Quote:
Originally Posted by markharris
All very valid points. Nah I’m not his friend, just a keyboard warrior but one that got quite shocked when I read the news. I do part time university admission counselling so it seemed analogous to that.
Your point about the implied circumvention of the democratic application process is true; but we all know people who have entered the industry using connections privately, at least this opens it up to everyone ? Plus there was an option to defer payment if they can’t afford. But ultimately you’re right it’s never a right thing to publicly insinuate corruption-like services.
Yes It was Milbank’s decision not the law soc, but that was a very predictable outcome from the law Soc’s POV when they used words like fox in sheep’s clothing - pre-charge accusations and libel ?
Yes moral of the story is if sounds bad it probably is - thanks for clarifying ! Stay safe !
|
like you i am a keyboard warrior and not his friend. While his idea is definitely objectionable, objectively, as a self declared right thinking member, I think Law Soc official statement (including Greg's harsh words) are rather uncalled for and arguably opportunistic.
I mean this forum is full of evidence of the harsh hours, bad culture etc perpetrated by law firm partners who are themselves exploiting juniors (perhaps less in your face). Law Soc's response thus far is to convene committees to review Tc etc and have a young lawyer sub com. End of the day, issue of exploitation is still widespread in the industry.