|
I need some advice, lawgoons. Next year will be my final year of law school. The short simplified version of the system here is that you do the law degree, then do either a clerkship (super competitive) or this course called PLT which takes about six months, after which you can apply to be admitted as a solicitor (for various reasons I'd do the PLT option rather than clerkship). I'm trying to decide whether it's worth me doing the PLT and bothering getting recognised/licensed to practice as a solicitor or not. I currently have a job in politics, essentially running communications for the politician I work for, and I love the route I'm on with that. Pros: keeping options open for the future in case I ever decide to practice law (not something I intend on doing at this point); it'd be nice to be able to say I'm a lawyer, even just as recognition that I made it through the course, which it didn't always look like I would; my parents have offered to pay, so money isn't a factor. Cons: nobody in my current line of employment is going to care if I'm qualified to practice (they'll care that I have the degree, not if I can practice); if I did PLT, it'd be during an election year, so I'm not going to be swimming in spare time; I don't have any desire/intent to practice, so it feels a bit pointless and like I'd be doing it mainly for the sake of it. I know that only I can decide for myself and whatever, but does anyone have any advice/input? Thanks goons. tl;dr: will have a law degree, can't decide whether it's worth getting qualified as a lawyer when I don't want to practice.
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2016 13:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 13:50 |
|
|
Thanks for the advice, it's completely the sort of thing I was after. I guess it really strikes at the heart of it as well - I'm not going to be disadvantaged by having it, and the main advantage is that if you have it, you have more options. Well, unless they take it away from you, like they did my ethics lecturer who disappeared halfway through the semester when it transpired she'd been borrowing from clients' trusts and was disbarred. Since this is the law school megathread as well - grades were released a few days ago and I've officially passed Constitutional and I'm so relieved. For someone who works in government I should probably care more about our Constitution but I just hate it and want it to go away forever. Although working in government, I'm sure my job would be easier if it just went away forever, so actually I'm not seeing a downside at this point, other than I already passed. Anyway mainly I just wanted to share my relief with people who'd get it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:It sounds like you aren't in the US, so it's hard for us here to give you much advice. But I'd agree with other posters that if you can get licensed while working your current gig you should suck it up and do it. Also study harder than you did during law school so you actually pass. (I assume that's why clerkships aren't an option) I get why you'd assume that, but the main reasons I've ruled out a clerkship are that here, only 20% of people get them, so they're super competitive, and while I haven't failed any classes (credit/distinction average) I'm not top 20% of the state good (high distinction average). The main reason I've ruled it out is that clerkships are full time and go for about a year, so I'd definitely have to quit my job, which I like. Many (but not all) are also about who you know, and since I come from a family of teachers, the answer is "nobody". PLT is a lot faster and I could do it while keeping my job, and since 80% of lawyers do it, it isn't really seen as lesser or inferior. To those asking why not delay until after the election: I could, and if I started and realised I really couldn't do both I would, but I work better keeping the momentum up. If I take a year off, it's way more likely that I just wouldn't bother and wouldn't come back to it. There is a time limit for PLT where if you don't do it within three years you have to repeat some subjects before they'll let you do it, so I'd be fine delaying for a year. Thanks again for the advice everyone, I do really appreciate it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
The form PLT takes depends to an extent on which of the three providers you do it with, but it's basically a combination of coursework and placement in a firm. It'd be a pain to do the placement but possible if I used my leave. Here it isn't uncommon for people to do a law degree and not do the extra step to get qualified as a lawyer. Obviously most people get qualified, but I know a lot of people who work in government as advisors, HR, managerial roles etc. who have law degrees but aren't lawyers.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
Millennial posted:Hey, I'm an Australian lawyer who has worked in politics and remains politically connected. Rolled Cabbage posted:They do now. I don't know how the cut off works applying to Whitlam, but she'll at best have extra hoops to jump through and at worst have to redo the ruddy thing. Thanks guys, especially Millennial. My understanding is that PLT has a three year limit - if you don't do it within three years of graduating, you have to retake some subjects (I'd assume it's the Priestly but I don't know for sure). Choices, choices.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2016 11:31
|
|
|
In many ways I don't want to do it, but I'm also aware that there are pros and cons on either side, which is why I was looking for advice in case there was anything I'd overlooked or not considered. I figured people in here would know more than me since none of my relatives are lawyers so I don't really have anyone in real life to ask, and uni and PLT providers aren't going to give unbiased advice because they both want to push everyone into doing PLT (PLT providers for obvious reasons, my uni because of graduation rates and stats. I'm in the first year of intake and they want everyone to join biglaw so that their course looks good). At this point I'm mostly leaning towards "it probably isn't worth it", but I wanted to get some more informed opinions, even if only to make sure my reasons for not doing it were valid, and not just weak justifications and rationalisations for being lazy. I mean I've still got like a year to decide, so it isnt a huge urgent decision to make, but the main reason for doing it would be a "keeping options open just in case" kind of thing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
I mainly lurk (final semester, four weeks to go, holy poo poo) but here's a story some of you might get a kick out of if legal schaudenfreude is your thing. Jurisdiction is Australia. My friend's parents are getting divorced. Both parents are directors of her mother's company. Divorce is bitter and prolonged, domestic abuse etc., culminates in him getting tazed by the cops for charging at one whilst holding a knife after being asked to leave the premises, which sees him do a little jail time. For extra laughs, he was a police officer, so probably should have known better. He gets out of jail, they still don't have a court date to determine custody of my friend's younger sister (mother seeking sole custody because she wants it, father seeking it because he doesn't want mother to have it). Meanwhile, he goes to the Supreme Court to file for bankruptcy on behalf of the business. Judge very quickly works out a) business is completely solvent and doing just fine, and b) (ex)wife has no idea he's done this. He essentially says "my bad, can we pretend this never happened?" Judge says "nope, you started this, I'm finishing it. Come back after the custody hearing has happened." Breach of directors' duties is something that can be a big deal here, with possible jail time, which you're more likely to get if you're clearly just trying to manipulate the court. At this point, it's been going on for well over a year, and my friend's mum's lawyer is basically working pro bono which is good, because there's no way they'd be able to afford the legal fees by now. poo poo like this is why I am never, ever going to go into family law, so God bless all of you who do.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2017 16:09
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Oh yeah, thats the good stuff. Yeah, I feel bad, because at this point I know they're just exhausted and want to get the custody stuff in particular over with, but personally I'm looking forward to watching him get turbofucked by the judge who clearly knows what's up. The custody bullshit did lead to one  moment though - they were telling the sister how the judge was going to ask her some questions about where she'd like to live, and how she should just answer honestly. The sister replied "mum, no offence, but it's [older sister] first, then you."
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
So here in Australia, law is a four year course, unless you pair it with another degree (like a bachelor of arts, or international politics or whatever), which makes it a five year degree. This week I had to submit an assignment for a fifth year unit, human rights law. It was 2000 words, worth 50% of our grade, and footnotes were included in the word count. So in actuality it was a fifth year compulsory subject, worth 50%, 1700 words. I really don't go to a real law school at all.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
olylifter posted:maybe that's why people in Canada who go to australian law schools have a hard go of it. They rarely get decent gigs if they work in law at all. In fairness, that example was an extreme outlier caused by a lot of miscommunication between different lecturers across multiple campuses (footnotes were included, then they weren't, then they were), but still. Here some students do the LSAT, but I'm pretty sure it's only if you're doing the JD, so definitely not all students, and probably not even a majority. Part of the problem is my school is still new (I'm in the inaugural class), so there are still some teething issues, especially since they're still determined to co-ordinate across our campuses in Victoria and New South Wales, which just doesn't work. This has never been the most prestigious course, but things have taken a notable downslide over the last could of years, which is kind of impressive. If I was looking to start today, as opposed to five years ago, I wouldn't go here. Other highlights of my time here include: our ethics lecturer disappearing halfway through semester after the faculty discovered she'd been disbarred for, you guessed it, unethical conduct (no idea how she got hired without them discovering it); our Communications Law lecturer leaving three weeks in for reasons probably relating to him having a husband and working at a Catholic Univeristy; and a minor media scandal after another lecturer quit after levelling bullying allegations at our Dean, who has had bullying allegations upheld against her at her previous university, and is now in mandatory anger management classes. I essentially go to Greendale Community College.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
I genuinely find that fascinating. Honestly the only reason I'm so blasé about my school's reputation and whatever is because I already have a job working in politics that I love and will keep, so at this point I'm able to sit back and enjoy the pretty flames. If I actually wanted to practice law I'd be a lot more panicked.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
Jaded Burnout posted:Law school starts today Your username is going to be so fitting so soon.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
Had my final ever law class today. I think I should feel something - happy, relieved, scared, whatever - but I don't feel anything at all. Is this how I know I'm really ready to be a lawyer? This emptiness inside?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2017 13:26
|
|
|
Fun story, I only have one law exam this semester because my other subject had all assessment tasks completed by week 10 (12 week semesters) so there was no point going to class after then. Not that there was much point going before, since the topic for our final assessment piece (worth 60% of our grade) was self-selected. Not, like, off a list or anything, our task was to come up with any prompt and topic we wanted and write it. We didn't have a rubric either. I have so many stories about this place. (Thanks for goongrats.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
nm posted:Lol, now you have to pass the bar. Or you can still quit now. Nah, I'm in Australia. I'm going to do PLT (basically a mandated diploma type thing to get your practising certificate, equivalent to articles) and I'm done. If I get into the program I want, I should theoretically finish in July next year (doing it part-time because I currently have a job).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
Just had my last ever law exam. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2017 09:58
|
|
|
Got my results, officially made it through my five year double degree without failing a class. (I realise this should be like bare minimum but I'm the only one in my friend group who managed this, and as someone who is not passionate about being a lawyer, it was a hell of a slog.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2017 12:44
|
|
|
Got an email from my uni. I'm officially considered "course complete" and set to graduate autumn 2018.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2018 11:48
|
|
|
I started my compulsory pre-admission course (PLT) today. They made us do a Myers-Briggs test. My winning streak of quality legal education continues.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2018 14:34
|
|
|
In today's installment of Whitlam's Adventures in Lawyer Finishing School we had Negotiation, which consisted of our group being split. Three quarters of us were employees, one quarter were employers, role playing the establishment of a new firm. Our first action as employees was to unionise, which we were told was "against the spirit of the exercise". In brighter news, I found out my compulsory placement can be reduced from 25 days to 15 due to prior experience I've had at a crim firm. It may not sound like much but given I have a real job already that I kind of need to be at, I'll take any reduction I can.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2018 13:29
|
|
|
Real-time update from the training course: I'm in Negotiations. We're going to do another Myers-Briggs to help figure out our personality types and how that might influence our negotiation techniques. We can't use the results from earlier in the week because ???
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
I'm negotiating a contract for a TV anchor who just wants the job so she can get a movie deal and doesn't really care about the salary. I don't know what my partner's facts are but feels like it should he straightforward?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2018 00:39
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Offer to take 77% of what male counterparts make, pay for clothes out of your own salary, and promise not to get pregnant for the first two years of the job Hah. I got the prize for negotiating the best deal. I got her $225,000, first right of refusal for hosting season two, and a national campaign to highlight the network's commitment to equality (thus further boosting her profile, and making the network look good). Babby lawyer do good?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2018 01:21
|
|
|
Hoshi posted:Depends, what did your biggest ask look like? The facts I was given were she wanted the job, didn't care about salary but her last role was $75,000 six months ago interstate, wanted to leverage the role into an acting career. I started out asking for $250,000, based on industry rates, was prepared to go to $80,000. The facts the guy representing the network had were that someone had dropped out last minute, if the series was cancelled they'd lose $1 mil (so really just wanted to close the deal) and were going to pay to original, much younger host $300,000.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2018 01:38
|
|
|
$200,000
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2018 04:14
|
|
|
CmdrSmirnoff posted:This is fantastic and raises the question: are there any really good courtroom clips on youtube that are must-watch for trial lawyers? Either for comedy or practical value. Relatedly, a big component of my course this week was being told "don't do that. Americans do that. We don't.  "
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2018 00:01
|
|
|
I'm completing my mandatory placement at this law firm, and today I had my monthly security awareness training. The training this month was to do with Bitcoin. Not about how your computers might be hacked to secretly mine it, but about how we should all buy some to keep on hand just in case, and criminals have a business model too, so there's a good chance you'll get your data back from them if they infect you with ransomware. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2018 04:41
|
|
|
I've officially passed my first oral exam (with a distinction ) and finished my placement, which means for the first time in two months I won't have to travel an hour and a half each way weekly for my two-day placement on top of my other two jobs. Still on track to be admitted some time around August. I look forward to never practicing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2018 14:44
|
|
|
GET MONEY posted:"work smart not hard" philosophy So someone should probably explain the concept of "billables" to you too, huh. Especially since this is usually shorthand for "I'm lazy but do enough to scrape by". No judgement, that's fine in a lot of jobs, but in my experience that's often what it means. Not unrelated but a friend of mine who graduated this year with me is working at a medium sized firm and regularly puts in 12+ hour days. Within the last few weeks she had a literal 22 hour day. She then had work the next day. If you're not familiar with law and legal hierarchies you really need to understand how they work too, although I'm willing to accept this may vary by region (but I'd bet it probably doesn't vary that much). Where I am, the legal profession is incredibly hierarchical, comparable to the army (according to friends of mine with experience in both). If you can't handle being bottom of the pecking order, having to hold your tongue around stupid ideas that you know are moronic, and staying back for no reason other than your Principal is still around, don't even consider law for a single second.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2018 12:55
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Attorneys are statutorily disqualified from jury duty here. Ditto. Where I am (Victoria, Australia, but I think it's nationally consistent) you're automatically ineligible if you're a lawyer or barrister.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
Where I am they do multiple swearing in sessions a year at the Supreme Court (which is not our highest court in the hierarchy) and you need to find someone to move to have you admitted to the roll. Who moves you can be a political thing and signify your future intentions (e.g. whether you ask a judge, partner at a firm, whatever). I work in actual politics, and have been told that if I want I can get the state Treasurer to move me. I'm almost tempted to take it up for shits and gigs because it'd just be so ridiculously overkill.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
Ironically, I'm now in the position where I'm being encouraged to make something up, because I've got nothing to declare - no parking tickets, speeding fines, arrests, disciplinary matters from uni, nothing. Apparently it looks really suspicious if you declare absolutely nothing, so a few people are advising that I make up something minor that couldn't be checked up (e.g. dismissed ticket for travelling without a concession card).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 05:23
|
|
|
I'm on my way to graduation and I'm on the train and feel so overdressed. I'm still quite worried I'm gonna get there and they'll say "sorry, who are you? Nope, no record of you graduating today." Law school: trust no-one.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2018 02:48
|
|
|
There are more people here I don't recognise than do. My one regret at this point is that I didn't bring a flask.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2018 04:53
|
|
|
Double post but our commencement speaker just got the name of the university wrong. Instead of ACU she called us ANU, which is a much better school.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2018 05:45
|
|
|
Toona the Cat posted:No, not really. Though, a nice note. My mom died 5 years ago, and today for graduation, I wore one of her gold necklaces with a pendant I gave her for her birthday when I was in high school. That's sweet. I did something similar, recent graduation buddy (although mercifully my parents are still alive). I wore earrings from my dad, a necklace from my mum, a bracelet from my remaining grandmother, and a ring I received when I turned 21 from the estate of my other grandmother. Probably the best part of my graduation (other than it was really quick) was that they livestreamed it, so my family who couldn't be there in person still got to watch.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2018 10:41
|
|
|
Yeah what the gently caress is it with everyone and G&S? When Sondheim is so vastly superior. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2018 14:22
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Funny you say that. The aforementioned paid gig is for a Sondheim show. You are finally doing something good and worthwhile with your life. (For real though, 'grats and break a leg.) Alaemon posted:Holy poo poo, are we going to segue from G&S chat into Sondheim chat? THIS IS THE BEST THREAD. My high school theatre teacher met Sondheim. It was the night of our year 12 formal (equivalent of senior prom, I think), and Sondheim was doing a talk in the city, so I went basically straight from that to the formal. When I got there, the teacher told me what had happened and why he was late. He'd been at a hotel bar and when he went to the bathroom, Sondheim walked in, to which all he could think of to say was "oh my God, you're Stephen Sondheim! You made me not hate musical theatre." They briefly chatted, and Sondheim invited him back to his table, where he was sitting with his good mate Geoffrey Rush. They invited him to hang out but he declined and came to the formal instead, for reasons I will never understand, but aren't "stdh".
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2018 00:19
|
|
|
Just caught up with a friend who's a crim lawyer, planning to ask him for advice and maybe any tips on job openings. He ended up asking me. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2018 05:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 13:50 |
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:I'm sorry I find this morbidly funny. Nah it's pretty funny. The reason he asked me is because he's looking to gtfo. I was toying with the idea of applying for graduate lawyer jobs but after talking to him today I'm very strongly considering not doing that at all and just staying in government. Less job security but more money and fewer hours. Plus no billables.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2018 09:14
|
|