Lawyer Salary

Originally Posted by Unregistered

What's the compensation like now though for the local firms? Is it still around 5-6k? And if you slug it out how many years does it take to become a partner, assuming you have the capability?

Looking at the new batch of A&G partners, about 7-8 years. Starting pay remains 5-6k for most of the bigger firms as of last year.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Who said anything about whether NUS was better than UK? the point that was made is that it is far easier to get a FCH or 2.1 in law in the UK compared to NUS (and SMU). Whether or not other countries accept an NUS degree (they don't) is a completely different matter altogether.

And why are we talking about MNCs/CSs in a thread that focuses on qualifying as lawyers in Singapore? Where Singapore law firms are concerned, it is quite clear that there is a (slight) bias towards local grads, but IMO this bias may be made up for by the fact that it is easier to get better grades in the UK. So a 2.2 in NUS may in fact be disadvantaged because there is a good chance that he could have gotten 2.1 in Bristol/Nottingham or even UCL/KCL. Plus the fact that it is very possible to get a UK TC if one graduates from a UK uni, which is near impossible to get if one graduates from NUS/SMU, means that going to a reputable UK uni may be the best option if one can afford it.

I am really curious how sure are you that it is easier to obtain a 2.1 or FCH in law in UK compared to NUS/SMU? Have you personally viewed their curriculum? Or just by the statistics? This is really a problem in our local grad and why alot faced rejection in the industry. You think too highly of yourself. You are again comparing an apple with an orange. Please take some time to look at how curriculum were conducted over there and here before keep saying that a 2.2 can obtain FCH or 2.1 in those UK Universities. If you have seriously go through their programmes, you will know a local grad might not even survive there. Just because UK grades are of a lower level as us doesnt define that a local 2.2 can have high chance of getting 2.1 over there. UK universities academic structure are famous in a way that not only academic results are a factor, in fact industry and scenario situation plays a big part in it too. UK dont wanna train their students who are just good in academic results. What matters to them were in fact how their students react, present, talk and think throughout the whole course.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I am really curious how sure are you that it is easier to obtain a 2.1 or FCH in law in UK compared to NUS/SMU? Have you personally viewed their curriculum? Or just by the statistics? This is really a problem in our local grad and why alot faced rejection in the industry. You think too highly of yourself. You are again comparing an apple with an orange. Please take some time to look at how curriculum were conducted over there and here before keep saying that a 2.2 can obtain FCH or 2.1 in those UK Universities. If you have seriously go through their programmes, you will know a local grad might not even survive there. Just because UK grades are of a lower level as us doesnt define that a local 2.2 can have high chance of getting 2.1 over there. UK universities academic structure are famous in a way that not only academic results are a factor, in fact industry and scenario situation plays a big part in it too. UK dont wanna train their students who are just good in academic results. What matters to them were in fact how their students react, present, talk and think throughout the whole course.

1. Outside of possibly Oxbridge, it is common knowledge that its easier to get better results in the UK than locally, at least for law. The stats only confirm it. Plus based on the average A Level results, the academic quality of the cohort in the local laws schools is broadly speaking no worse than Singaporeans who have gone over to the UK for their LLB (again, Oxbridge excluded). There's nothing wrong or correct about it; it's just a fact.

2. Ironic that you say that UK unis look beyond academics; conversely, they usually admit and assess students purely on the basis of academic ability. Even the local unis don't assess students based on 100% exams.

I think much has been said about Oseas law grads. Firstly, U.K. law exams are closed notes exams. That's a major difference with Sg law schools. Do a closed book law exam and you'll know that it's very difficult and require different set of skills. U.K. does not have a bell curve unlike sg law schools bcos its v simple. If u meet the standards of the professors who are marking the papers, then it's a first class. No questions asked. It's a different culture and one that is very much based on challenging yourself rather than beating your peers.

Secondly, u need to know that Singaporean students who go to uk universities to read law have their own set of challenges. What kind of challenges these are - you have to go through yourself to find out. Many bright individuals who go overseas to study, eventually they snap at some point in time because it's really difficult psychologically.

Thirdly, the 5% of FCH - in the local unis Singaporeans are the majority and they have 100% chance to be part of the 5%. In uk unis, and the uni that I'm from gives out only 7% of FCH - you are a minority fighting for the 7% of FCH. And they cannot give all the Singaporeans a first for that matter. So if u consider it carefully, it's harder to get a first class in the uk. 2:1 yes, but not first.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

1. Outside of possibly Oxbridge, it is common knowledge that its easier to get better results in the UK than locally, at least for law. The stats only confirm it. Plus based on the average A Level results, the academic quality of the cohort in the local laws schools is broadly speaking no worse than Singaporeans who have gone over to the UK for their LLB (again, Oxbridge excluded). There's nothing wrong or correct about it; it's just a fact.

2. Ironic that you say that UK unis look beyond academics; conversely, they usually admit and assess students purely on the basis of academic ability. Even the local unis don't assess students based on 100% exams.

Admission is admission. Yes, they might based on academic for admission but that doesnt mean they will based on ur academic to grade you an A at the end of the day. That's what im referring to. UK Universities based really very much on your psychology. And im sorry, local uni do assess based on your theoretical exam and ironically now that they found out that good academic result does not mean that you have the set of skills - industry skills. And if you look at the ST news today, they introduced some compulsory courses for all NUS 1st year. This already explained what I'm saying
Those skill set that were introduced were infact all along exists in the UK academic system. Go a UK uni to experience yourself before commending what you think it is like. If you think our local cert is seriously so worthwhile, take it to try apply a job in UK.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I think much has been said about Oseas law grads. Firstly, U.K. law exams are closed notes exams. That's a major difference with Sg law schools. Do a closed book law exam and you'll know that it's very difficult and require different set of skills. U.K. does not have a bell curve unlike sg law schools bcos its v simple. If u meet the standards of the professors who are marking the papers, then it's a first class. No questions asked. It's a different culture and one that is very much based on challenging yourself rather than beating your peers.

Secondly, u need to know that Singaporean students who go to uk universities to read law have their own set of challenges. What kind of challenges these are - you have to go through yourself to find out. Many bright individuals who go overseas to study, eventually they snap at some point in time because it's really difficult psychologically.

Thirdly, the 5% of FCH - in the local unis Singaporeans are the majority and they have 100% chance to be part of the 5%. In uk unis, and the uni that I'm from gives out only 7% of FCH - you are a minority fighting for the 7% of FCH. And they cannot give all the Singaporeans a first for that matter. So if u consider it carefully, it's harder to get a first class in the uk. 2:1 yes, but not first.

Yes. Totally agree. One need to go through that kind of academic structure then they will know why SG grade B is their grade A. No bell curve. No question asked. You manage to prove psychologically and meet the prof standard. You get it. It is of challenging yourself then beating your peers through papers. When you are outside working as a real lawyers, you will see having good writing doesn't lead you to have good ideas. If you are not good at certain skill set and mindset, what's the use of having a good writing skill?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I think much has been said about Oseas law grads. Firstly, U.K. law exams are closed notes exams. That's a major difference with Sg law schools. Do a closed book law exam and you'll know that it's very difficult and require different set of skills. U.K. does not have a bell curve unlike sg law schools bcos its v simple. If u meet the standards of the professors who are marking the papers, then it's a first class. No questions asked. It's a different culture and one that is very much based on challenging yourself rather than beating your peers.

Secondly, u need to know that Singaporean students who go to uk universities to read law have their own set of challenges. What kind of challenges these are - you have to go through yourself to find out. Many bright individuals who go overseas to study, eventually they snap at some point in time because it's really difficult psychologically.

Thirdly, the 5% of FCH - in the local unis Singaporeans are the majority and they have 100% chance to be part of the 5%. In uk unis, and the uni that I'm from gives out only 7% of FCH - you are a minority fighting for the 7% of FCH. And they cannot give all the Singaporeans a first for that matter. So if u consider it carefully, it's harder to get a first class in the uk. 2:1 yes, but not first.

I would challenge the notion that a closed book law exam is difficult. As a local law student, we all did Contracts as a closed book paper, so we know how it was like.

Do an open-book exam on a bell curve, and you will see how difficult it is to get an A - against your equally brilliant peers. Even a B+ is no walk in the park.

Memorisation is about the easiest thing you can do.

In any case, you're defending the indefensible. It is generally agreed that it is easier to score a 2.1 or First in a UK university (Oxbridge aside) than in Singapore. They don't set quotas for Firsts for international or local students.

The simple fact is that there is no bell curve in the UK. The other simple fact is that the entry requirements to enter Singapore law school is higher than the majority of the UK schools. Put 2 and 2 together.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I would challenge the notion that a closed book law exam is difficult. As a local law student, we all did Contracts as a closed book paper, so we know how it was like.

Do an open-book exam on a bell curve, and you will see how difficult it is to get an A - against your equally brilliant peers. Even a B+ is no walk in the park.

Memorisation is about the easiest thing you can do.

In any case, you're defending the indefensible. It is generally agreed that it is easier to score a 2.1 or First in a UK university (Oxbridge aside) than in Singapore. They don't set quotas for Firsts for international or local students.

The simple fact is that there is no bell curve in the UK. The other simple fact is that the entry requirements to enter Singapore law school is higher than the majority of the UK schools. Put 2 and 2 together.

Another one. Hopeless grad. Sg is so small that is why entry is limited leh. Very obvious isnt it? Can local grad stop seeing what is written on their requirements and think beyond that? They can put easy entry but doesn't mean you really can go in easily right. Singapore uni always like to set standard higher because of the small island and its population.

People like you shows why foreign industry reject our grads. Because all they can see is believe and compare on what's is written on web rather then think logically.

The reason why Entry standard is lower in UK because they had foreseen dropouts and they couldn't afford too little grads as it is not advisable due to their population and economy. Even if you can enter easily doesn't mean you can make it out in the end. Sg doesn't need so many lawyers if you notice. Our economy and population don't need so many but we still need to continue the course in hope for real talent and have back ups available in the case where local grads decide to migrate and we lose them. We have so many outstanding until stat board had to be divided so to be able to recuit more unemployed law grads.

In UK everything is psychological. If it is so easy to obtain 2.1 or fch. You will see ppl flood in but did you see it? Because reading and living in ur own world. Do some serious thinking and research on other countries political status and economy standing.

Salary for NQ in big 4, 5.5k. Below big 4 to mid size 4k. Today's papers.