Jump to content

FineCanadianFXs

Members
  • Content count

    292
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

FineCanadianFXs last won the day on August 29 2016

FineCanadianFXs had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

439 Good People

About FineCanadianFXs

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

463 profile views
  1. Transitioning from Gov to Firm

    Sure, and in your circumstance I would have agreed with your decision--nobody should pressure themselves into taking a position they feel would be a bad fit for them. It's usually sound advice to tell a law student applicant to avoid taking a job out of necessity in cases similar to yours, and in fact, that is probably the "unhealthy" example Queensberry above fears. In the face of information that a job will likely make someone unhappy, advising them to just do it anyway because it is there--unless that applicant seems not a great candidate to replace that opportunity elsewhere--is bad advice. Yolo. Nobody should waste their lives doing work they hate. I agree. But. The distinction is between cases where a person wants to do A, not B, but is offered B, a "good job" and those where a person merely wants to do A, but is offered B which is a "good job". There's a huge difference between the two. And here, OP hasn't chimed back in with more specifics, so the former doesn't seem the case; it isn't really safe to assume they're worried they're going to hate or even marginally dislike their summer employ. And even still--based on the language they used--it doesn't even really sound like the alternative is the be-all-end-all of their aspirations: "I would've preferred to have some firm options" and "I would like to work at a firm for articling and the start of my career (and maybe all of it)" is quite different than "I always dreamed of working for corporate clients", or "I got into law to do insurance defense work", or "If I'm not a real estate lawyer I'm nothing". I was in the same boat, if not inclined more specifically to a particular area of law; I took an exceptional opportunity, albeit outside my primary area of interest; I was fine; life is phenomenal. So, while in your case, it was a good decision--and to be fair, you seem extremely happy with your work, making it easy to retrospectively justify your decision in the absence of any idea what the alternate "Sliding Doors" universe looks like--I think that in most cases as here, without more information, there is little wisdom in telling law students to say no to opportunities. Especially those opportunities not cast in many years of stone. Certainly, with MAG's hireback rates (depending on their office), they'd likely be right back in the hunt for work after articling at which point they'd have a fine resume to take around to firms, if that's still what they wanted to do.
  2. Transitioning from Gov to Firm

    Or they may not change their mind. Or they may decide they like what they do. Or they decide they don't like law at all. Or they die suddenly. In none of these outcomes is the choice to take on a 2L summer job (or the advice to do so) anything in the remote proximity of dangerous or incorrect. Certainly there's no finality to it. So, two lines of advice can coexist and be fine here: your advice which suggests "everything will be fine, follow your dreams"; and the other advice--which includes mine--that says one should say yes to typically decent legal job offers. Its fine that you offer an alternative view, and I haven't even disagreed with it generally. I disagree with in this instance, because here I think it come from a place of privilege. Most people who are less financially stable, or who have historically been, have more difficulty with the mentality of 'waiting and seeing if something better comes along'. And, we both know that students--and eventually associates--working in MAG (yep, even those who may not originally have dreamed of working in the Ministry of Hats when they applied to law school) are not those we usually hear from as being woefully and terribly unhappy nay clinically depressed with their choice ("oh, woe, my law school decisions had I only known") but regrettably stuck in their decrepit horrendous public sector garbage lives forever. But, I might agree with your approach in other instances. Its fine we disagree. That doesn't make my advice healthy and yours un. Anyway, I'm through arguing semantics--I'm convinced there's nothing wrong or dangerous with telling someone to strike one iron while its hot and worry about the nicer iron later when that one heats up. I'm pretty sure deep down you know there's nothing really wrong with this approach either, especially in this case, so I'll leave it there.
  3. Transitioning from Gov to Firm

    Okay, but nothing in the above properly explains why it is "unhealthy and wrong advice" to recommend someone accept an offer for a job to which they applied.
  4. Transitioning from Gov to Firm

    Are you unfamiliar with the articling market in Ontario? Because that is perhaps what underlies the mentality held by many of your fellow law students, which you refuse to understand; they're concerned they will wind up with nothing or something with which they'll be unhappy. I'm unsure why that reasoning is difficult to understand. The OP stated explicitly above that they would be happy with a MAG job. Of course, they can risk that position by holding out for something better. Here, we know neither the likelihood of a firm job ("a little elbow grease" will not guarantee employment, I think you know that. We also have no information of the OP's qualifications) nor do we even know OP's area of interest--they simply expressed they'd like to work at a firm. None of the above advice to which you refer amounts to "If you have a job, you'd be crazy not to take it". It amounts to "based on what OP communicated, a wise choice would be to accept an offer, knowing that the position offered would make that person relatively happy. Particularly considering that the market is rough, we know nothing of the OP's qualifications, and it is generally a relief for most law students to have succeeded in acquiring an articling position". That is fine advice which you're welcome to disagree with, but I'm not particularly sure you made a strong case for the alternative.
  5. Transitioning from Gov to Firm

    I second what healthlaw says above--never reject an opportunity you'd be happy taking because you think there's some other hypothetical better one out there. I'm pretty sure there's some wisdom in the "a bird in the hand, etc." proverb. Its one thing if you actively loathed MAG and were disinterested in working there. But it sounds like you'd also like it there and so the idea that you'd reject an employment offer is pretty unreasonable. Essentially, you've just answered the $500,000 question on Who Wants to be a Millionaire, and you're asking us if you should take that money or reject it before you've even heard the next question because you'd prefer the million. You should probably take your guaranteed payday.
  6. Should you wear a poppy?

    You shouldn't wear it unless you want to. And if you want to, do whatever you want. I dunno, this is like asking "should I wear a blue tie or a red tie." It really probably doesn't matter.
  7. Completely agree. The key is not to let that frustrate you, the material is not as complex as its authors seem to want to make it. Unlike other sections, I found that making chapter-by-chapter summaries of Real Estate helped me isolate and clarify the core concepts, which is all you really need to do (and frankly that goes for most of the exam). 1. Know the things; 2. know where to find the things; 3. learn how to find those things real fast; 4. practice finding em faster; 5. learn to answer questions that require answers about the things you've gotten really good and fast at finding.
  8. No. "Hardest" is undoubtedly a relative term. Do not let a perceived "difficult" section stress you out, it will only harm your capacity to take in the material.
  9. In-Firm Interview Schedule

    Stamina is an issue though and a large one, so why discount it? It limits the amount of energy you're able to invest in any single firm. Beyond stamina, it limits the time and flexibility you can invest in any one firm if you start scheduling 2nd interviews. And you may want to be careful with communicating, even subconsciously, how busy you are, because it paints you as a flight risk. Why invest time and effort on candidate who has seven other firms on her mind? Think of it like dating - if a person is seeing ten other people and can barely fit you into their schedule, how likely is it that you'd keep pursuing them unless you were certain you were soulmates. Finally, you'll be limited by attention you can give to any one firm. Eight interviews means a lot of people, and their names and stories which you may want to remember and connect with on later occasions. I had six, and it was too many.
  10. What are in-firm interviews like?

    I think such a combination bow/bolo tie exists already, though I think it is ineffective and unpopular in practice for many of the same reasons a mullet is not a popular legal hairdo. If you're gonna wear two of something, you're better off wearing two suits. Sure, it'll get hot and you'll sweat a lot, but it probably won't soak through the second layer. That's what the second suit is for. it both creates and solves your sweat problem.
  11. What are in-firm interviews like?

    I doubt anyone will care or notice. Unless the exact following: Both your ties are muted and interview appropriate but also just perfectly unique enough to be noteworthy; You see and talk in depth to the same person at both interview and reception; That person happens to be sartorially-minded; That person notices you changed ties and has a comment to make on one, the other, or both; Your ties are so goddamn good that it would compel someone to make a positive comment on one, the other, or both. Otherwise, do whatever you would normally do. I'm probably the type of person in #3-4 (I'm also the type of person who might change ties) but it would take a goddamn killer tie to lead to #5. So in sum: no it matters not one iota. Just wear whatever best tie matches your best suit and focus on actually relevant things like whether you want to work at that firm and why they should hire you, none of which has to do with tie selection. By the way, if you wear your best, most confidence-inducing tie to the interview, why would you change into an inferior tie? Or if you're saving your best for the reception, why are you showing up to the interview in your number two or lesser? Or do you not rank your ties and if not how do you spend your time?
  12. In-Firm Interview Schedule

    It's hard to get beyond the notion that everything you do is a signal to the firms in some way, but you have no choice but to navigate the options available to you. More importantly than whether it looks bad is remembering to juggle your schedule according to your preferences. If this is your fifth-ranked firm, then who cares if it looks bad? Put them on Tuesday. And remember, whatever strategy you have will be decimated on the fly anyway by whatever happens the morning calls flood in (if they do, and if they don't your decision is easy).
  13. Interviews

    I know you know that giving up before even trying something--let alone giving it your full attention and effort--because you assume failure is a terrible way to approach literally anything in life. Anything. I'll refrain, then, from recommending that you put 100% into your interviews because that's the only acceptable way to go about getting opportunities most people do not get.
  14. Study time for Ontario Bar

    My fear of failure compelled me to "read" them twice, but the second time was a major skim-job. I thought it was rather helpful in building confidence by going through complicated (tax) or ill-written (real estate) sections a second time. If your brain is like mine, prior sections are just pushed nether toward nothing once you move on to other subjects. With time and efficient reading, a second read can be done. Not well, but it can be done. I think in retrospect, the right approach is--if you have bonus time--spend it re-reading the professional responsibility section. Thrice even. I'm sure there are nice people out there, but I wouldn't index with strangers, myself. That said, I found my index really helpful. I'm sure you can get by with the table of contents alone (many posters on this board endorse that method) But you can also apparently buy indices. Personally (and only theoretically since I have not done so), I'd rather save time and pay a stranger. Despite my skepticism, it seems preferable for one person or organization to do it all for me. I lose no time, instead of doing work myself while relying on numerous strangers to do it right. More variables and stranger danger. And the problem with counting on the reliability of strangers is this: time is your most valuable resource in the process, and if someone screws it up (even though it is a mindless task) it will have a major negative impact on your schedule. Or, best-case, their incompetence ruins your index for a particular section. Maybe you're less cynical than I am, in which case people post here all the time near the bar date looking for fellow indexers.
  15. When's the best time to start making my summaries as a 1L?

    Seems a bit speculative and harsh. OP merely wanted some advice about summaries; they had no concern about overall study habits. 4-6 hours of daily study is fine, especially if one is caught up with their readings. Moreover, most students I know did just fine without ever catching up fully with assigned readings. I worked about that much in school, if not more. I certainly don't consider myself inefficient or a slow reader. And though I did not come remotely close to reading everything, I did quite well. Still, I would never advise anyone to adjust their habits before those habits actually translated into negative results. Also, I can't think of any good reason to believe upper year classes at any school become consistently more arduous. I don't remember that ever being the case. In fact, in my experience, law school got exponentially easier as I went.
×