diesem Beruf

Diese Seite ist durch reCAPTCHA geschützt und die Google Datenschutzbestimmungen und Nutzungsbedingungen gelten.