Salary.sg Forums

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I guess its "easier" to make partner in a local firm because you don't have to compete with your foreign counterparts? Since the OP was asking about disputes, being in a local firm means you practice litigation, which is a protected area in which foreign lawyers cant practice in. Would that make it easier to "build a book" as compared to doing arbi in an intl firm?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

This one is a ****ing myth la. There is no glass ceiling in international firms - not at least by virtue of race.

In Big4, it is no longer the case that if you stay long enough, partnership is a given. Nowadays the partnership ranks are so saturated that it takes more than long service to make it to partner (think about it, 30+ years as a partner vs 7+ years as an associate - long-service promotion is unsustainable unless the Singapore economy grows exponentially every year). You need something more to set yourself apart. This means that the associate has to have a strong network, potential for a book of business, or angkat one or more partners' balls. If international firms have a limited number of "slots" for Asia-based partners (if there even is such an arbitrary concept), then Singapore law firms will probably similarly have a limited number of "slots" for Singapore-based partners.

I've seen many many competent lawyers get passed up for promotion in my years at big4. It's a microcosm of the Singapore economy, really. Last time, middle class folks could afford a car and a house. This was during the economic boom. Now that the economy is plateauing, middle class folks can't afford ****. Same as big4 - last time, mediocre lawyers who lasted the distance could make it to "partner", and now it's way harder to do so.

In any event, law firm business models are all the ****ing same - that includes Singapore law firms. Barring racism, why should the promotion criteria of international firms vs Singapore firms be any different?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Big4 is an easier route to partner than most int firms.

For int firms, they have a limited number of counsel/partner slots for the Asian market. You basically can't get it unless someone leaves or dies (or some senior partners argue heavily for you).

Int firms get you to a higher pay fast, but the glass (Asian) ceiling is going to be hanging over your head.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Any idea what’s the salary range in big 4 firms for those called in 2019?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Can any disputes lawyer who has been in practice for a while (at least 7 years or so) give advise as to whether one should stay in big 4 disputes, and grind it out to make equity, or go to an international firm to practice arbitration and hope to one day make partner? I know equity isn’t guaranteed for either and people say it’s easier to make equity in big 4 - but does the better salary in an intl firm justify taking that risk?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Hearsay for the new 1 year TC the second 6 months is 4k. True?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Hearsay for the new 1 year TC the second 6 months is 4k. True?