Lawyer Salary

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Is the girl good looking?

Is the mother sick looking?
Got photo rite
Heard she already very sick

Originally Posted by Unregistered

He should have turned up to face the music.
He would have gotten a lighter sentence, and his name would still be redacted.

Read the C3J judgment. Dude left D&N and found employment in another law firm. If you know this person, you'd know that he landed on his feet pretty good.

Just before his criminal conviction, he found another job as inhouse counsel in an Indon company.

All things considered, this loser got lucky due to the gag order hiding his identity, despite being a beta pervert criminal.

He's probably living the life in Jakarta or something on good cushy pay, and I doubt the Indons give a rat's ass about an ex-con lawyer working for them - it's probably par for the course.

Meanwhile the victim also quit D&N and has to live with all sorts of emotional trauma for the rest of her life.

Sometimes life is really unfair and high fliers really don't suffer the repercussions of what they truly deserve.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Is the girl good looking?

Doubt her looks mattered to this Drew Napier pervert, he was only interested in photographing her underwear for god's sake.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Doubt her looks mattered to this Drew Napier pervert, he was only interested in photographing her underwear for god's sake.

Why did she expose her undies to him?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Why did she expose her undies to him?

Stop victim blaming. It’s people with your mentality that creates such culture.

And all you people stop objectifying the victim.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Doubt her looks mattered to this Drew Napier pervert, he was only interested in photographing her underwear for god's sake.

Even so, he’d only have targeted her if , as OP asks, she is gd looks

Mr Ang explains this transparency deficit as prompted by the need to retain talent.

"We haven't even thought of (revealing numbers)," he says. "If we are too transparent, it creates unhealthy competition. The remuneration committee knows all the numbers but if you and I start comparing, it creates unhealthy competition. It makes people want to join particular firms just for the money."

s://.straitstimes.com/business/invest/patrick-angs-setting-rajah-and-tann-for-life-after-45

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Mr Ang explains this transparency deficit as prompted by the need to retain talent.

"We haven't even thought of (revealing numbers)," he says. "If we are too transparent, it creates unhealthy competition. The remuneration committee knows all the numbers but if you and I start comparing, it creates unhealthy competition. It makes people want to join particular firms just for the money."

s://.straitstimes.com/business/invest/patrick-angs-setting-rajah-and-tann-for-life-after-45

A backwater mentality. Surely if there is pay transparency, you would know better if a top assoc joining you is joining for your money or not? Also, this just sounds like the classic 'poor bf' argumentative: "but it is not about the money! I want to know you are with me not just for my money". If you are paying top rates, you would be proud and using that as part of your recruitment.

Also further in his argument on why performing junior RT lawyers are not paid good bonus... Come on la, EPs bring in work but the junior assocs do the heavy lifting. He also mentioned that junior lawyers i.e up to 3 PQE cost more than value add to the firm.. Hello, they are the most valuable to a file since they cost so little hourly but can more or less be used to run the day to day file.

Honestly this is just a shameless ad and one used by the firm's management to propagate outdated mindsets on assoc compensation and grievances. Pui!

Q: (Reads) “People say we got to check the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS). but I argue that the CCCS has to check the SMEs. If you don’t have a CCCS that checks the SMEs, when they don’t screen their products, we are going to end up with all kinds of products in the market. This will diminish the standing of the Singapore market. – Prime Minister on why he was exposing Mr.Tang. Just like your help on this so that the CCCS knows your approach. Are you saying that as CEO of a major MNC and board member of CCCS, you believe it’s you duty to check the SMEs?

A: First, let me clarify, I think, one word of it here. It could be a misquote. It should be “all kinds of products in the market”not “CCCS”.

Q: Exactly. So you mean ‘market’?

A: In ‘market’, that’s what I meant. Yes.

Q: Well, could you now kindly address the question: Do you take the view that as CEO of a major MNC and board member of CCCS, it’s your duty to check the SMEs?

A: Yes. I think when that statement was made in the context, I thought it as my duty to prevent unsavoury products from entering the market. So it’s my duty to check the competing SMEs who could do harm to the whole system of a CCCS' governance in Singapore.

Q: By ‘unsavoury products’, do you mean ‘products with unsavoury ingredients’ or ‘unsavoury packaging’?

A: Unsavoury packaging, taste. And in some cases, ingredients which are threatening to the health of Singaporeans.

Q: Look further down in terms of your approach to the free market, please. You advised the young consumers. Do you see them?

A: Yes.

Q: Half down, about voting, “we are telling them, we are not giving you the luxury of a choice.” Isn’t it rather odd for an anticompetitive commission in a free market to say you are not giving them the luxury of choice?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

A backwater mentality. Surely if there is pay transparency, you would know better if a top assoc joining you is joining for your money or not? Also, this just sounds like the classic 'poor bf' argumentative: "but it is not about the money! I want to know you are with me not just for my money". If you are paying top rates, you would be proud and using that as part of your recruitment.

Also further in his argument on why performing junior RT lawyers are not paid good bonus... Come on la, EPs bring in work but the junior assocs do the heavy lifting. He also mentioned that junior lawyers i.e up to 3 PQE cost more than value add to the firm.. Hello, they are the most valuable to a file since they cost so little hourly but can more or less be used to run the day to day file.

Honestly this is just a shameless ad and one used by the firm's management to propagate outdated mindsets on assoc compensation and grievances. Pui!

3PQE cost more than add value.
0PE cost more than add value because need to train them.
Aiya so basically only 1-2QPE are profitable la. OK noted whatever you say lor.
Explains their terrible attrition rate.