Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Hi I'm a new voice to this conversation. Would just like to point out that regardless of the truth of this particular situation, current law students shouldn't let their guard down. Most newspaper articles have pointed to a glut of Lawyers. Yet someone is suggesting the opposite here, that anyone from a local law school will 100% have no problem getting a TC even if they have a poor second lower or non-cum-Laude. This is effectively a suggestion that there is no glut of Lawyers, and that times are still the same as 5 years ago when any local law student could get a TC easily.
The SMU year 4 situation may or may not be true. Regardless, it is not indicative of current market conditions. Students shouldn't have the mentality that "oh as Long as I am a local student I will confirm 100% get a TC no matter how poorly I perform in school". This is definitely false, and merely puts pressure on the many local students who are either unable to get a TC, or have decided not to apply because they think they can't get a TC anyway. |
I'm the poster you quoted. In no way did I intend to suggest that conditions now are the same as 5 years ago and I apologise if that seemed to be the case. My seniors (2-3 batches above, before the glut) could secure
TCs very easily, with even non-cum laudes getting places in the big 4. Students of the same standard now can only realistically aim for places at small firms, and must work doubly hard to even stand a chance against the hundreds (literally!) of students from other schools. So while most of my batchmates do have
TCs, they probably had a lot less leeway in choosing in which firm to join (most of us grab the first thing that comes along).