Lawyer Salary

Is it just me or has something really gone wrong with the new admissions process?

Why do we have to file TWICE - once for NP and once for A/S? Why couldn't they just left the pathway to A/S available to qualified persons straight away? Isn't that another $510.40 charged to firms for no good reason (esp. when it could have gone to our TC pay)!!!

Also why in the world are we being asked to submit certificates of good character once at the NP stage and again at the A/S stage? Do I now have to bother four friends instead of two?

SILE and LSS!!! Fix this pls....

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Is it just me or has something really gone wrong with the new admissions process?

Why do we have to file TWICE - once for NP and once for A/S? Why couldn't they just left the pathway to A/S available to qualified persons straight away? Isn't that another $510.40 charged to firms for no good reason (esp. when it could have gone to our TC pay)!!!

Also why in the world are we being asked to submit certificates of good character once at the NP stage and again at the A/S stage? Do I now have to bother four friends instead of two?

SILE and LSS!!! Fix this pls....

Bro/sis I'm already serving 14 days of reservist + firm closures + had a 3 day MC so i dont think ill have a rest day in the year. Likely to serve additional days beyond the 365 days as well .

Pestered SILE for 2 months alr why reservist is counted in the 18 days. No avail.

Good luck with changing that as well.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Bro/sis I'm already serving 14 days of reservist + firm closures + had a 3 day MC so i dont think ill have a rest day in the year. Likely to serve additional days beyond the 365 days as well .

Pestered SILE for 2 months alr why reservist is counted in the 18 days. No avail.

Good luck with changing that as well.

My condolences on your plight - that is very very unlucky. For insight into whether it is effective at all, did you try asking your firm to help in your appeal to your unit?

Honestly, I don't expect any changes this round for us (happy to be surprised though), but I'm hoping that the parties involved take into account our complaints to improve things for the future batches (and maybe fire a few of the decision-makers for making what appears to be a pig's breakfast of the entire process).

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Is it just me or has something really gone wrong with the new admissions process?

Why do we have to file TWICE - once for NP and once for A/S? Why couldn't they just left the pathway to A/S available to qualified persons straight away? Isn't that another $510.40 charged to firms for no good reason (esp. when it could have gone to our TC pay)!!!

Also why in the world are we being asked to submit certificates of good character once at the NP stage and again at the A/S stage? Do I now have to bother four friends instead of two?

SILE and LSS!!! Fix this pls....

The way I see it, having two rounds of certification makes sense. You’re called as a lawyer without PC, and then with PC. The alternative you’re suggesting seems to imply the issuance of PC without the need to apply to the courts?

I just learned that a newly minted JP in Big4 won't even make $20k monthly. That's after 7 years in practice or so... Why is the $ so low here?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

The way I see it, having two rounds of certification makes sense. You’re called as a lawyer without PC, and then with PC. The alternative you’re suggesting seems to imply the issuance of PC without the need to apply to the courts?

I see it the other way around. You start as a qualified person. Then as a qualified person you should be able choose to either: (a) apply to the courts to be a lawyer non-practitioner; or (b) apply to the courts to be a lawyer (practitioner). The caveat for (b) obviously being that you have to serve a 12-month PTP before you apply.

This way, you just have to apply once (either for Lawyer (NP) or Lawyer (A/S)) and you also don't have to file duplicate papers like the good character certs.

I don't understand why the decision-makers didn't decide to design the system to work this way. The costs savings alone of candidates needing to only make one application should have been rather attractive. 🤨

Originally Posted by Unregistered

The way I see it, having two rounds of certification makes sense. You’re called as a lawyer without PC, and then with PC. The alternative you’re suggesting seems to imply the issuance of PC without the need to apply to the courts?

the very notion of admitting a non-practising lawyer (who does not have a right to practice) is a contradiction in terms, not to mention a hollow exercise.

a lawyer who does not have a right to practise is not a lawyer in any real sense of the word.

this regime sounds exactly like what one would expect policymakers sit around in a room and shuffled words on paper.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

the very notion of admitting a non-practising lawyer (who does not have a right to practice) is a contradiction in terms, not to mention a hollow exercise.

a lawyer who does not have a right to practise is not a lawyer in any real sense of the word.

this regime sounds exactly like what one would expect policymakers sit around in a room and shuffled words on paper.

In-house counsels don’t have active PCs bro, relax lol.

Isn’t one of the reason for all qualified person who has passed Part B to become NP lawyers to push for more career options to cater for those that don’t wanna become practising lawyers?

Administratively, it makes more sense to have all of the qualified persons (mind you, this just means passing law school for local grads) who has passed Part B to just get called to the bar as NP lawyers? As opposed to having these fresh grads decide which path to take straight out of law school (most of which don’t have real working experience).

Originally Posted by Unregistered

In-house counsels don’t have active PCs bro, relax lol.

Isn’t one of the reason for all qualified person who has passed Part B to become NP lawyers to push for more career options to cater for those that don’t wanna become practising lawyers?

Administratively, it makes more sense to have all of the qualified persons (mind you, this just means passing law school for local grads) who has passed Part B to just get called to the bar as NP lawyers? As opposed to having these fresh grads decide which path to take straight out of law school (most of which don’t have real working experience).

Inhouse counsel analogy not entirely on point. These guys had practised before (even if just as a trainee), and do have the right to practice anytime again on fairly short notice with reactivation of PC (a mere administrative step)

A lawyer (NP) never had the right to practice and cannot (re)acquire the right to practice on short notice without doing substantive steps (the completion of a practice training requirement).

A meaningful difference between a "law graduate" and "lawyer" surely can't hinge on the completion of a few Part B subjects.

The better solution imo to diversify career options for law grads should be to allow law grads to satisfy the practice training requirement via inhouse seats. This is what they do in the UK. Not confer empty titles like NPL which the hiring market can see through in a second.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I just learned that a newly minted JP in Big4 won't even make $20k monthly. That's after 7 years in practice or so... Why is the $ so low here?

Are u sure??? Is that base pay or including bonus