 |
|
29-08-2018, 12:33 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 36
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
True. I think there is only one exception - Clifford Chance Cavenagh Law tie up where all lawyers are paid on the international scale (starting salary 12k)
|
Cavenagh is very different. Cavenagh was not a pre-existing local firm which CC merged with. Cavenagh is a creation of CC, established from scratch and staffed with lateral hires - Big4 liti partners from all over Singapore and their teams.
Long story short, CC Cavenagh is not a product of a merger. Rather, Cavenagh is a true blue birthchild created by CC.
|
30-08-2018, 07:48 PM
|
|
|
channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-bar-exams-practice-training-extended-lawyers-10666774
Anyone knows whether current freshmen will be affected by this?
|
30-08-2018, 07:52 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-bar-exams-practice-training-extended-lawyers-10666774
Anyone knows whether current freshmen will be affected by this?
|
Looks like it will affect the most recent batch of freshmen.
|
30-08-2018, 10:06 PM
|
|
|
Good. Too many lawyers around.
But then they should kick out international lawyers
Since we want to control sg lawyers so much
Why don’t we control foreign lawyers practicing out of Singapore?
Force them to submit to our rules so we have jurisdiction over them
|
30-08-2018, 11:07 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-bar-exams-practice-training-extended-lawyers-10666774
Anyone knows whether current freshmen will be affected by this?
|
Seems to me like an extension of cheap labour. What about those poor trainees out there who are receiving low or no pay at the moment? An extension of the training contract could really hurt them. Also, most in-house don't hire fresh grads so what's the point?
|
30-08-2018, 11:15 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Seems to me like an extension of cheap labour. What about those poor trainees out there who are receiving low or no pay at the moment? An extension of the training contract could really hurt them. Also, most in-house don't hire fresh grads so what's the point?
|
Exactly I see the committee deciding on this. Annex A on the MinLaw website.
How would judges or career AGC people be aware of what’s exactly happening on the ground? How come not appoint some junior lawyers on the panel. Lawyers who have gone through the training process who work in private practice to really decide on their own fate?
Some trainees are so poor thing already. Bullied and not getting paid.
Newspaper did not cover other recommendations
Such as requiring trainee to complete their one year training in one law firm.
What if they can’t get along with that partner or need to change halfway.
I just think it’s generation X trying to screw the strawberry generation.
Perpetually f*
|
31-08-2018, 08:26 AM
|
|
|
Any solicitor who does not pay his trainee is a cheap despicable lowlife. Fair value for fair work. And any trainee desperate enough to accept a non paying TC needs to seriously rethink their own self worth.
|
31-08-2018, 09:28 AM
|
|
|
s://.straitstimes.com/singapore/training-spots-can-go-to-law-grads-keen-to-practise
s://.todayonline.com/singapore/lawyers-say-proposed-new-training-regime-could-raise-competency-might-not-address-shortage
The articles fail to realise that
1. Employers deem being called to the bar to be more employable because being called to the bar means the lawyer has been through 6 months of practice training – Not because of the mere fact that he/she has been called to bar.
2. A sizeable proportion of the 1 in 5 people who do not pursue law career after their training contracts cannot find a job as a lawyer – not because they do not want to pursue law. The ministry did, afterall, advise firms to give out more training contracts (even if they do not intend to retain everybody) not that long ago.
3. Most law grads do not actually know that they do not want to pursue a career in law until after they have done their practice training and seen the horrors firsthand.
So many unjustified assumptions…
|
31-08-2018, 10:38 AM
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
s://.straitstimes.com/singapore/training-spots-can-go-to-law-grads-keen-to-practise
s://.todayonline.com/singapore/lawyers-say-proposed-new-training-regime-could-raise-competency-might-not-address-shortage
The articles fail to realise that
1. Employers deem being called to the bar to be more employable because being called to the bar means the lawyer has been through 6 months of practice training – Not because of the mere fact that he/she has been called to bar.
2. A sizeable proportion of the 1 in 5 people who do not pursue law career after their training contracts cannot find a job as a lawyer – not because they do not want to pursue law. The ministry did, afterall, advise firms to give out more training contracts (even if they do not intend to retain everybody) not that long ago.
3. Most law grads do not actually know that they do not want to pursue a career in law until after they have done their practice training and seen the horrors firsthand.
So many unjustified assumptions…
|
So true. The value in being called to the Bar is because you've been deemed at least good enough to be hired by some law firm to do some menial work for 6 months, not because you sat for and passed some stupid near-impossible-to-fail exams. Minlaw is totally missing the point.
To provide an analogy, attached guys are usually more attractive to other girls than single guys because of the perception that they've already been "filtered" out from the creepy weirdos who still remain single. Same goes with law grads jumping ship to other firms
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
