Lawyer Salary

Originally Posted by Unregistered

i wonder if the associates in the more prestigious teams get paid better in terms of monthly salary. for example the assocs in R&T's appeals and issues team

Associates pay would be across the board but bonuses would differ from team to team.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Associates pay would be across the board but bonuses would differ from team to team.

RnT not frontloaded?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I oso graduated from Harvard summer school for botany during my school term at NUS where I didn't get a first. I Havard grad like Tyra Banks and Donald Trump. Now can tell clients.

#setforlife #merit

Thanks for your well wishes, appreciate it. You seem like a nice person, I shall stop asking whether your IQ objectively represents your background since it raises questions about how imaginary OP got into Harvard.

To be fair, I think the OP was talking about Harvard LLMs.
If you are a competent lawyer/student, all you needed to do was google:
“Harvard LLM Singapore”. And you can see how many of them are at the top of the legal profession. Especially the firm in tower 1 MBFC. There’s only one Harvard LLM there

Originally Posted by Unregistered

To be fair, I think the OP was talking about Harvard LLMs.
If you are a competent lawyer/student, all you needed to do was google:
“Harvard LLM Singapore”. And you can see how many of them are at the top of the legal profession. Especially the firm in tower 1 MBFC. There’s only one Harvard LLM there

Lmao I can't imagine this discussion spilling over 3 pages. Any non-moron would have realised that original OP was trolling.

It does not even answer the preliminary argument of selection bias - you sought to bring this around in circles instead of answering the simple question of whether you truly understood the meaning of selection bias.

Your argument from authority in order to support your even weaker argument of selection bias is an absolute nonsense.

No one espoused any single person rising above the odds (which, by all means, is a commendable notion). In fact, this is exactly what OP eschewed by saying you have failed to cite fair examples. But we cannot use selective examples in an inquiry on general statistics. That is the whole point on selection bias.

We're talking in general. Sure, there are a lot of UK grads that do rise above the odds, but any meaningful discussion about statistics is and must necessarily be made at a level of abstraction, otherwise you're committing the very same fallacy that you accuse of.

Selection bias has to do with your choice of sampling and choosing the 'right' samples to buttress your point that generally UK graduates do well. However, a number of outliers cannot be a general position. They are the exception and not the rule.

This is precisely what you seek to do. By selecting a couple of commendable examples, you seek to interpose that into a rule.

If you don't see the point in the first place, I *doubt* OP is actually a real person, more like a forum troll trying to bring someone else in. Stop throwing shade at Harvard.

For every one UK person that succeeds, there are 5 NUS. That is the reality of Singapore legal practice. Do the math.

HOLY **** GUYS. WHO CARES.

Can we keep the discussion focused on salary / job prospects?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

RnT not frontloaded?

Can someone confirm this?

All the jobless students wanking over the prestige of your university and engaging in flame wars. Please. Just. Stop. You are not convincing anyone here.

which of the big 4 has the highest starting pay after A&G?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

All the jobless students wanking over the prestige of your university and engaging in flame wars. Please. Just. Stop. You are not convincing anyone here.

Ya i agree. Grow up lah trolls