Salary.sg Forums - Reply to Topic

Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options Automatically parse links in text Automatically retrieve titles from external links

Today 06:58 PM

Unregistered

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

However, my point was not that. My point was on doing a stint (e.g. 3 months/6 months in-house, akin to a client secondment seat in the E&W TC programme) to which you will pick up commercial skills and understanding beyond (or more fully integrated with) legal, and communication/process management with the other functions in the company, which you can then bring back with you when you return to private practice (yes, more likely with an int'l firm than local firm) and then proceed to being a solid associate/SA who can resonate better with clients.

Ok yes. We don't disagree with your points, broadly speaking. This route can be useful for a fledging lawyer. It certainly won't be detrimental.

So go and find an arrangement that allows you to do such an in-house stint and thereafter bring your 6 month in-house experience back to private practice?

Not sure why you're trying so hard to convince us here about the merits of such a route? If you're so convinced that this route is advantageous and worth pursing on the merits, then just go do it? And I don't mean this sarcastically. I sincerely mean, if you truly believe in this route, then go for it.

Today 06:11 PM

Unregistered

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Just read through SILE's consultation paper for the implementation of the new admission regime

It does not address pay at all? Are firms going to pay the same shitty pay for all 12 months of the PTC?

As far as the PTC goes it's probably not surprising if the pay stays the same for all 12 months without any external nudge from Lawsoc etc.

Today 06:07 PM

Unregistered

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

What is the current monthly/annual benchmark for pay for fresh grads in legal service/big 4? Researching now since the expected salary will be a conversation during the hiring process, would like to hear some thoughts

Today 05:59 PM

Unregistered

Today 05:45 PM

Unregistered

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Mans tryna prove a point to people he asked for advice from on an anonymous forum, who probably worked in the industry for years or decades and has more legal experience in their left nut than his entire existence.

i love this forum

To be fair, he's putting good points while you're just bashing him without substance. At least he puts out substance lol

Personally, I'm interested to hear more on this discussion

I didn't know there were so many in-house internships available for nus/smu kids lol

Today 05:37 PM

Unregistered

Today 05:34 PM

Unregistered

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

1) You can gain legal and commercial experience/understanding in asset/aviation finance/law, just not as much as working in a law firm that specializes in this field.

2) You can gain legal and commercial experience/understanding in oil and gas/project development/project finance/laws, just not as much as working in a law firm that specializes in this field.

3) You can gain legal and commercial experience/understanding in oil and gas/project development/project finance/laws, just not as much as working in a law firm that specializes in this field.

4) You can gain legal and commercial experience/understanding in fund formation/structuring/corporate laws, just not as much as working in a law firm that specializes in this field.

Today 05:31 PM

Unregistered

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

OP here once again. To further prove my point above that it is well-settled that law students have had the chance of benefiting from an in-house internship (and that the only way in is NOT just to go in after years of practice), and to persist in progressing this discussion in answering of my question above - for the benefit of all law students interested:

NUS law school has facilitate in-house internships with (source: s://law.nus.edu.sg/cfglaw/students/i-want-to-find-internships-training-contracts-jobs/vi):

• Aberdeen Asset Management
• Accenture
• AEM Singapore Pte Ltd
• Align Technology
• Allfunds
• Amadeus GDS Singapore Pte Ltd
• Aramco Trading Singapore Pte Ltd
• ATT Systems (S’pore) Pte Ltd
• BBC Worldwide
• Bollore Logistics Asia Pacific Corporate Pte Ltd
• BP Singapore Pte Ltd
• Bunge Ltd
• ByteDance (Singapore)
• Canon Singapore Pte Ltd
• Capgemini Singapore
• Changi Airport Group
• Citibank N.A. Singapore
• Danone Asia Pte Ltd
• Dril-Quip Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
• Engie Services Singapore Pte. Ltd.
• Epsilon Telecommunication Pte Ltd
• Fox International Channels
• Fushinova Technologies Pte Ltd
• GE Money
• Gemalto Pte Ltd
• General Electric
• General Insurance Association (GIA) of Singapore
• Google Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
• Guocoland Management Pte Ltd
• Harley-Davidson Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
• HydraX Tellabs, Inc
• Imerys Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
• Ingram Micro Asia Ltd
• Intelllex
• Intel Technologies Pte Ltd
• JP Morgan Chase Bank
• Klook Travel
• Lazada South East Asia Pte Ltd
• LEGO Group
• LinkedIn Singapore Pte Ltd
• Luxottica

• Marina Bay Sands Pte Ltd
• Marriott International
• Merck Pte Ltd
• Merz Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
• Minterest Private Limited
• Mitsubishi Corporation
• NBCUniversal
• NEFIN Technologies Pte Ltd
• Nestle Singapore Pte Ltd
• NTUC Income Insurance Co-operative Limited
• Orica International Pte Ltd
• Pavilion Capital International Pte Ltd
• PayPal Private Limited
• PetroChina International (Singapore) Pte Ltd
• RCI Asia-Pacific Pte Ltd
• Rolls-Royce Singapore Pte Ltd
• RtM International Pte. Ltd.
• Samsung Asia Pte Ltd
• Silverdale Capital Services Pte Ltd
• Singapore Petroleum Company Limited
• SMRT
• Standard Chartered Bank
• Symantec
• Temasek Trust Ltd
• TES-AMM (Singapore) Pte Ltd
• Toyota Tsusho Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
• Unilever Singapore
• Vopak Asia Pte Ltd
• Yara Asia Pte Ltd

SMU YPH law school has facilitated in-house internships with (source: s://law.smu.edu.sg/student-activities/internship):

• Accenture Pte Ltd
• Asia Pacific Breweries Limited
• Adobe Systems Pte Ltd
• Allianz International Pte Ltd
• Allianz SE Insurance Management Asia Pacific
• Aon Singapore
• BP Singapore Pte Ltd
• Capitamalls Asia Limited
• Changi Airport Group (Singapore) Pte Ltd
• Coca-Cola Far East Limited
• CrimsonLogic Pte Ltd
• Dymon Asia Capital (Singapore) Pte Ltd
• Dyson Operations Pte Ltd
• ESPN Star Sports
• Financial Industry Disputes
• Resolution Centre Ltd (FIDReC)
• GE Capital Services Pte Ltd
• GE Healthcare
• Google Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
• Hewlett Packard Singapore (Private) Ltd
• Hong Leong Finance Limited
• Ingram Micro Asia Ltd
• Keppel Fels Limited
• LexisNexis Singapore
• McDonald's Restaurants Pte Ltd
• Monsanto Singapore Co. Pte Ltd
• NTUC Income Insurance Cooperative Limited
• Pavilion Capital
• Paypal SG
• Pontiac Land Group
• PricewaterhouseCoopers
• Saxo Capital Markets Pte Ltd
• SE Insurance Management Asia Pacific
• Siemens Pte Ltd
• SingPost
• Singapore Aero Engine Services Private limited
• Starwood Hotels and Resorts
• Symantec Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
• Tellabs Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
• Temasek Holdings Pte Ltd
• Tiger Airways Singapore Pte Ltd
• Vopak Asia Pte Ltd

You can't tell me that:

1. Working at Tiger Airways wouldn't enable you to gain legal and commercial experience/understanding in asset/aviation finance/law.

2. Working at AON wouldn't enable you to gain legal and commercial experience/understanding in insurance brokerage/laws.

3. Working at Aramco wouldn't enable you to gain legal and commercial experience/understanding in oil and gas/project development/project finance/laws.

4. Working at Pavilion Capital wouldn't enable you to gain legal and commercial experience/understanding in fund formation/structuring/corporate laws.

bro no one is contesting your claim that you can get valuable experience with an in house role. We are just saying that it wont be as much or as valuable as working in private firms, especially in your first few years after getting called.

In case you do not know this already, the law industry is very competitive. Having the brains alone is not enough. Having the connections alone is not enough either. You need to have both in order to survive (not even thrive). If you are so set on doing an internship (in house role) then so be it. But be prepared to struggle when you do go into PP when your peers do not need to be handheld by SCs whilst you are still struggling to figure out how do things.

Just an opinion from me, someone who would not bother giving ******** advice and would rather be blunt and straightforward so a junior's career is not ****ed. You can do whatever you want its your life your career your choice.

Today 04:50 PM

Unregistered

Today 04:12 PM

Unregistered

OP here again. Thanks for all the responses. I will start by saying while I appreciate all of your views, and that the following is generally the advice given to people intending to move in-house (yes, gain legal substantive skills, then move in-house; no one wants to train ppl in-house cos you are a cost centre; only law firms are invested to train you b/c you are an asset there).

However, my point was not that. My point was on doing a stint (e.g. 3 months/6 months in-house, akin to a client secondment seat in the E&W TC programme) to which you will pick up commercial skills and understanding beyond (or more fully integrated with) legal, and communication/process management with the other functions in the company, which you can then bring back with you when you return to private practice (yes, more likely with an int'l firm than local firm) and then proceed to being a solid associate/SA who can resonate better with clients.

This is already being done as part of 3 or 6 month client secondments in the E&W TCs. By the time people go on such secondments, they would already usually have at least say 6 months of practice (as a trainee). Also, in the Singapore context- there are clearly some current associates/SAs/even trainees who had done legal in-house internships (usually at least 3-6 months) and in a niche area such as tech/web3/crypto/VCs/project developers, which I am sure must have been hugely beneficial for them when they return to private practice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

In house lawyer here.

Good mentality. ...

But I would still recommend going PP first because there are skills you should learn as a freshly called lawyer at a PP where you still can have the "im new" card.

I was in PP for 3 years before moving in house and the first 2-3 months of moving in house, I could already see myself displaying skills/attributes I gained over the course of 3 years in PP in my new role. Things I learnt from my mentor in PP were put to good use, even in the mundane stuff like replying emails with precision, labelling attachments etc.

Some people scoff at such comments but a good lawyer knows that we as individuals, do not sell a physical product. We advertise and offer our skillset in knowing the law, how to explain it to laymen, how to apply it in situations.

I would bet my left testicle that any corporate company would appreciate an in house who is able to reply emails with qualitative feedback over someone who did not gain all those skills under mentorship at a PP and went straight in house after being called (in fact you may not even need to be called to go in house under the new regime).

All jokes aside, I regretted the nights I slogged away at PP but I never regretted going to PP first even though I knew my end goal was always to move in house. Given the same situation, knowing that I would have learnt what I know now only at PP, I would do the same thing again.

Made my life a lot easier in house with what I learnt at PP. I hope you go through the same path and have an excellent career ahead.

I do appreciate this reply - as yes, it's true that as a trainee you get more chances to f up and improve, rather than as an associate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Depends on the department / firm.

If you are in a local firm, the runway to Partner is short, and inhouse stints may result in PQE cuts. Less so for intl firms. Generally, the mindset is most law firms is still that 100% practice is the way to make partner.

However, depending on practice area, from a substantive/work pov, inhouse exp is likely to be very useful for more "operational" and/or "specialised" fields, and less useful for more "project-based" fields. For instance:

Disputes - inhouse exp is not useful at all
M&A - limited use, unless you are inhouse in a company that does M&A on a regular basis
Funds - prob quite useful, as fund structuring is all about the underlying commercial considerations
Finreg - useful, as alot of Finreg is about understanding the business and how that relates to regulations
Projects - prob quite useful to understand the underlying commercial realities

You probably also can take max 2 yrs inhouse before firms consider that you are too detached from practice

I also appreciate this response - and I agree, that it is more useful for the practices you mentioned above, particularly areas where you would only be able to appreciate the work/motivations/drivers/painpoints beyond pure legal perspectives toward commercial ones, particularly in areas where it would not be easy to break in even as a NQ associate.

I would also add that in in-house teams (most of which are extremely lean, with many being 3-4 man shows, and some even 1-2 man shows) if you were able to break in as a legal intern/trainee/executive, you would do far more (in terms of responsibility, being able to take on certain tasks) in this role than you would as a trainee assisting a partner in a traditional law firm setting. All experiences are what you make of it, so if you are working in a lean transactions team, it would be very possible that you do take on higher-level work even at your lowly level just because the team is so lean.

I suppose, the post that resonates with me the most is the one where such experience would be most fruitful if: (1) the in-house team does much of their transactions in-house; (2) the in-house team works directly with their other corporate functions; (3) the nature of their work is in a niche area that you would not easily break into at a law firm as a junior; (4) the connections and working relationship matter (but while this would be a potential advantage to your law firm, I would say it is definite advantage to you in that you gain commercial/stakeholder perspectives, connections and knowledge of the sector you are working in).

Qualifier: I understand the above all requires you to have some basic fundamental experience (that trainees/junior assocs are expected to know)- so take this as an assumption that has been met.

This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads You may post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Forum Rules