Lawyer Salary

Originally Posted by Unregistered

lmao so many words just to say know your place coolie

truly a lawyer

.

I kinda understand his sentiment.

Lately, there has been a lot of posts dissing SMU UK schools and UK 2.1s, as well as delisted schools. C'mon guys COVID is hitting our industry and still got time to diss here diss there. Everyone is in the same boat - please don't take your frustrations out on where someone got educated at.

Grades/school are an absolutely trash way to decide someone's individual aptitude, attitude and potential. It only serves as an indicator, and not conclusive proof. This is practice. Not SCHOOL. Stop worshipping false idols, start doing and improving yourself.

The legal profession is diverse enough to accomodate people from all backgrounds. If you studied locally, can you read / know English cases better than a UK graduate? (at the same level, aptitude, background, etc).

This is such a Year 1 Sem 1 mentality - the world has been 'unfair', I came from X school that is better than Y school. Oh I came from NUS so I must stand necessarily better prospects than the 'degree mills' (one common example used being KCL and I do not agree). The schools that are visited by droves of recruiters paying top dollar overseas are inferior to the local schools.

Surely there cannot be such a difference in value between what those firms saw, and what local firms see.

Those firms are about twice or three times as difficult to get your foot in the door. Ask anyone. Those who did apply and get jobs will tell you that the application process and interviews are really 3x the length and 2x the difficulty.

Case interview. Group interview. 1 to 1 with HR partner. IQ test. EQ test. Write 1000 words on why you want to join the MC. Demonstrate commercial awareness. Talk about a deal we did that interests you. Tell me about how the markets affect our practice. Don't forget, you're Asian and will always be.

If someone prefers to pay to take that gamble, who is to tell him or her and his or her parents that it is a bad investment? No one tells you or your parents how to spend money, so who are you to say that going there is bad for prospects and what you think is just a print job of a degree?

Sure, so what if X school is better. Does it make a difference to your prospects of getting a job that you want? Or is someone being from Y school that you think is a degree mill / less rigorous going to affect your prospects?

Does it challenge or offend your narrow worldview?

Think about it, and stop your childish comparisons. A bigoted view is absolutely not going to assist you in soothing your frustrations nor in legal practice.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

On to salaries,
Heard all the magic circles are cutting salaries even for SG office.

At 3PQE some of my peers are getting $25-30k SGD a month as an associate.
Sigh. No luck.

Bump... is there a way to earn $25-30k sgd in the white shoe?
Hoping to retire by 40. Sick of the daily grind.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Yes actually for the grads from NUS, in the past 4 years or so NUS has aligned it with UK.
Typically in UK, on average it’s like this.

Top 10% - FCH
Next 60% - 2:1
Next 25% - 2:2
Bottom 5% - 3rd/fail

What is a low vs high 2:1 from SG schs? Does it make a difference for TC applications?

i have a weak 2:2 from NUS.

earning 150k pa in an inhouse role.

am i a loser?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

On to salaries,
Heard all the magic circles are cutting salaries even for SG office.

At 3PQE some of my peers are getting $25-30k SGD a month as an associate.
Sigh. No luck.

Fake news. Only heard one MC doing that.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

i have a weak 2:2 from NUS.

earning 150k pa in an inhouse role.

am i a loser?

You're a loser because either (1) you're telling the truth but you feel the need to seek validation from an internet forum or (2) you're lying.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

.

Grades/school are an absolutely trash way to decide someone's individual aptitude, attitude and potential. It only serves as an indicator, and not conclusive proof. This is practice. Not SCHOOL. Stop worshipping false idols, start doing and improving yourself.

Lol this is bullshit. This is law, not economics or liberal arts. It's a professional degree, like medicine. How you perform in the classroom in many ways directly correlates to how you will perform in practice because analysing facts, recommending arguments, reading cases, this is stuff you do on a day-to-day basis in practice. So to say that grades are "absolutely trash" to decide someone's aptitude at law is stupid.

What most people seem to be salty about (and this is their opinion, not mine) is that a NUS or SMU 2:1 is far harder to obtain than a first class at those delisted schools, but somehow they are put on the same level by employers. IF that were true, I kinda get where they're coming from. It sucks to work harder for one year longer just to lose out because your school is more rigorous.

But to those people saying their 2:2s from NUS/SMU are better than 2:1s or even FCH from the delisted unis, I'm gonna be straight with you: My honest opinion is that people who gets 2:2s from the local schools are either complete morons, completely unsuited for the law, or did not try at ALL throughout their time in law school. In NUS, it was so absurdly easy to get Bs even without going for a single seminar. I have no idea what you were doing.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

.

Grades/school are an absolutely trash way to decide someone's individual aptitude, attitude and potential. It only serves as an indicator, and not conclusive proof. This is practice. Not SCHOOL. Stop worshipping false idols, start doing and improving yourself.

Lol this is bullshit. This is law, not economics or liberal arts. It's a professional degree, like medicine. How you perform in the classroom in many ways directly correlates to how you will perform in practice because analysing facts, recommending arguments, reading cases, this is stuff you do on a day-to-day basis in practice. So to say that grades are "absolutely trash" to decide someone's aptitude at law is stupid.

What most people seem to be salty about (and this is their opinion, not mine) is that a NUS or SMU 2:1 is far harder to obtain than a first class at those delisted schools, but somehow they are put on the same level by employers. IF that were true, I kinda get where they're coming from. It sucks to work harder for one year longer just to lose out because your school is more rigorous.

But to those people saying their 2:2s from NUS/SMU are better than 2:1s or even FCH from the delisted unis, I'm gonna be straight with you: My honest opinion is that people who gets 2:2s from the local schools are either complete morons, completely unsuited for the law, or did not try at ALL throughout their time in law school. In NUS, it was so absurdly easy to get Bs even without going for a single seminar. I really have no idea how you managed to get that

Originally Posted by Unregistered

.

Grades/school are an absolutely trash way to decide someone's individual aptitude, attitude and potential. It only serves as an indicator, and not conclusive proof. This is practice. Not SCHOOL. Stop worshipping false idols, start doing and improving yourself.

Lol this is bullshit. This is law, not economics or liberal arts. It's a professional degree, like medicine. How you perform in the classroom in many ways directly correlates to how you will perform in practice because analysing facts, recommending arguments, reading cases, this is stuff you do on a day-to-day basis in practice. So to say that grades are "absolutely trash" to decide someone's aptitude at law is stupid.

What most people seem to be salty about (and this is their opinion, not mine) is that a NUS or SMU 2:1 is far harder to obtain than a first class at those delisted schools, but somehow they are put on the same level by employers. IF that were true, I kinda get where they're coming from. It sucks to work harder for one year longer just to lose out because your school is more rigorous.

But.... to those people saying their 2:2s from NUS/SMU are better than 2:1s or even FCH from the delisted unis, I'm gonna be straight with you: My honest opinion is that people who gets 2:2s from the local schools are either complete morons, completely unsuited for the law, or did not try at ALL throughout their time in law school. In NUS, it was so absurdly easy to get Bs even without going for a single seminar. I really have no idea how you managed to get that

Originally Posted by Unregistered

.

Grades/school are an absolutely trash way to decide someone's individual aptitude, attitude and potential. It only serves as an indicator, and not conclusive proof. This is practice. Not SCHOOL. Stop worshipping false idols, start doing and improving yourself.

Lol this is bullshit. This is law, not economics or liberal arts. It's a professional degree, like medicine. How you perform in the classroom in many ways directly correlates to how you will perform in practice because analysing facts, recommending arguments, reading cases, this is stuff you do on a day-to-day basis in practice. So to say that grades are "absolutely trash" to decide someone's aptitude at law is stupid.

What most people seem to be salty about (their opinion, not mine) is that a NUS or SMU 2:1 is far harder to obtain than a first class at those delisted schools, but somehow they are put on the same level by employers. IF that were true, I kinda get where they're coming from. It sucks to work harder for one year longer just to lose out because your school is more rigorous.

But to those people saying their 2:2s from NUS/SMU are better than 2:1s or even FCH from the delisted unis, I'm gonna be straight with you: My honest opinion is that people who gets 2:2s from the local schools are either complete morons, completely unsuited for the law, or did not try at ALL throughout their time in law school. In NUS, it was so absurdly easy to get Bs even without going for a single seminar.