Lawyer Salary

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Top choice. Great training and great pay. With healthy work life balance and caring seniors and partners.

Seriously guys, stop screwing around with the newbie lawyers and law students. People might actually think you're serious when u say nonsense like this.

anyone moved from B4 to international firms?

At which PQE (sg scale) did you move?

what were the salaried before and after the move?

what about the hours?

did you make a move out of a recruiter’s referral?

many thanks

Originally Posted by Unregistered

anyone moved from B4 to international firms?

At which PQE (sg scale) did you move?

what were the salaried before and after the move?

what about the hours?

did you make a move out of a recruiter’s referral?

many thanks

anyone moved from B4 to international firms? Yes, but if you want to have a better chance, go for Corp work, it's a lot harder as a liti assoc.

At which PQE (sg scale) did you move? Most move around 2/3 PQE, due to UK's 2 year trainee scheme. You maybe downgraded to UK NQ level at 2 PQE.

what were the salaried before and after the move? I assume you mean what is the difference in salary scale for b4 and int firms. It depends on which "int firm" you go to, whether they are paying cravath scale (rare), MC scale, transatlantic scale, or some other int scale. But you definitely will get a pay bump as a 2PQE SG associate because SG associates are criminally underpaid in general.

what about the hours? More focus on BD, the yearly billable requirement usually stays the same or may even drop. Again, depends on the int firm and the b4 dept you came from, there isn't a one-size-fit-all "all firms are slacker/longer hours than b4".

did you make a move out of a recruiter’s referral? Other than the top-scorers, a lot of people are referred by friends or just self-apply. Cold recruiter calls doesn't really work unless they have a mandate. Remember that the recruiter needs to be paid, so companies are more willing to take you directly than having to pay added costs (barring certain exceptions like a highly specialised field/team that no one wants to go to).

Why do lawyers / people who have studied law often advise others against doing the degree?

They speak as if they have studied another degree or worked in other jobs and industries before but truth is most took a traditional path of education to becoming a lawyer.

I'm not sure what people in legal are comparing to? Or is it just in them that they r more vocal?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Why do lawyers / people who have studied law often advise others against doing the degree?

They speak as if they have studied another degree or worked in other jobs and industries before but truth is most took a traditional path of education to becoming a lawyer.

I'm not sure what people in legal are comparing to? Or is it just in them that they r more vocal?

There's a difference between studying law and practising law. I think some people advise against both, some advise against only one of the two (in some jurisdictions you can practise without spending your uni years doing a law degree), some advise against practising for too long. So it all depends on who you speak to and what their background is.

My guess is that a lot of people that become lawyers generally could have pursued a wide variety of other studies at university and also probably studied quite hard both pre-u and during university (to the neglect of other activities such as socialising/having fun and developing knowledge/skills in other domains).

So I suspect there's sometimes this regret of spending all that effort and then finding themselves (in their own perception) stuck in a career they don't like when they could have done so many other things? This will be be the case especially when kids (many of whom scored top marks at pre-u level) get grinded down to below average of the class in uni or starting their career with firms that don't pay or train them as well as they think they deserve (or both). That is perhaps one explanation apart from the usual stories of long hours and pay that is incommensurate to the effort etc

Also maybe lots of people complain about their job/degree but perhaps due to law having some status people pay more attention to it?

Having been doing this for a while, another possible issue with some Singaporean kids is that they might not have thought hard enough about what they want to do in their lives and why. Some of these kids choose a degree / vocation based on some graduate salary survey or the perceived prestige/popularity of a degree. e.g. CS is the hot thing now. It's not necessarily going to lead to satisfaction for everyone.

Having done both law and non-law I don't regret any of it.

And to your last point: i think in this forum most people like to compare to those that make more money than them, e.g. investment bankers, techies? but then i wonder why be a professional (subject to all sorts of codes and ethical rules) if the aim is to mint money?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Seriously guys, stop screwing around with the newbie lawyers and law students. People might actually think you're serious when u say nonsense like this.

Who are u to say its not serious? N if people wanna believe forums then sucks for them too bad la

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Whenever I see female lawyers walk past me in the office, I imagine ****ing them, I also imagine that their pussies are unshaven and super hairy, although they may be well groomed on the outside. After that I imagine them peeing on me, with their dribble splashing all over, that hissing sound is super hot when they need to go urgently after a few hours of intense drafting!!!

Wow, just wow . No words.

Btw which firm you from bro? EDMW?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Wow, just wow . No words.

Btw which firm you from bro? EDMW?

lol i think even edmw has matured over the years

Originally Posted by Unregistered

lol i think even edmw has matured over the years

But on serious note, which firm has good lookers ?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

There's a difference between studying law and practising law. I think some people advise against both, some advise against only one of the two (in some jurisdictions you can practise without spending your uni years doing a law degree), some advise against practising for too long. So it all depends on who you speak to and what their background is.

My guess is that a lot of people that become lawyers generally could have pursued a wide variety of other studies at university and also probably studied quite hard both pre-u and during university (to the neglect of other activities such as socialising/having fun and developing knowledge/skills in other domains).

So I suspect there's sometimes this regret of spending all that effort and then finding themselves (in their own perception) stuck in a career they don't like when they could have done so many other things? This will be be the case especially when kids (many of whom scored top marks at pre-u level) get grinded down to below average of the class in uni or starting their career with firms that don't pay or train them as well as they think they deserve (or both). That is perhaps one explanation apart from the usual stories of long hours and pay that is incommensurate to the effort etc

Also maybe lots of people complain about their job/degree but perhaps due to law having some status people pay more attention to it?

Having been doing this for a while, another possible issue with some Singaporean kids is that they might not have thought hard enough about what they want to do in their lives and why. Some of these kids choose a degree / vocation based on some graduate salary survey or the perceived prestige/popularity of a degree. e.g. CS is the hot thing now. It's not necessarily going to lead to satisfaction for everyone.

Having done both law and non-law I don't regret any of it.

And to your last point: i think in this forum most people like to compare to those that make more money than them, e.g. investment bankers, techies? but then i wonder why be a professional (subject to all sorts of codes and ethical rules) if the aim is to mint money?

interesting. thank you. so it's about not doing as well as before academically or not to their expectations and then thinking that other industries have it easier?

i think its funny to compare w those in big tech or high finance because it's not much easier to make it into investment banking or high finance when people with a fancy MBA or pass CFA level 1 or boutique firm experience can be considered as a competitive applicant for a role. there are people with both qualifications even. and then there are ppl here comparing schools......

even after getting in, the person has to be on their toes all the time because there are truckloads of ppl trying to get in as compared to the legal industry where restrictions are placed left and right.

as for tech... they are so welcoming to the industry but what they dont say is the amount of coding that has to be learned and the number of bugs that have to be fixed and the uphill climb to be that good.