Originally Posted by Unregistered (Post 194691)

Agree except the part about the international firms in SG not taking SG-qualified associates is somewhat misleading and, for certain practice areas, dead wrong. They don't take local litigation lawyers because they simply dont do litigation. However for corporate work, in particular funds, banking & finance, corporate / M&A, there is a crazy hot market currently (and has been for a past few years) for locally-trained associates from the top local B4 teams. Just take a look at the career trajectories of the corp associates from the best B4 teams on linkedin and you will see what I mean (think A&G / WP banking or M&A, R&T restructuring). There is usually a discount process on your PQE when you join to match their UK pay scale (and some firms dont even discount), but if you want the top tier international firm rates, this is honestly the easier way to get there (I have seen some truly mediocre B4 associates land amazing jobs just because the market is so hot).

There are top firms which offer SG students a dual-qualified training route (like links and A&O, I don't think CC offers UK qualification anymore even though u do the 2 year training still, can anyone clarify?) but imo it's totally not worth it. You have to go do the conversion course for like a year (idk what it's called) while on some low allowance and it will take 3.5 - 4 years from graduation to finish UK + SG call. Whereas you can just do the normal SG call process then do the SQE after (just two exams now) - all while making full salary and building PQE.

Originally Posted by Unregistered (Post 194692)

Partially correct save for the fact that the reality is that some associates in these international do not stay past 1-2 years and a number quit practice to go in house thereafter.
Big 4 is insulated. Once you go to the international, you are not competing with your NUS schoolmate, but global lawyers with different outlook and competitiveness.
It’s a harsh world out there

Originally Posted by Unregistered (Post 194694)

You seem to be implying that they leave because they can't make it... but that's definitely not true. They leave because they have gotten that high private practice pay which they can then leverage to get a great inhouse package. That's what many people do.

Agree that B4 is insulated in the sense that everything is cleared by partners beforehand and you are not given real responsibility until quite a fair bit into your career, but it is also gruelling and gives you solid technical grounding. Once you have these two things you will usually excel in the intl firms (my fellow assocs who move into internationals always impress the partners with their work.. and they're not even trying nearly as hard as they had to in B4).

Originally Posted by Unregistered (Post 194699)

Re first para, you’re only partially correct.
You know. I know. That much needs to be said on an anonymous forum.
In B4, it’s like BMT, if you press on you can still make it.
It does not work the same way in international firms.
Technical skills are the basic expectation, rightfully so when they pay you $20k a month at 2PQE.
But… navigating the maze of politics which is more intense than big 4, and a whole range of other things that you are only privy to when you’re in such a firm, is not something your fch can help you with.

Originally Posted by Unregistered (Post 194689)

You should complete a LLM at Harvard, Cambridge or BCL at Oxford.
Thereafter, work in London or New York.

Originally Posted by Unregistered (Post 194714)

Is it worthwhile to jump to int?

I hear it's very political and a revolving door (some teams especially)

Originally Posted by Unregistered (Post 194727)

And local firms are diff?

Originally Posted by Unregistered (Post 194732)

Depends on luck lor - some teams are pretty ok and some aren't. This is the case int or local. Do your due diligence.