Lawyer Salary

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I see. So in practice, if my superior is conducting a matter and I strongly disagree with how the matter is being conducted (of course I would be able to back this up with good reasons in this hypothetical) I should make that clear to my superior, preferably in writing? Can I just refuse to work on a file then, if something like this happens and my superior goes 'I have way more experience than you and you're being dramatic/wrong'?

Do junior lawyers often disagree with their bosses in reality? Doesn't the power imbalance at play here mean that few people would be courageous enough to do so? Disagreeing with someone who may have a say over your prospects of promotion seems unwise. I suppose in reality people just leave the firm if they really don't like the culture there? Or is it the case that by the time you are actually counsel on a matter you have quite a few years of experience and the partners would actually be inclined to listen to you?

if one is going to be a junior assoc in a big firm (or any firm really), how does 'choosing your boss carefully' even work? surely no one will listen to you when you say sth like 'I've heard very good things about Boss B and would like the opportunity to work under B', aren't you just expected to do the work you are assigned?

-
The lawyers here are from reputable firms tho so it's quite surprising sth like this even happened. Hopefully it's an anomaly

Despite the bad press, there are ethical and principled partners out there (at least in litigation).

I really didn't understand the CA's comment about them being lawyers from "reputable firms" though.

Firms are reputable because they do high profile or sophisticated work, rake in good profits, which leads to a virtuous cycle of attracting and retaining the best talent who in turn attract more sophisticated clients

There is no correlation between ethics and whether the firm is top tier one or not.

McKinsey is a reputable management consulting firm. It doesn't make them naturally more ethical (as their conduct recent years has shown)

There may be bad eggs in high powered law firms just as there are in small one-man shops. It can't be implied that lawyers from non-top tier firms are assumed to be less ethical or more prone to misleading the Court

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I really didn't understand the CA's comment about them being lawyers from "reputable firms" though.

Firms are reputable because they do high profile or sophisticated work, rake in good profits, which leads to a virtuous cycle of attracting and retaining the best talent who in turn attract more sophisticated clients

There is no correlation between ethics and whether the firm is top tier one or not.

McKinsey is a reputable management consulting firm. It doesn't make them naturally more ethical (as their conduct recent years has shown)

There may be bad eggs in high powered law firms just as there are in small one-man shops. It can't be implied that lawyers from non-top tier firms are assumed to be less ethical or more prone to misleading the Court

agree.

unfortunately, it's just like how sg ppl like to judge what school and uni you went to.

i rmbr a hearing where one party was represented by Firm A, who had taken over from Firm B (a supposedly 'reputable firm'). Firm B didn't do some work properly or it appeared that they didn't advise accurately, something like that. IIRC the judge basically said something to the effect of he's sure Firm B wouldn't have done such a thing.

how often are good days (e.g. Leave office at 12 midnight) for M&A associates?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Despite the bad press, there are ethical and principled partners out there (at least in litigation).

Litigation is where the most PCR infringements occur.

Not corporate. How many ethics cases involve litigation lawyers

[Laui]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

how often are good days (e.g. Leave office at 12 midnight) for M&A associates?

Depends on the firm and which team you’re in. If your partner is a rainmaker, those days will be exceedingly rare.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Litigation is where the most PCR infringements occur.

Not corporate. How many ethics cases involve litigation lawyers

That's because corporate lawyers are not really lawyers. Standard stuff day in day out.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Litigation is where the most PCR infringements occur.

Not corporate. How many ethics cases involve litigation lawyers

i imagine it's because a lot of rules of conduct are addressed at the relationship between practitioners and the court.

i don't mean to defend any particular practice area but i think without a neutral 3rd party like the court overseeing the matter (viz. litigation), dubious corporate practices can sometimes go undetected e.g. false witnessing of signatures, backdating of contracts (for an illegal purpose) etc.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

i imagine it's because a lot of rules of conduct are addressed at the relationship between practitioners and the court.

i don't mean to defend any particular practice area but i think without a neutral 3rd party like the court overseeing the matter (viz. litigation), dubious corporate practices can sometimes go undetected e.g. false witnessing of signatures, backdating of contracts (for an illegal purpose) etc.

Is it because non liti areas like corp banking n non liti IP can have these ceca equivalents unlike liti cannot have cecas

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Is it because non liti areas like corp banking n non liti IP can have these ceca equivalents unlike liti cannot have cecas

Is ceca good?

I heard their quality of work is excellent
Give us local a run for our money 💸