Lawyer Salary

Originally Posted by Unregistered

How is the litigation team weak though? Don't they have a few prominent partners in the team - a number of whom mentioned from time to time even in this forum?

Like who ah

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Like who ah

Indian George Clooney Nandakumar Ponniya.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I think people here just like to type **** for the fun of it. Behind every insult here isn't an aggrieved guy foaming at the mouth - it's just someone looking for a laugh.

Objectively speaking:

Does Baker have strong and weak teams? Yes, it's a mix. Their tax team is strong and litigation teams are weak.

Do they pay well? Yes - much better than B4 but slightly lower than silver circle.

Do they give good exit opportunities? Depends on which team you are in. See above.

For exit prospects

Baker better or A&G and WongP?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Check chambers or legal 500 la

Lol your list doesn't make sense. Did you take the top 6 results from googling Singapore law firms?

Legit qn tho
Outside of baker and big 4
Dentons

Where else for SG firms?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Legit qn tho
Outside of baker and big 4
Dentons

Where else for SG firms?

TSMP, cutting edge wall street work and pays close to big 4

Originally Posted by Unregistered

This is a surprisingly accurate answer.

The quality of Baker hires is getting increasingly poor. They used to have a substantial flow of high quality trainees from the local universities who would stay a long time. Now, the quality of the trainees is dropping and with the higher exit rate of associates to the "proper" international firms, the replacement laterals hired are usually either terribly trained or from a completely different practice area.

You can do a scan on linkedin to check all the recent hires over the past year - I've heard so many complaints from my baker associate friends about litigation associates hired from smaller firms who are academically and procedurally weak and can't even handle basic matters, and also complaints about corporate associates coming from litigation with 0 corporate experience, but somehow they are given no PQE cuts. Imagine how infuriating it is to have been slogging in a firm for your partners for a few years, then having to watch people get hired in at your level getting the same pay but whom you need to train from scratch and clear all their work - then you can start to imagine why people leave.

I don’t doubt what you are saying and only ask that you or your friends give them a chance. They may not have had the same training opportunities but they can be trained. Remember: some junior and mid-level lawyers started their practice training when there was a glut of lawyers and found it hard to secure training contracts at large firms. They may not have the same exposure to large deals or cases but don’t look down on them especially if they are keen to learn.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I think people here just like to type **** for the fun of it. Behind every insult here isn't an aggrieved guy foaming at the mouth - it's just someone looking for a laugh.

Objectively speaking:

Does Baker have strong and weak teams? Yes, it's a mix. Their tax team is strong and litigation teams are weak.

Do they pay well? Yes - much better than B4 but slightly lower than silver circle.

Do they give good exit opportunities? Depends on which team you are in. See above.

What about the Real Estate team in Baker headed by Geraldine Ong? Better than joining Big 4 Real Estate?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I don’t doubt what you are saying and only ask that you or your friends give them a chance. They may not have had the same training opportunities but they can be trained. Remember: some junior and mid-level lawyers started their practice training when there was a glut of lawyers and found it hard to secure training contracts at large firms. They may not have the same exposure to large deals or cases but don’t look down on them especially if they are keen to learn.

True, but this doesn't really address the last part of OP's statement, that these newcomers are paid as much as if not more than the incumbents who do 90% of the work, whom I guess then leave and the overall quality of the team drop.

Sure, that's not on the new hires, and I'm certainly not saying they should voluntarily take a paycut, but that's how Baker is being run into the ground.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

True, but this doesn't really address the last part of OP's statement, that these newcomers are paid as much as if not more than the incumbents who do 90% of the work, whom I guess then leave and the overall quality of the team drop.

Sure, that's not on the new hires, and I'm certainly not saying they should voluntarily take a paycut, but that's how Baker is being run into the ground.

Exactly. The point is not really the new hires. It is as mentioned the lack of direction and strategy from management and HR poor practices and not being prepared to deal with poor performers. It is a systemic toxic issue which needs a total overhaul and this will take time. Baker is broken.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I don’t doubt what you are saying and only ask that you or your friends give them a chance. They may not have had the same training opportunities but they can be trained. Remember: some junior and mid-level lawyers started their practice training when there was a glut of lawyers and found it hard to secure training contracts at large firms. They may not have the same exposure to large deals or cases but don’t look down on them especially if they are keen to learn.

If I'm from Coventry City and I didn't play much and somehow found my way to Man City. I'm paid like Haaland but continue to not play much. Does it matter if I'm keen to learn.