Lawyer Salary

Does anyone know what trainee/NQ pay at WithersKhattarWong is?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

NQ and PQE1 are 2 different things.

NQ is after mass call in Aug until Dec
In the next calendar yr Jan, you'll be 1 PQE.

6.5K for NQ, rising to 7.2K for 1 PQE.

How will this calculation change post- Part B overhaul? Cos the TC is one year, so mass call is somewhere in March. Does it mean NQ for 9 months and PQE 1 is only from the next calendar year?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Same tier as Morgan Lewis Stamford, Dentons Rodyk, Clyde & Co Classis, etc etc…. You get the gist

What about compared with HSF, NRF, Simmons & Simmons - which offers their sg trainees UK/dual qualification, or Ashurst - which puts their sg trainees through 2-year rotation also.

Thoughts on QWP opening an office in London?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Thoughts on QWP opening an office in London?

should send Joyce Khoo there. far away from the rest of us.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Thoughts on QWP opening an office in London?

They closed their HK office. Money losing ventures. Cant fight in Sg so they try hard to differentiate themselves. Just a fourth rate firm.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

How will this calculation change post- Part B overhaul? Cos the TC is one year, so mass call is somewhere in March. Does it mean NQ for 9 months and PQE 1 is only from the next calendar year?

So little thought behind the whole revamp it’s honestly ridiculous. So much for commenting on the degrading standards of the industry when this entirely debacle was put forward 5 years ago.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

should send Joyce Khoo there. far away from the rest of us.

what lmao, what did she do to you

Originally Posted by Unregistered

So little thought behind the whole revamp it’s honestly ridiculous. So much for commenting on the degrading standards of the industry when this entirely debacle was put forward 5 years ago.

I have serious doubts lengthening the TC period will improve the quality of practising lawyers as is hoped.

This is one of those initiatives that look good on committee papers, and you can spend hours writing pages of policy recommendations based on "extensive" overseas datapoints etc etc, but anybody who's spent even a week in a real law firm working environment will know that it will be ineffectual and totally divorced from reality.

All that will happen is that it gives law firm 6 additional months to exploit their trainees at low pay. And shift financial burden and imposes barriers to financially disadvantaged lawyers.

We do not have a quality problem of NQs.

What we have is a quality problem of old senior lawyers working in 1 to 5 man outfits that are unable to provide good mentorship and experiences to their trainees/juniors, because either their book of business have been declining over the years, or they've picked up numerous poor habits and work ethics, or both. A perusal of recent disciplinary cases largely dealing with senior lawyers in such solo/small practices, will attest to that. This is the quality problem that LawSoc / MinLaw should be addressing.

One of the advantages of this jurisdiction that makes it marginally tolerable to practice law is the relatively short period (0.5 years of bar + 0.5 years of TC) for professional qualification compared to say the UK or HK. The current status is OK considering how low the market payscales are.

Lengthening the TC period to 1 year will make law an even less attractive prospects to even semi-bright young people who have a plethora of other good and well-paying career options to consider.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I have serious doubts lengthening the TC period will improve the quality of practising lawyers as is hoped.

This is one of those initiatives that look good on committee papers, and you can spend hours writing pages of policy recommendations based on "extensive" overseas datapoints etc etc, but anybody who's spent even a week in a real law firm working environment will know that it will be ineffectual and totally divorced from reality.

All that will happen is that it gives law firm 6 additional months to exploit their trainees at low pay. And shift financial burden and imposes barriers to financially disadvantaged lawyers.

We do not have a quality problem of NQs.

What we have is a quality problem of old senior lawyers working in 1 to 5 man outfits that are unable to provide good mentorship and experiences to their trainees/juniors, because either their book of business have been declining over the years, or they've picked up numerous poor habits and work ethics, or both. A perusal of recent disciplinary cases largely dealing with senior lawyers in such solo/small practices, will attest to that. This is the quality problem that LawSoc / MinLaw should be addressing.

One of the advantages of this jurisdiction that makes it marginally tolerable to practice law is the relatively short period (0.5 years of bar + 0.5 years of TC) for professional qualification compared to say the UK or HK. The current status is OK considering how low the market payscales are.

Lengthening the TC period to 1 year will make law an even less attractive prospects to even semi-bright young people who have a plethora of other good and well-paying career options to consider.

Lol, what did you expect, during the opening of the legal year, our CJ said that WFH is causing ethical issue with young lawyers and creating more lawsoc disciplinary actions, when almost all of the people who underwent disciplinary action were old(er) lawyers.

IMO, this statement obviously comes from some echo chamber of old lawyers who aren't really in touch with the practice of law anymore.

The issue is that the old guard refuses to die out or adapt, when being a lawyer was so much easier during their time, and are unwilling to actually do anything that would alleviate the issues with the legal industry.