 |
|

16-01-2025, 12:18 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Why am I not surprised that WongP play this kind of stunt and portray themselves as cheapo?! Literally treating their trainees like cheap labour. You are better off joining other big 4 cos WongP don’t give a damn to match the trainee honorarium to market rate or rather they see themselves giving trainees at “market rate” but in actual fact it is not. Anyway, retention rate at WongP is not high, probably 80%.. So better don’t take the risk to join this firm!
|
I disagree. It’s not like they aren’t matching the market. Just that they are protecting their interest from POV of the firm to clawback the additional pay from trainees that leaves the firm.
Not the best show of class from a big4, but I don’t think it’s fair to insinuate that they don’t care about trainees or they aren’t matching the market as a b4. And I doubt clawbacks are unique to WP.
I think of it as a boyfriend that asks for the gifts back from the girlfriend after the break up. Sure a dick move, but can’t say he didn’t do his part.
|

16-01-2025, 01:26 PM
|
|
Yall adding zero value to the firm, but instead taking up time and resources to train.
The starting point already a net negative. On top of that, still have the gall to kpkb like yall god's gift to the legal profession about low trainee pay
Bringing back the good old days when yall had to pay somebody to train your sorry a*sses instead is the kindest solution I can think of
|

16-01-2025, 02:13 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Yall adding zero value to the firm, but instead taking up time and resources to train.
The starting point already a net negative. On top of that, still have the gall to kpkb like yall god's gift to the legal profession about low trainee pay
Bringing back the good old days when yall had to pay somebody to train your sorry a*sses instead is the kindest solution I can think of
|
Sounds like a Chinatown firm sole practitioner who no longer can afford trainees to vet his error-filled submissions.
|

16-01-2025, 02:31 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Yall adding zero value to the firm, but instead taking up time and resources to train.
The starting point already a net negative. On top of that, still have the gall to kpkb like yall god's gift to the legal profession about low trainee pay
Bringing back the good old days when yall had to pay somebody to train your sorry a*sses instead is the kindest solution I can think of
|
You're free to publicise this generous offer to train people in return for payment on whichever platform you choose. That'll show the entitled batch of law grads. Why rant on an anonymous forum?
|

16-01-2025, 02:45 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Sounds like a Chinatown firm sole practitioner who no longer can afford trainees to vet his error-filled submissions.
|
The B4 are paying you ~4k as a trainee to vet the partner's subs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
You're free to publicise this generous offer to train people in return for payment on whichever platform you choose. That'll show the entitled batch of law grads. Why rant on an anonymous forum?
|
For the same reasons you lot are ranting here. Asked and answered. It's not the clever gotcha you think it is. Why don't you put your position on LinkedIn, link the post here, and we take it from there?
|

16-01-2025, 03:19 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
The B4 are paying you ~4k as a trainee to vet the partner's subs?
For the same reasons you lot are ranting here. Asked and answered. It's not the clever gotcha you think it is. Why don't you put your position on LinkedIn, link the post here, and we take it from there?
|
It's a salary forum so law grads are discussing the offers they've gotten for their TC and whether it's fair market. You're offering to train in return for payment and expecting to be consoled for your inability to sustain a business without taking payment from trainees? Are you running a law firm or a training company?
|

16-01-2025, 04:57 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
It's a salary forum so law grads are discussing the offers they've gotten for their TC and whether it's fair market. You're offering to train in return for payment and expecting to be consoled for your inability to sustain a business without taking payment from trainees? Are you running a law firm or a training company?
|
I don't need to rely on trainees to run my business, and I don't know where you got that point from.
From your dichotomy, I run a law firm, so I must eat a loss when taking on trainees, and on top of that also silently eat criticism that we're still not paying them enough. "Market rate" is apparently strictly assessed by what other firms are paying and not the real value brought to the table by the trainee.
Let's get the lawsoc to have us register under the Charities Act instead, I will uncritically accept everything you said then
|

16-01-2025, 05:42 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
I don't need to rely on trainees to run my business, and I don't know where you got that point from.
From your dichotomy, I run a law firm, so I must eat a loss when taking on trainees, and on top of that also silently eat criticism that we're still not paying them enough. "Market rate" is apparently strictly assessed by what other firms are paying and not the real value brought to the table by the trainee.
Let's get the lawsoc to have us register under the Charities Act instead, I will uncritically accept everything you said then
|
Must be setia boss... relax uncle. We get it.
|
 |
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» 30 Recent Threads |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|