Lawyer Salary

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I am a lawyer (Year 2), and I can say I am earning more than the range that is provided by Skydiver, even though I am in a local firm that is not in the big four and I did not get 2:1.

The key is to differentiate your skill set against other lawyers, and you will find yourself in an enviable position. I know it is easier said than done.

Wait a minute, better than 2:1 or lower than 2:1? that makes a lot of difference.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Wait a minute, better than 2:1 or lower than 2:1? that makes a lot of difference.

What a Douchebag! Lol

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Top: Ox Bridge
Higher: UCL, LSE, Kings, Durham
Mid: Warwick, Bristol, QM, Notts, Exeter
Lower: everything else.

These are all very rough generalisations. Truth to be told, there's not much difference amongst the OSUs, in terms of rigour or education quality. It has to do mainly with perceptions.

Don't get caught up with where your school is ranked (i'm assuming by your questions that you're a Singaporean UK law student). Focus on your degree classification and your CV. Most importantly, focus on laying the foundations to being a good lawyer. A few years into practice, a fancy foreign degree won't save you if you're inept.

King's College London?

People enter law in King's with BBB/B.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

King's College London?

People enter law in King's with BBB/B.

Public perception lah. King's is still regarded as one of the more prestigious golden triangle London unis.

Your typical HR and hiring partner isn't keeping a close watch on entry cutoffs for UK unis. And in the past, the few SGreans who went overseas for law in Kings were quite decent scorers. of course, admissions standards have dropped across all UK unis.
Public perception is everything. People still go "wah Oxford!" even though I'm pretty sure a significant number of law students in the local schools are on par calibre-wise.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I am a lawyer (Year 2), and I can say I am earning more than the range that is provided by Skydiver, even though I am in a local firm that is not in the big four and I did not get 2:1.

The key is to differentiate your skill set against other lawyers, and you will find yourself in an enviable position. I know it is easier said than done.

If you're a Year 2 lawyer, how do you know that your annual compensation will be above the range posted by Skydiver? That's something you'll know only at the end of the year when your bonus is declared. Local Big Fours tend to pay out a lot of the annual comp only at the end of the year.

Nevertheless, you seem to have a very good base salary if you're paid above the prevailing market rate. Good for you! As you've discovered, it's all about how much value you add to the firm. If you're an excellent workhorse who does well in a client facing role, your employer will treasure your contribution and remunerate you properly to ensure that he doesn't lose you to headhunters or poachers. The class of honours is irrelevant once you get a foot in.

To be honest, I don't really see why there is such a fuss about the shortage of training contracts for lawyers and how there may be a surplus of lawyers in singapore. The number of training contracts well exceed the number of local law graduates, and given that the employment of fresh nus & smu graduates stands at 100%, local grads are in a great position to be.

Need I remind people that law still has the highest pay across all degrees, and that the % of fresh grads employed straight out of graduation are still the highest amongst all other courses.

The burden of excess graduates will always lie on the people studying law overseas, as according to the law employment survey by the gov firms in sg always prefer sg grads to overseas. Overseas grad employment is currently at ard 70%, as compared to 100% for local grads.

Overseas grads simply find it impossible to find employment overseas as there is already a huge glut of lawyers in UK and in Australia.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

To be honest, I don't really see why there is such a fuss about the shortage of training contracts for lawyers and how there may be a surplus of lawyers in singapore. The number of training contracts well exceed the number of local law graduates, and given that the employment of fresh nus & smu graduates stands at 100%, local grads are in a great position to be.

Need I remind people that law still has the highest pay across all degrees, and that the % of fresh grads employed straight out of graduation are still the highest amongst all other courses.

The burden of excess graduates will always lie on the people studying law overseas, as according to the law employment survey by the gov firms in sg always prefer sg grads to overseas. Overseas grad employment is currently at ard 70%, as compared to 100% for local grads.

Overseas grads simply find it impossible to find employment overseas as there is already a huge glut of lawyers in UK and in Australia.

your post is full of nonsense. Dont shoot garbage out of your mouth about things that you dont know.

The number of training contracts may well have exceeded the number of law graduates, but that was probably 5 years ago. the reverse is happening now; definitely it has been in the last one to two years & it will probably remain so for the foreseeable future. its called a "SPIKE in overseas law graduates" for a reason.

employment of nus and smu grads, while great, is not at 100%. Don't believe the statistics that come out of MOE's Graduate Employment Survey as these are all self-reported. an unemployed graduate is far less inclined to return survey responses.

the large numbers of overseas grads are also squeezing local students. we can argue all day about whether law firms still favour local law grads over foreign ones, but the squeeze is very real.
we can also say that local law grads shouldn't be accorded preferential treatment when it comes to the job market. indeed they shouldn't, but why cap the number of places to read law locally so stringently (last i checked, law is still one of the hardest faculties to get into locally besides medicine & nus dentistry), and then let hundreds of grads to flood the market though paying for their degrees overseas? why not open more places locally, or even start law school in ntu, so that law is more accessible to students from lower income households rather than flooding the industry with those from higher-middle to upper income households who went overseas? the real shortage in the legal industry is for lawyers who don't come from privileged or comfortable backgrounds and who empathize with the needs of the common man!

finally pay is irrelevant to the question of training contracts. i'm sure many law grads would accept an industry-wide pay freeze or pay cut in return for meaningful employment and a chance for career development. well, at least the more mature ones who wouldn't drool over starting pay.

The salary and career progression for law graduates are still the best in the industry. There are dozens of engineers who will never hit 100k in their lives, yet law grads are able to achieve that in 1-3 years of employment. Given the payoff, anyone should pick law over any other subject if presented the choice.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

indeed they shouldn't, but why cap the number of places to read law locally so stringently (last i checked, law is still one of the hardest faculties to get into locally besides medicine & nus dentistry), and then let hundreds of grads to flood the market though paying for their degrees overseas? why not open more places locally, or even start law school in ntu, so that law is more accessible to students from lower income households rather than flooding the industry with those from higher-middle to upper income households who went overseas? the real shortage in the legal industry is for lawyers who don't come from privileged or comfortable backgrounds and who empathize with the needs of the common man!

this point seems to be more applicable to crim. i was in a liti team which does crim including pro bono ones but crim cases are only the minority. most are still commercial or civil liti ones.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Top: Ox Bridge
Higher: UCL, LSE, Kings, Durham
Mid: Warwick, Bristol, QM, Notts, Exeter
Lower: everything else.

I would trade QM for Durham. QM law has always been strong and they have a niche especially in IP law. All the London colleges should be in the Higher category.

Again, just personal perceptions.