Uh. As you said, only some get the list. The exceptions prove the rule lul. Most of the consistent FCH don't care enough. Otherwise you should see the list full of FCH. It isn't.

To add on to this, by the time one does part B, one will already have TC. There is really no incentive to use Part B list for TC purposes. Retention also unlikely, since firm will already see you work half a year as well. Part B list should be a minor factor in retention as such.

Aiyo. This forum discussion on part b like small kids fighting for toys.
If u get Commendation list good la. Give you, you take lor.
With you for life.
If u don’t get, then get on with life

Just explain to you about relevance of part b. Since a lot of people talking about this.
I believe interested people will be the part b students.

1. Is a distinction in part b prestigious?
Ans: Yes it is. As said by course facilitators, pass is good enough. A person who can distinguish himself/herself with distinction means the body of work is outstanding as compared to his/her equally competent peers.
2. What is the purpose of part b?
Ans: It is a gatekeeper exam. Meaning it is the stage where you are judged by practitioners and not academics (unlike uni) whether you are fit to practice law in Sg.
If such practitioners who have 20 years exp adjudged you as not competent meaning fail, it means you have failed to meet the standard required to practice law.
Conversely, a part b distinction given by these practitioners means you have truly distinguished yourself.
3. If everyone is copying other ppl’s notes etc as claimed by one poster, then how valuable is a distinction?
Ans: like you said, if everyone has the same notes, then of course everyone will pass since everyone is producing the same answers. Then the people who can get distinctions are truly smart and good because they would have to go above and beyond in order to get the coveted distinction. Meaning they are smart. Whether you like it or not.
4. We have different unis with diff standards. How do you determine which grads are better?
Ans: Part B. Part B is the control mechanism to facilitate this process.
5. Someone said the fact that not many JLCs get dist means it is an irrelevant exam. How true is this?
Ans: Not true. There are JLCs/DPPs with distinction in the part b exams. Given that they have the same amount of caseload as the other JLCs and DPPs, and they can still get dist as compared to their agc peers, it means they are truly good and above and beyond their peers in agc.

What about the earlier poster's view on the commendation list being only a number of distinctions rather than aggregate performance? He/She/Apache helicopter does make a good point that the commendation list is not the same as a FCH etc, because it is only based on number of dists

Actly are you even a part b student who has completed the exams?
If you do attend the classes and the revision lectures, it will be clear to you that part b is an exam marked by senior practitioners for the sole purpose of judging whether you are fit for legal practice. Not whether you are good academically.
The LLB degree judges whether you are good at grasping legal concepts in an academic setting.
The Part B exams determine whether you are fit for legal practice, i.e. understand the concepts required of legal practice.

A first class in LLB + Commendation list on part b means you are ready for practice (and can perform above most individuals) and on top of that you have a solid grounding in law.

A Commendation list on its own with a 2:2 LLB means your legal foundation is not strong but you are able to quickly pick up legal concepts for the purpose of practice. In other words, you have better practical knowledge for practice of law. Not the study of law.

LLB and Part B test different skills. One is more academic, the other is more practice focus.
It should be obvious if you have attended the part b intro lectures.

Stop bickering kids. Let a helpful senior sum it up for you.

Good degree from a good uni + part b commendation : you're all set for legal practice
Good degree from crap uni + no part b commendation: you're all set for legal practice
Crap degree from good uni + part b commendation: you're all set for legal practice
Crap degree from crap uni + no part b commendation: you're all set for legal practice

Notice the difference? Good. Now stop being little b itches and let's get back to salaries.

Love this!!!

Lmao thanks for this. The age of the forum users really shows

Associate looking to jump to another assignment.
Any good legal recruiters to recommend?
Been talking to a few previously but no news from them.
Heard everyone have collected their bonuses and a mass exodus is eminent.

Anybody else at the opening address by CJ menon on monday? Will the new "legal technician" role be staffed by fts or even the new suss law school?
Overall I think its positive news as we'll be getting additional support.

Take it with sal

Take it with a lot of salt. Remember that it's also his colleagues who tried to propose scaled fees which didn't went well. A bit too activist imo

s://.singaporelawwatch.sg/Headlines/Pathway-to-world-access Thoughts on this guy? Heard assocs dislike working with him

What is the difference between mid size and big four?

Is it true that once you are in mid size firm you cannot move to big four?

never heard of him

for all his comments about chinese deals in sg, he's clearly not working in the right firms lol

黔驴技穷

Well right firms or not, you must admit that a non European, and a chink no less, being hired by Gide loyrette is pretty darn impressive.

lawyer's salary for middle sized firms?
 

Hi,

Does anyone know what the qualifying salary for new associates are in middle sized firms e.g. Eversheds Harry Elias and Tan Rajah & Cheah, and how these may compare to qualifying salaries for associates of the big 4?

Thanks!

Eversheds Harry Elias has aligned the Singapore payscales with our UK counterparts. NQ associates now start on SGD8k.

Do you mind sharing where this information is from? I thought their NQs start at SGD5k, last I heard.

Cool, except that SGD 8k works out to GBP 54k per annum, which is most definitely NOT what Eversheds pays its NQs in London. Its more like GBP 72k p/a. Remember they're a silver circle firm

But I'm all for paying associates more. Lawyers are seriously underpaid overworked and exploited in Singapore

Anybody knows why Davinder Singh left drew? Is it worth it joining his new firm? Will the pay be highest in the SG market?

Agree with you.$ 8,000 is actually quite little for an international firm. Plus the amount of work and hours, Singapore law firms salary is way behind hk and uk

Except that you should also factor in the much higher taxes (30-40%) NQs in London will be subject to, and the expensive rent in London. Hence an associate paid 8k here may be better off than an associate paid 70+k GBP in London.

More importantly, it's doubtful that HE is paying NQs $8k/month here. The only way that's conceivable is if they recruit the trainee straight into the Eversheds side (rather than the HE side), which is still very unlikely.

In any, case the Big Four, TSMP, O&B have all dropped starting salaries to <$7k/month. Doesn't make sense now for them to increase salaries.

Probably retirement. Many law firms have partnership agreements that end when a partner is 60+. If the older generation of leaders don't leave, the younger generation cannot move up and may be tempted with offers elsewhere, which is bad for a firm's succession.

Agree with this but would be nice to have someone from Eversheds-HE confirming whether NQ salary has actually been raised to match international standards. If true, this could precipitate a huge shift in attitude towards JLVs/FLAs, which are currently seen as a waste of time unless you get hired into the international side.

Does anyone know what's the NQ salary at Simmons & Simmons JWS? Would it be closer to Baker McKenzie or closer to Hogan Lovells Lee & Lee? Thanks

Let me guess.. You must still be a law student

There's no such thing as Hogan lovells Lee & Lee

Just a reminder to everyone reading this forum at 1am to rest well and take care of yourselves! Even Cravath pay won't make up for poor health.

Hah, not sure if you're being ironic or genuine. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say thanks. Practicing law really is about moderation - and no salary is worth the bad health problems down the road.

Anyone can comment on joining nus/smu law as a lecturer/Sheridan fellow?

What kind of grades they need? How is their pay like?

Nothing short of a first class (top 5%) unless you have solid references from established chairs.

When they pay you US$180k the day you qualify as a newly qualified lawyer, and this goes up 10-15k USD per year, reaching US$340k (basic) in your 7th year, 24h also can give to them.
Because 40 can reach partnership, and u earn $2-3M a year

I see. But how is the pay like?

Are they really good at the law or are they just good at playing fancy writing ah? Is it a good idea to join academia without some pqe?

Haha bro it's not as rosy as you think... most people can't stand the crazy lifestyle and drop out to go inhouse after spending just a few years in biglaw.

From my understanding, to be able to become a law academic (lecturer or assistant prof) with no Pqe means you have to be really really good (beyond good like Oxbridge or references from established chairs).
Most of the time, most academics have some years of Pqe.

but then a lot of the sheridian fellows no PQE leh

Sheridan fellows are not lecturer or assistant prof lah.
They are training to be one, like a practice trainee is not an associate but merely training to be one. Same reasoning.

Partnership in a US law firm is insanely tough to get. Most people exit the ladder after year 8 without partnership, and go in-house or go to UK outfits as partners (where partners earn significantly less). Not a bed of roses.

It’s US$190k btw, 180 is outdated.