Lawyer Salary

Should I leave Paul Seah team to join Wee Swee Teow?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Should I leave Paul Seah team to join Wee Swee Teow?

Hearsay R&T private client team better

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Hearsay R&T private client team better

Who is the lead partner? Jerald foo?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Honestly, numbers don’t lie. ROI is an indicator of whether it was worthwhile to pursue that route / option, seriously.

Next time you all buy house, you all also wanna know whether have capital again, and whether it’s worthwhile to service the interest on the mortgage against your rental yield.

Likewise, there are plenty of smart kids who scored 4-5As and did well in an arts course and joined the govt, banks, consultancies, etc.

So I’m just saying maybe the OP didn’t like law in the first place, and it’s just a pity for him, because he sounds v smart since he got a full scholarship overseas. Maybe if he had just done arts locally, he wouldn’t have suffered and in all likelihood would be drawing a better pay without doing what he perceives to be dreadful work.

That’s all!

Hello. In house lawyer here. When I got called to the bar sometime around 12-15 years ago (honest no one bothers to remember), I only worked in big4 for like 2 years before I went in house. Never regretted my decision.

Am drawing 30-35k (not going to disclose exact amount) as senior legal counsel right now for a MNC and I also started off with a lower salary around 4-5k ish after 2 years of private practice in big4.

In house is a decent alternative to practising and by no means is it considered a failure. I have time to spend with my wife, my kids and bring home enough bread to live comfortably.

Just FYI because I read your point on ROI but your opinion on how OP is a failure or not fillial to parents making them worry etc because he went in house is giving me a headache. The part about "not full fletched" also gave me aids.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Hello. In house lawyer here. When I got called to the bar sometime around 12-15 years ago (honest no one bothers to remember), I only worked in big4 for like 2 years before I went in house. Never regretted my decision.

Am drawing 30-35k (not going to disclose exact amount) as senior legal counsel right now for a MNC and I also started off with a lower salary around 4-5k ish after 2 years of private practice in big4.

In house is a decent alternative to practising and by no means is it considered a failure. I have time to spend with my wife, my kids and bring home enough bread to live comfortably.

Just FYI because I read your point on ROI but your opinion on how OP is a failure or not fillial to parents making them worry etc because he went in house is giving me a headache. The part about "not full fletched" also gave me aids.

Perhaps OP is not a parent yet and do not understand fully that parents usually do not judge their kids on ROI. It is just a modern parenting thing. People get agitated and defensive once you talk in terms of sucess or failure.

To my mind there are many different "tracks" out there for lawyers, none of them are superior to another. They all have their pitfalls and suit different types of people.

Private Practice - You get to hone the actual lawyering craft. Earn more if you make it and jobsecurity is more or less there. You get to be anal about drafting and be the quick fix expert in the cases you do. At the upper end though, private practice is a sales job and you have to either follow someone with many clients or earn or own clients. Otherwise, you lose value quickly because there are many bright SA who also mastered the basics of lawyering and cannot charge so much.

In house - this is a complicated field because every company is different and in different industries. There are some inhouse who are working their socks off while some have plenty of time to chill. Some stay long and earn big but increasingly there are also very junior inhouse roles akin to paprlegal. Reality is that as inhouse, you are a cost center and in most mncs you or even the GC do not have much say in things that matter because you do not bring in the bacon. Job progression and security are real concerns. The CEO has no much reason to promote you when he can find another more junior one outside. And many senior inhouse counsels struggle to find jobs when displaced. Partly is because of inhouse skill set is centred on contract management and company specific nuances. Many inhouse actually do not have unique value add or commercial insights even after working 10,15 years.

Legal Service - it is whole mammoth on its own and the immediate feeling is that you are so insignificant. Definitely a fair share of intellectual and cutting edge work but i think the day to day mundane will definitely get to you. You probably need to have passion in public interest and some political sense otherwise your commercial sense will get you nowhere in this area.

Gov Policy Making roles - many thinks this is same as Legal Service but it is not. Legal Service can send you into such roles as secondment though. Essentially such roles make changes to laws and regulations in specific areas and obviously law trained persons have a bit of an edge. Such roles are multi dissiplinary and experience here do make you more versatile since you can be inhouse, public policy roles, government relations role as well next time. Downside is that legal is just one of the many niche skills in this field. You have to prove yourself alongside the econs, accounting , and engineering grads. The sense is law grads have some advantages because good drafting and presentation is highly valued in public service. You also will have the legal and reg knowledge to help in the legis drafting. Another downside is poor pay package butnthe siliver lining is excellent job security and hey our top public servants are known to rake in v good pay ... if you make it up the ranks

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Hello. In house lawyer here. When I got called to the bar sometime around 12-15 years ago (honest no one bothers to remember), I only worked in big4 for like 2 years before I went in house. Never regretted my decision.

Am drawing 30-35k (not going to disclose exact amount) as senior legal counsel right now for a MNC and I also started off with a lower salary around 4-5k ish after 2 years of private practice in big4.

In house is a decent alternative to practising and by no means is it considered a failure. I have time to spend with my wife, my kids and bring home enough bread to live comfortably.

Just FYI because I read your point on ROI but your opinion on how OP is a failure or not fillial to parents making them worry etc because he went in house is giving me a headache. The part about "not full fletched" also gave me aids.

I see where you’re coming from, but your numbers already make my point.

You were called 15 years ago and already earning 4-5K. Say, you got a pay bump when you went in house, or even at the same pay - and this was 13 years ago.

The OP who went in house, just went in at 4+K - you see the issue now? He’s drawing the same pay or even lower compared to you 13 years ago.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Perhaps OP is not a parent yet and do not understand fully that parents usually do not judge their kids on ROI. It is just a modern parenting thing. People get agitated and defensive once you talk in terms of sucess or failure.

To my mind there are many different "tracks" out there for lawyers, none of them are superior to another. They all have their pitfalls and suit different types of people.

Private Practice - You get to hone the actual lawyering craft. Earn more if you make it and jobsecurity is more or less there. You get to be anal about drafting and be the quick fix expert in the cases you do. At the upper end though, private practice is a sales job and you have to either follow someone with many clients or earn or own clients. Otherwise, you lose value quickly because there are many bright SA who also mastered the basics of lawyering and cannot charge so much.

In house - this is a complicated field because every company is different and in different industries. There are some inhouse who are working their socks off while some have plenty of time to chill. Some stay long and earn big but increasingly there are also very junior inhouse roles akin to paprlegal. Reality is that as inhouse, you are a cost center and in most mncs you or even the GC do not have much say in things that matter because you do not bring in the bacon. Job progression and security are real concerns. The CEO has no much reason to promote you when he can find another more junior one outside. And many senior inhouse counsels struggle to find jobs when displaced. Partly is because of inhouse skill set is centred on contract management and company specific nuances. Many inhouse actually do not have unique value add or commercial insights even after working 10,15 years.

Legal Service - it is whole mammoth on its own and the immediate feeling is that you are so insignificant. Definitely a fair share of intellectual and cutting edge work but i think the day to day mundane will definitely get to you. You probably need to have passion in public interest and some political sense otherwise your commercial sense will get you nowhere in this area.

Gov Policy Making roles - many thinks this is same as Legal Service but it is not. Legal Service can send you into such roles as secondment though. Essentially such roles make changes to laws and regulations in specific areas and obviously law trained persons have a bit of an edge. Such roles are multi dissiplinary and experience here do make you more versatile since you can be inhouse, public policy roles, government relations role as well next time. Downside is that legal is just one of the many niche skills in this field. You have to prove yourself alongside the econs, accounting , and engineering grads. The sense is law grads have some advantages because good drafting and presentation is highly valued in public service. You also will have the legal and reg knowledge to help in the legis drafting. Another downside is poor pay package butnthe siliver lining is excellent job security and hey our top public servants are known to rake in v good pay ... if you make it up the ranks

What a roundabout way of saying that private practice lawyers are 'superior'.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

What a roundabout way of saying that private practice lawyers are 'superior'.

Not really, as the poster said, legit full fledged in house counsels who have proven their mettle at the workplace and coupled with a good PQE base at a good firm will do really well too

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I see where you’re coming from, but your numbers already make my point.

You were called 15 years ago and already earning 4-5K. Say, you got a pay bump when you went in house, or even at the same pay - and this was 13 years ago.

The OP who went in house, just went in at 4+K - you see the issue now? He’s drawing the same pay or even lower compared to you 13 years ago.

Whether OP is drawing the same pay as I was 13 years ago has nothing to do with whether he made a right or wrong decision to go in house.

The problem lies with the legal industry, because freshly called graduates in private practise also have the same pay from what my batch had 10-20 years ago.

The difference could also be from a multitude of reasons such as him working in house in a smaller company and thus the lower starting range. I was blessed and lucky to have been accepted into Big4 law firm then, moved into in house in a large company afterwards thus my higher starting salary. Also note that I moved into inhouse 2 years after practising. Unsure how many PQE OP has before he/she moved in house.

Comparison is the thief of joy but what I think is very basic and fundamental here that I find it surprising that I even have to explain is the fact that moving in house should never be considered as a failure.

Your argument is sort of deviating away from this which also puzzles me slightly as originally you mentioned that OP moving in house = failure and now all of a sudden you are saying that him/her drawing the same pay as I was 10-15 years ago suddenly makes him/her a failure.

I repeat: stagnant starting salary has nothing to do with the people and everything to do with the industry. If you consider this a failure, its the industry's failure and not OP's.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I see where you’re coming from, but your numbers already make my point.

You were called 15 years ago and already earning 4-5K. Say, you got a pay bump when you went in house, or even at the same pay - and this was 13 years ago.

The OP who went in house, just went in at 4+K - you see the issue now? He’s drawing the same pay or even lower compared to you 13 years ago.

sorry I have been reading this thread since the OP who moved in house made his first post and I got to ask because I am genuinely curious.. are you in the legal industry?

I am so lost on what you are trying to say.

First you mentioned ROI.. which well to be honest, is not really a factor in considering your life career. If it is something you enjoy doing, ROI should not be an issue and as a parent myself, I also would not care whether ROI is good if I need to send my children for higher education. As long as my children are happy and living an honest living, I will splurge 200-300k if necessary.

Second point you made is that OP is a failure for moving in house. Wrong. I do not even want to elaborate further. I think comments above have roasted you enough.

Third point you are making is that the salary from someone else 13-15 years ago is the same as OP now, thus making him/her a failure. Are you sure you really want to state this.. I feel like this is some desperation pov you came up with as an afterthought because you could not find a logical reasoning to back your previous statements (all of which are ridiculous imo). Starting salary has not changed much in the legal industry because the boomers in private practise are raking in all the dough and leaving little to no crumbs for the new generation. Believe me, I know, its coming from my batch and my seniors who have been in the industry for 20-30 years.

To OP who just moved in house, I salute you for making that post and congratulations on your new career trajectory. It takes a lot of courage for you to stand up to your boss like that and it was nothing less than heartwarming to see that you have a strong sense of fillial piety. As a parent I am proud of you if your parents have not told you that yet.