Lawyer Salary

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Regardless, fact is that far more UK grads work in international law firms (in both SG and London) as compared to SG grads.

Provided that you have rich and connected parents or some sort of connections
Majority who go UK to study doesn’t.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Provided that you have rich and connected parents or some sort of connections
Majority who go UK to study doesn’t.

Don’t think you have been in international firms long enough or you’re probably not in the know.
But with these international firms, most people who are able to stay long enough past the infant stage are those with some sort of wealth affiliation or business connections. Not those small time connection (friends etc that can get you into big four at most). We are talking about ppl who have connections with wealth estimate north of US$100 million or more and control large conglomerates who can then supply these international firms with businesses.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Don’t think you have been in international firms long enough or you’re probably not in the know.
But with these international firms, most people who are able to stay long enough past the infant stage are those with some sort of wealth affiliation or business connections. Not those small time connection (friends etc that can get you into big four at most). We are talking about ppl who have connections with wealth estimate north of US$100 million or more and control large conglomerates who can then supply these international firms with businesses.

Hardly. Unlike local firms, you can't even get into an international firm through connections. Furthermore, these firms are not propped up by "connections" to ultra-high net worth individuals. The majority of their clients are institutionalized (e.g. Freshfields and Bank of England) or secured on a panel basis with large corporations. Please don't go around spreading fake news.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Hardly. Unlike local firms, you can't even get into an international firm through connections. Furthermore, these firms are not propped up by "connections" to ultra-high net worth individuals. The majority of their clients are institutionalized (e.g. Freshfields and Bank of England) or secured on a panel basis with large corporations. Please don't go around spreading fake news.

How do you think the law firms even get onto the panel?

International firms are willing to bend over backwards to win new clients. You are probably too junior to know about their tactics.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Hardly. Unlike local firms, you can't even get into an international firm through connections. Furthermore, these firms are not propped up by "connections" to ultra-high net worth individuals. The majority of their clients are institutionalized (e.g. Freshfields and Bank of England) or secured on a panel basis with large corporations. Please don't go around spreading fake news.

You’re just too junior to understand what’s going on.
Look at Forbes billionaire list spend some time to trace the institutional funds they control.
It’s a waste of time explaining.

International firms rely heavily on MNCs and global conglomerate and large institutional banks. Notice the poster said north of US$100M. But I’d say probably in the billions.
It’s not small time $5-10M that will lend you private client status in local banks.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

You’re just too junior to understand what’s going on.
Look at Forbes billionaire list spend some time to trace the institutional funds they control.
It’s a waste of time explaining.

International firms rely heavily on MNCs and global conglomerate and large institutional banks. Notice the poster said north of US$100M. But I’d say probably in the billions.
It’s not small time $5-10M that will lend you private client status in local banks.

You’re the one who doesn’t get it. Law is not a top tier career. It’s not something the billionaires or even the hundred millionaires want for their children, when they could easily be pulllng far more in PE, hedge funds or family offices working half the hours.

In some rare cases, these white horses may come in and train for a few years, but they never ever stay. They always leave for greener, larger pastures.

So don’t come and talk crap. I’ve been in two top international firms, and almost none of the people there were white horses. Law is ultimately still a middle class family career path.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Regardless, fact is that far more UK grads work in international law firms (in both SG and London) as compared to SG grads.

Forget London - our arena is SG since we are debating about the hirability of local vs UK grads in SG. Obviously if you look at London offices they’re going to be dominated by local grads.

In SG international offices, the local Singaporean population in MCs and the white shoes firms tend to be NUS dominated. Take a look at CC and ask the local assocs where they studied. You’ll find almost all of them came from NUS. This is a function of the MCs growing their workforce by poaching Big 4 associates, who tend to be local grads, and MC associates being poached by white shoes.

The UK grads in MCs tend to be white imports from the UK, who’ve decided to try experience life in the Far East, and spend their weekends travelling and exploring exotic Asia.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

This is common knowledge and has been repeated many times here, but I think must be said again for the benefit of mid career people contemplating a switch to law:

Law is only lucrative if EITHER: (i) you got into NUS/SMU law, paying local undergrad school fees, OR (ii) you could only get into 2nd tier UK/Aus unis but family is wealthy enough to fund overseas studies without feeling any pinch, OR (iii) you got into Oxbridge.

For mid-career switchers, you need to think long and hard about the costs of a 2nd degree in law (which is essentially considered a 1st degree) plus the opportunity costs of halting your current earnings.

Remember, a law degree is NOT A PROFESSIONAL DEGREE (at least not under the Commonwealth, non-US/Canada common law system). It is a FIRST QUALIFYING DEGREE - for all intents and purposes, its an undergraduate degree.

Getting a second degree in law is NOT like getting an MBA. Don't expect a salary premium unlike say an MBA where, if you go into management consulting, you can leapfrog the Analyst position and enter straight as an Associate (with higher pay).

As a 2nd degree LLB grad, you will still need to hustle with all the other undergrads for TCs/jobs and endure the kind of underpaying salaries and exploitative hours that the legal industry in Singapore is known for (note: this refers to local/Singapore law practices only).

Some of you might, even after spending tens of thousands of pounds to acquire a 2nd degree from a UK uni (to a lesser extent this also applies to getting a GLB/JD from NUS or SMU), still have to settle for Chinatown law firm positions paying peanuts and servicing man-in-the-street clients who can't pay.

Don't get me wrong - there's certainly nothing wrong with doing community law work. It is respectable even, but the truth is, it doesn't pay, and that will reflect in your salary as a legal associate working in these firms.

I'm saying this so that future mid career professionals will think very carefully before they decide to make the jump.

This makes perfect sense. If have to go overseas to study through loans, etc, it’s not worth it.
No way to recover the costs in this market and in future years with AI coming into the picture and pressure on keeping legal costs low.

In the old days, law was a very lurcrative career. If you went abroad to study (in the time when people use steamships to travel to England), it was a very prestigious thing and you’ll almost certainly be hired anytime.

Fast forward to 2018, broadly you go overseas if you’re a scholar. That needs no further explanation.
Otherwise if your family is rich enough without any pinch (like poster mentioned above) and you know you can return to a family business if you don’t have a job.
If not, if you have to rely on loans, chances are it will end quite ugly.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Forget London - our arena is SG since we are debating about the hirability of local vs UK grads in SG. Obviously if you look at London offices they’re going to be dominated by local grads.

You are ignoring the fact that plenty of singaporean UK grads get hired into the London offices every year, something which SG grads do not have the opportunity to do. This is a significantly different (and imo far superior) career path compared to going back to work in SG.

On that basis alone, it is worth mentioning in response to the "survival bias" comment. Point being - the best of the best don't even go back to SG, they stay in London. Hence, when you compare local grads with UK grads in SG, you are comparing the best of locals with the more mediocre of UK.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Forget London - our arena is SG since we are debating about the hirability of local vs UK grads in SG. Obviously if you look at London offices they’re going to be dominated by local grads.

In SG international offices, the local Singaporean population in MCs and the white shoes firms tend to be NUS dominated. Take a look at CC and ask the local assocs where they studied. You’ll find almost all of them came from NUS. This is a function of the MCs growing their workforce by poaching Big 4 associates, who tend to be local grads, and MC associates being poached by white shoes.

The UK grads in MCs tend to be white imports from the UK, who’ve decided to try experience life in the Far East, and spend their weekends travelling and exploring exotic Asia.

Why so few SMU grads in MCs and white shoes vs NUS grads?