Lawyer Salary

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Whatever. This is sophistry at its finest. Nokia had complete monopoly over the mobile phone market by the early 2000. No one saw the competition from Apple and the iPhone.
Say all you want…

It isn't sophistry - it seems that way only because you're not a lawyer and will not understand the business of law unless you practice in it

In short, legal advice is a product that doesn't lend itself to offshoring to 3rd world jurisdictions well. Clients aren't paying for a commodity. They're paying for a bespoke product.

At the top end, the sophisticated corporate clients all want to engage a firm/advisor that looks and talks exactly like them, which is why big law firms emulate their clients so much.

You may ask, what about the offshoring processes like how the Big 4 accountancy firms have done it, e.g. EY's Global Delivery Services in India?

This isn't likely to happen in law because law is less process-driven, and much more advisory and relational-driven than audit or tax services or the other kinds of services that EY, KPMG, etc offer.

Sure, parts of the legal advisory "product" are process-driven and can be offshored/automated, but those components are not done by lawyers to begin with. It is those paralegal and auxiliary legal jobs that will be at risk, I will grant you that.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

It isn't sophistry - it seems that way only because you're not a lawyer and will not understand the business of law unless you practice in it

In short, legal advice is a product that doesn't lend itself to offshoring to 3rd world jurisdictions well. Clients aren't paying for a commodity. They're paying for a bespoke product.

At the top end, the sophisticated corporate clients all want to engage a firm/advisor that looks and talks exactly like them, which is why big law firms emulate their clients so much.

You may ask, what about the offshoring processes like how the Big 4 accountancy firms have done it, e.g. EY's Global Delivery Services in India?

This isn't likely to happen in law because law is less process-driven, and much more advisory and relational-driven than audit or tax services or the other kinds of services that EY, KPMG, etc offer.

Sure, parts of the legal advisory "product" are process-driven and can be offshored/automated, but those components are not done by lawyers to begin with. It is those paralegal and auxiliary legal jobs that will be at risk, I will grant you that.

I do not think OP said the legal profession will cease to exist as a result of automation and technology. He/she just said that there will be a need for lesser people in the law firms, as more and more things become automated.
There will always be partners and law firms around, just how many left in the firms rather than whether or not such firms will continue to exist.
In other words, only a select few will make the cut to become partners in firms as more and more companies rely on good in-house legal counsels.
You’re not wrong to say that the larger firms do emulate their clients, and that’s because the business of the firm and the company is so intertwined in a sense, but I don’t think that what the OP was addressing. It was more to do with automation/AI/technology which will lead to lesser need for manpower. Law is labour intensive (I think you will accept that premise) unless you’re in a firm where you can go home at 6pm everyday.
A lot of the hours spent in the firm (be it litigation or corporate), is churn work. Even legal advisory requires heavy research and understanding of the issues involved. A human person no matter how capable or experienced will eventually need time off to recharge and rest.
Rudimentary legal research tech tools (as what you/some other posters alluded to in this thread) will not be able to replace the need for human lawyers NOW. But this does not mean the tech will not progress… it will. And 5 years time legal tech will look very different from your contract express and what not

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I do not think OP said the legal profession will cease to exist as a result of automation and technology. He/she just said that there will be a need for lesser people in the law firms, as more and more things become automated.
There will always be partners and law firms around, just how many left in the firms rather than whether or not such firms will continue to exist.
In other words, only a select few will make the cut to become partners in firms as more and more companies rely on good in-house legal counsels.
You’re not wrong to say that the larger firms do emulate their clients, and that’s because the business of the firm and the company is so intertwined in a sense, but I don’t think that what the OP was addressing. It was more to do with automation/AI/technology which will lead to lesser need for manpower. Law is labour intensive (I think you will accept that premise) unless you’re in a firm where you can go home at 6pm everyday.
A lot of the hours spent in the firm (be it litigation or corporate), is churn work. Even legal advisory requires heavy research and understanding of the issues involved. A human person no matter how capable or experienced will eventually need time off to recharge and rest.
Rudimentary legal research tech tools (as what you/some other posters alluded to in this thread) will not be able to replace the need for human lawyers NOW. But this does not mean the tech will not progress… it will. And 5 years time legal tech will look very different from your contract express and what not

All the law tech talk now sounds like incredulous only because we can’t see how it will work out but it will work out. Imagine if you were a legal associate in the 1970s when there was no lawnet. And you go tell your senior partner, I tell you one day we will not be flipping the sg law reports in hardback. I think you’ll be scoffed and laughed at. Similar to many of the skeptical responses on this forum.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

All the law tech talk now sounds like incredulous only because we can’t see how it will work out but it will work out. Imagine if you were a legal associate in the 1970s when there was no lawnet. And you go tell your senior partner, I tell you one day we will not be flipping the sg law reports in hardback. I think you’ll be scoffed and laughed at. Similar to many of the skeptical responses on this forum.

"last time got small change means now got big change"

solid argument la counsel, i wont tax ur bill

Originally Posted by Unregistered

"last time got small change means now got big change"

solid argument la counsel, i wont tax ur bill

Unless you’re in Baker, DLA or Dentons, you are not at the forefront and you have no idea how things will pan out.
The three top law firm brands in the world invest heavily in tech because they know where things are heading towards.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Unless you’re in Baker, DLA or Dentons, you are not at the forefront and you have no idea how things will pan out.
The three top law firm brands in the world invest heavily in tech because they know where things are heading towards.

LOL Hahahahahaha

NandaKumarr team in Baker good to join?

Good pls join. Market leading salaries and top tier work

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Unless you’re in Baker, DLA or Dentons, you are not at the forefront and you have no idea how things will pan out.
The three top law firm brands in the world invest heavily in tech because they know where things are heading towards.

Weird flex but ok

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Unless you’re in Baker, DLA or Dentons, you are not at the forefront and you have no idea how things will pan out.
The three top law firm brands in the world invest heavily in tech because they know where things are heading towards.

hahah guys come here for free comedy show