Lawyer Salary

Originally Posted by Unregistered

failed a paper each in part A/B, and my firm has said no to coming back now. given the current market, is there still a chance for me?

Your firm just looking for opportunity to get rid of you in the first place.

Failing a paper is not extremely common but not unusual

Originally Posted by Unregistered

There is no "current market". The legal market is always going to be s**t because there are far more people who want to be lawyers (in big firms) than are actually needed. They're just giving an excuse to drop you because you can't make the cut.

I'm a firm believer that standards shouldn't be compromised. But i also feel for you seeing as how you must have spent quite some years working towards this.

Go look for the small Chinatown firms and work your way from there. They are always in need of people. You don't really have the luxury of being picky now.

Since when small Chinatown firms are in need of people? With the current economy, I think they won't be taking in people unless person offers to work for free

Originally Posted by Unregistered

You not supposed to fail any of the papers in Part B. 90% of the candidates don't

In recent years, there have been more failures as the syllabus has expanded to cover more topics and also hearsay that the marking criteria is stricter now

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Lmao this discussion is lame. Only students give a damn about the commendation list, as if the fact that these individuals which happen to be from the same school as you somehow reflect your own capabilitues. The percentage of students "representing" certain schools shift year by year anyway.


Private practice cares about your ability to do the work and get clients, nothing else.

Can we get back to salaries please?

Exactly. You can see rainmaking lawyers who are piss-poor in grades who are the ones that are treasured over academically-excellent lawyer in the legal industry

Originally Posted by Unregistered

In recent years, there have been more failures as the syllabus has expanded to cover more topics and also hearsay that the marking criteria is stricter now

Its for the best. I was from an era before they tightened the screws and by god there were so many dumb and/or lazy overseas grad lawyers. Many of them didn't last beyond 2 years.

Not saying that there aren't any dumb NUS or SMU grad lawyers but you'll meet proportionately far less.

At least the standards are rising...I hope.

I am a trainee going to be called in August. Very scared about retention. What can i do?

In a recession, usually firms won’t retain anyone.
Try to find jobs in other industries.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Its for the best. I was from an era before they tightened the screws and by god there were so many dumb and/or lazy overseas grad lawyers. Many of them didn't last beyond 2 years.

Not saying that there aren't any dumb NUS or SMU grad lawyers but you'll meet proportionately far less.

At least the standards are rising...I hope.

Mixed feelings about this. While rising standards for exams are good for filtering, it may filter out those with keen interest in law but aren't exam-people. There are people who are good at work but bad at exams because they tend to have a bit of nervous breakdown during the 2 hours.

Lawyering is not just about exams, it is also about managing clients, meeting deadlines and for litigation, also about knowing how to speak well, which exams cannot cover. I feel exam standards should not have been raised but at the same time, let the industry weed out the incompetent graduates. After all, no sane firm will retain a law grad who is clearly incompetent in his/her work.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Since when small Chinatown firms are in need of people? With the current economy, I think they won't be taking in people unless person offers to work for free

Agree.

I've been working at a Chinatown law firm for the last 5 years - Nice partners, decent life, cheap rent.

We are not hiring.

It is unlikely we'll take in anyone, even if they offer to work for free. Remember that insurance, PC, SAL fees amount to quite a bit per lawyer.

We don't mind if you have your own book, tho. Heh.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Mixed feelings about this. While rising standards for exams are good for filtering, it may filter out those with keen interest in law but aren't exam-people. There are people who are good at work but bad at exams because they tend to have a bit of nervous breakdown during the 2 hours.

Lawyering is not just about exams, it is also about managing clients, meeting deadlines and for litigation, also about knowing how to speak well, which exams cannot cover. I feel exam standards should not have been raised but at the same time, let the industry weed out the incompetent graduates. After all, no sane firm will retain a law grad who is clearly incompetent in his/her work.

Lawyering is, though, how well you know the law and legal procedures, how you wrap you head around complex concepts or evidence matrices to explain them effectively to clients. Exams is just an earlier barrier to weed incompetent ones out. Otherwise all our indemnity insurance will get more ex in order to weed them out.