It bears mentioning that RHT, during the height of the glut, enthusiastically shared with BT about it's differentiated traineeship schemes, of which one involved not paying some trainees anything at all.

It seems to me, at that time, that management believed that taking in unpaid trainees was a noble contribution towards nurturing the next generation of the profession. Perhaps they still do. Said article is still accessible on their website:

://rhtlawasia.com/news/managing-partner-tan-chong-huat-shares-with-the-business-times-the-different-schemes-rhtlaw-taylor-wessing-adopts-in-taking-in-practice-trainees-following-the-glut-of-law-graduates-in-singapore/

In light of the recent chatter about the Great Resignation, accounts like the above exemplify the intractable differences in mindset between the younger generation of lawyers, and the older generation who think that new entrants must suffer or at the very least, be prepared to accept a great deal of shortchange (at personal cost) for the "privilege" of practising law.

Reactions from the UK at the time, given RHT's contemporaneous association with Taylor Wessing, were rather less enthusiastic:

s://rollonfriday.com/news-content/taylor-wessing-pays-trainees-nothing-singapore