Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 08/23/18 in all areas

  1. 8 points
    I'm an articling student who lives in a single room above a bowling alley and below another bowling alley. I hope the inherent privileges of this profession allow me to move to maybe like a basement?
  2. 8 points
    Oh jeeze - the poor white man being subject to assumptions about his race. Dude - seriously check your privilege. I'm totally assuming you're a white guy here because I can't see these words coming out of anyone else's mouth (except perhaps a white woman's). The fact is people treat you more positively because you're white. They just do. You didn't do anything to make that happen, you didn't earn it - you were just born white. When you interviewed at law firms I'm willing to bet that a lot of people you interviewed with talked about "how you were just a good fit" and that "they really just felt comfortable around you" -- part of that is probably because they are white too and they are more comfortable around other white dudes. You didn't earn that - you were just born white. If you and a black/brown/asian woman were born at the same time, in the same hospital you came out with an advantage due solely to the colour of your skin. That - right there, is privilege. Sure, you probably totally had to work hard to get where you are, but anyone, LITERALLY ANYONE who is not white and male probably had to work harder than you to get to the same position. You didn't earn that - you were just born white. Just take a moment and accept that - because nothing infuriates me more than having privileged white guys walk around and basically complain about "reverse racism" because they've been stigmatized with the label of being "privileged".
  3. 5 points
    We're lawyers because we're better than other people. And we're better than other people because we're lawyers. That's all I need to know thank you very much.
  4. 5 points
    Here - let me Google that for you. and here and here oh, here again and here and here
  5. 5 points
    To be clear, my intent was to share the things which we don't even think about that do show ones relative privilege in society. Whether or not it was earned wasn't even part of the original thought process. It was mostly to get people thinking. It was, at least in part, due to the incessant whining I've experienced from law students about how rough they have it. So my motivation might not have been entirely pure, but the message persists - it's important to merely recognize/be cognizant of certain privileges when they do arise. Lastly, I honestly to believe it can help with mental health issues, stress, etc. I'm worried about my debt. Almost daily, almost constantly. But it helps to walk into Scotia and be offered more credit without asking for it - because even though it's more debt, if a bank has this much faith in me that it'll be okay, surely there's something to that. Further, I think about my cousin who's trying to figure out how - even with tuition covered by grants now - how he can afford to live in Toronto and go to college at the same time, without income. He doesn't have access to the credit I do. The credit has enabled me to live a middle class Canadian life (sure, I might be better off living a lower class life, but I made that choice balancing risks and rewards, which is again a privilege. )
  6. 4 points
    Hi all. Long time lurker here. Thought I’d share some insights I’ve gathered over the past couple of years of law school with those of you about to embark on the 2L recruit. Here are a few tidbits that I think I’d have benefited from had they been shared with me prior to OCIs. Relax. OCIs are less important than you think. If you want to end up on Bay Street, there are plenty of ways to do so outside of the OCI recruit. If you don’t, great, because many exciting summer opportunities arise outside of the formal OCI recruit, and many, many, many more employers partake in the articling recruit as do in OCIs. If you end up without a position on Call Day, you are among the majority of your class, and the most of you will end up finding awesome jobs elsewhere. Prepare, prepare, prepare. Preparation is, IMO, the key to success in interviews. Anticipate the questions that you’ll be asked and prepare responses for those questions. Don’t necessarily have your answers scripted, but have an understanding going in of what points you want to make mention of in responding to particular questions. The more prepared you are, the more relaxed you’ll feel and the more easily you’ll be able to field questions from your interviewers. Think about the following questions, each of which I distinctly recall being asked during my own interviews: Why do you want to practice (insert practice area) law? What draws you to our firm? Describe a challenge you’ve faced in your previous employment and explain how you resolved it. Tell me about that thesis paper you wrote. I see you worked with X company for a number of years, what’s all that about? Have you had any negative customer service experiences? Where do you see yourself in 5 years? What do you like to do outside of school? If you were employed at our office and you were managing multiple assignments and a partner asked you to take on a new, urgent assignment, what would you do? You mentioned X as among your hobbies and interests. I do that too, and I know tons about it. What do you think about this thing that just happened that’s related to our shared interest? What has been your favourite class at law school? Do you have any questions for us? Have 1 or 2 thoughtful questions prepared for your interviewers, but don't limit yourself to those questions. Some of the best questions are those that arise naturally in the course of your conversation. E.g., if a lawyer mentions something about their firm that piques your interest at the outset of the interview, ask about it when the opportunity arises. Otherwise, try to avoid asking questions that you could ask any lawyer. Show that you’ve done some research by crafting some insightful questions about your recruiter’s practice. (E.g., if they are litigators, look them up on CanLII and ask a question about the work they did on X case). Also, this may be obvious, but it is very important that you actually listen to your interviewers’ answers to your questions; try to ask questions and make comments that flow from your conversation. There is nothing choppier than listening to the answer to your question and immediately jumping into a subsequent question that has nothing to do with the first question. Avoid the non sequiturs. Segue in. Keep a conversational tone in your interaction. If there is a particular firm that you are dying to work for, let them know! But wait until the time is right. Don’t tell firms during your brief OCI interviews that they are your first choice. Wait until in-firms and wait for the right opportunity. Firms can’t offer you a position before Call Day and they can’t ask if you’d accept a position if you were offered one. That said, they still want to be sure that you’d accept a position if they offered one, because if they offer you a position on Call Day and you choose to sit on it for a while, their second and third and fourth choices might get snapped up by the competition while you take your time to wait for another offer. If they ask a question like: So, what do you think of our firm? That is your opportunity to tell them that you’ve loved meeting their team, you love their exciting practice, and that you’d immediately accept a position of you were offered one (only once you’ve met enough of their team to actually have genuinely come to this conclusion). Also feel free to offer this information without any prompting by the interviewers. With that information in mind, they can feel secure in calling you with an offer on Call Day. Caveat: DON’T SAY THIS TO MULTIPLE FIRMS, AND DON’T SAY IT IF YOU DON’T MEAN IT. Recruiters chat, and they may catch you in a lie if you tell multiple firms. Also, it’ll look bad on you if you tell a firm that you’d immediately accept their offer and then turn around and take 20 minutes to accept once they offer you a position on Call Day. Be cognizant of your image. Be prepared for curveballs. I got the impression that one firm was trying to prompt me to breach confidentiality with respect to some legal work that I had been involved in at a legal clinic. Know what you can and can't talk about when it comes to your legal work, and don't fall into the trap of mindlessly blabbering on about information that you are bound to keep confidential. Multiple firms have asked me what other firms I was interviewing for. One actually wrote down my answer. During the recent articling recruit, some of my colleagues were asked: “If we were to offer you a position at 5:00 pm on Call Day, how quickly do you think you could respond to our offer?” This is obviously a pretty unfair question to ask of a student and is pretty clearly in breach of the Law Society’s Guidelines. A good non-response is to say “Well, I've been very impressed by you and your colleagues and your exciting practices and if I were so fortunate as to receive an offer at 5pm on Call Day, you can be sure that I'd respond very quickly." If there is some kind of glaring issue in your application (e.g. D in torts or zero demonstrated interest in the firm’s practice areas), be prepared to explain it. I hope this is at least a bit helpful. Feel free to reach out with any questions; I'm happy to take a stab. I have partaken in the 2L summer and articling recruits and have secured positions through both processes.
  7. 4 points
    No one is forced to do anything. But for some students, who may not have financial concerns for whatever reason (no debt, parents are supporting them, they are married to a spouse with a good job, they have independent wealth/savings) and who can find quality articles with a lawyer who may be reasonably successful and committed to mentoring them but just does not have the resources to pay them a salary (which do exist), why should they be prohibited from making arrangements that allow them to learn and meet the requirements to become part of a well-paying profession? Articling is not primarily "work", it is primarily learning. A person who cannot afford to work for free should not do it if they do not want to. Requiring all lawyers to pay minimum wage won't make the lawyers who currently have unpaid articling students pay minimum wage. It just means they won't take articling students and there will be less options/choices for the students who are willing to voluntarily take unpaid articles. It won't make the less desirable students get articling positions and it won't make crappy principals better.
  8. 4 points
    Privilege comes in many forms. Kudos to you for working hard, but hard work is necessary for success, but not sufficient. Luck plays a huge role as well. I assume you were born into a stable household and have been healthy and able-bodied your entire life. Your career hasn’t been derailed because you’ve been struck with an aggressive form of cancer, or had to care for a sick relative for an extended period of time, or been crippled in a horrible motor vehicle accident and had to drop out of school to spend 4 years going in and out of a hospital for rehab/treatment, or had to skip university altogether because your father skipped out on your family and left you to work 3 jobs since you graduated high school to help your mom make ends meet. I’ve seen all of these happen to close friends or family members. The hardest working person I ever knew died from cancer in their early 30’s.
  9. 3 points
    The point is that an articling student is not actually an employee. Some firms choose to treat them as such, but it is not required to do so because they are not traditional employees. Firms that can afford to pay them and see value in doing so, do it. Those that can't, don't. There are some lawyers that do all or almost exclusively legal aid. So I can envision plenty of situations where a student's work is not billable and not generating profit in and of itself. And where lawyers are not "billing employees' time to clients." You need to learn more about the reality of legal aid practices, my friend. Also, the way to avoid being someone who is in a position where unpaid articles are an option? Avoid being a marginal candidate. I don't think too many A students are articling for free. I think it's also relatively rare for B+ and B students. If you get your 1L grades back and you're below the curve, you can cut your losses and drop out before the debt gets too high, or if you choose to stick with it, then accept that you are not going to be the cream of the crop when it comes to articling recruitment and plan accordingly. But don't get a bunch of Cs, or go abroad to a crap law school and come back, and then be surprised that no one wants to pay you to article or sees value in your "labour", and be grateful that there are some people who will still give you a chance to prove your worth as a lawyer, whether or not they are paying you.
  10. 3 points
    Maybe they've read one of the many articles, books, or other resources that acknowledge the very real existence of both white and male privilege?
  11. 3 points
    I suspect, requiring law firms to pay the minimum wage will, for the most part, take away the choice of students to article for less than minimum wage but will not get law firms to increase their wage to the minimum.
  12. 3 points
    If you are going to take this view that far, you may as well go straight to the logical nihilistic end that you cannot take any personal responsibility for what they have achieved as it was all predestined. Attending law school for example, how does a person earn that? A person does not earn being born with enough intelligence to allow them to succeed on the lsat and university. Sure, the person made sacrifices, but they only made those sacrifices due to the people they met in their upbringing who enstilled the value of hard work in them and meeting those people was luck. So even their hard work ethic, they did not really earn that or the consequences flowing from their hard work. My point isn't that your logic is wrong (granted I don't think you took it far enough), rather my point is to ask what is the benefit of this kind of thinking? Who benefits from degrading all personal achievements to nothing but luck of circumstances? I agree it is important to be thankful for what you have and show gratitude, but one doesn't need to claim everything is due to luck and suggest that one hasn't earned anything to do that. On fact suggesting it is all up to luck seems to me to be missing a key part of being grateful. I'm thankful for my good fortune in life, but I am even more thankful for that something more than luck, something special which has helped me through life. By suggesting it is all luck, one loses the opportunity to be thankful for that something more, something special, which is a true shame.
  13. 3 points
    That’s a beautiful summary of why privilege is invisible. For a long time this profession was the almost exclusive domain of white men. Every one of them would say he earned his place on hard work and hence wasn’t “privileged”.
  14. 3 points
    I work with exceptionally smart, capable, driven and professional individuals on a daily basis. (My non-law friends' stories about their colleagues never fail to make me realize just how much of a privilege this is.)
  15. 2 points
    There are many legal aid files where a lot of what the lawyer does can’t be billed to anyone, never mind what the student does. Lots of charities/organizations rely on volunteers. Lots of new Canadians / new grads can’t get a job in certain areas until they have volunteer experience. Why is your concern only with articling students? Articling students have less than a year to, as you put it, “work for free” and then, if they’re providing so much value, they are free to bill whatever they want. This is no worse, and better than, the situation of many people in many professions. If you are against anyone doing any kind of task in any kind of workplace without getting minimum wage, fair enough, if you want to shut down charities, drive up health care costs and therefore taxes (no hospital volunteers) etc. If this applies only to lawyers, why?
  16. 2 points
    But it ain't gonna happen. What government, or LSO members, are going to pay money to make sure articling students get a minimum wage? They wouldn't. So the suggested solution is illusory. I'm not trying to be nasty to you, just realistic. EDIT: (edited after likes, so they might not agree...) re @providence above I think another recent discussion, because it's learning, if articling is retained I want enough loan etc. financing available so that someone without family resources who finds an unpaid articling position is not forced to not become a lawyer because they can't afford to live without income for a year. Treating it as education, fine, but a necessary corollary is recognize the lack of income as you would while the person was a student.
  17. 2 points
    And how the fuck would you know that? I mean, barring the fact that "because you say so" you're painting a very small population with a very wide brush.
  18. 2 points
    It depends on the Law schools you are applying to. I know for a fact Ottawa Law wants you to put a verifier for scholarships that are not listed on your transcript just in case, and they explicitly stated it won't negatively impact your application for being cautious in providing extra information.
  19. 2 points
    In my opinion, articling is necessary. I do not believe the skills you learn in articling can be taught through online simulation, and I do not believe they can be adequately assessed by a multiple choice exam. I think it is valuable to have individual lawyers training other individual lawyers in the skills and values that (ought to be) associated with being a member of this profession. Personally, I would be all for an option that removes the LPP, returns to the articling-only framework, and that incentives firms to take on students by offering a waiver of the CPD requirements, discounted fees, or something of that sort. I recognize that I was privileged to have an articling position that actually prepared me for practice, and that not all articling positions are created equal, but I don't believe the baby ought to be thrown out with the bathwater.
  20. 2 points
    Hard to say. Depending how many withdrawal between now to Sept 5 The revised list is extremely inflated because Ottawa didn't send out another confirmation. I would say at least 75% who are now on the wait list will not be able to come to Ottawa if they are accepted next week. The first week of Sept will most likely restricted to those who live in the Ottawa area or have friends or ties to Ottawa. The real (able to come to Ottawa) list may be only 30 or less by next week and less by first /second week of Sept. Just my thoughts.... I have no direct or creditable information from anyone.. Good Luck
  21. 2 points
    I can call pretty much any place in town, tell them who I am and who I work for and they'll put me through to the head muckity muck without trying to give me the go around.
  22. 2 points
    You'll obtain the conservative look by wearing a navy / charcoal suit, with a white / pale blue dress shirt and a dark solid / subtle pattern tie. Don't worry so much about being conservative, just ensure your pants aren't tailored too short or your jacket too tight. No shimmer / shine in the suits either, you're not performing in Vegas (to my knowledge)! In addition to Ted Baker, you could look at Jack Victor suits as well. They're great suits that can often be found on sale. Not sure where the closest retailer is in Vancouver, you'd have to check. Also, $100-200 is fairly steep for tailoring. Maybe $100. I tailor in the midsection of my suits, sometimes the sleeves, and the pants. The most I've paid is $80 (mind you, I'm lucky to have a fantastic tailor who charges very reasonable prices). Perhaps you need a bunch of alterations though, in which case that seems reasonable. Work hard and you'll be able to drop $5,000 on a Zegna or Purple Label RL soon enough!
  23. 2 points
    Privilege is living longer (on average).
  24. 2 points
    Although a person (to some extent) does earn their way into law school and does earn their success as a lawyer, they do not earn the fact that attending law school and being a lawyer is a highly advantaged position. A person does not earn the historic context of the profession that makes it prestigious. A person does not earn the fact that there are institutions of higher learning that are reasonably accessible to most Canadians that allow a person to enter said profession. A person does not earn the fact that Canada is economically wealthy which allow lawyers to collect high fees from private citizens and the government for their work. And they do not earn how the many institutions that exist within Canada allow the legal system and society to function in such a way as for people who possess a certain set of skills talents, and training to reap massive benefits from them. Etc. To me it makes sense that people can make incredible personal sacrifices to earn their success within a profession while at the same time being massive beneficiaries of the privileged position that said profession occupies.
  25. 2 points
    You're right, of course. I was ranting less about this thread I guess and more at the word privilege and how people usually use it. Too often it gets used as an insult, where people make assumptions about you and your history based purely on surface level things like race or profession. To me, privilege has always meant something undeserved or unearned, and a lot of the time people HAVE earned the privileges they have in life. Which is in no way to say that those who are still struggling HAVEN'T earned them - that they're lazy or undeserving or whatever else - but it's too often used as a way of undermining all the actual work that's gone into a lot of people's success. So I get that the point of this thread was more to point out all the ways we are comparatively better off than most people, but the word privilege will never stop bothering me to describe that. I'm not privileged to have the things I do - I worked hard for it (and yes, had some luck thrown in for things like not being born with/developing serious illnesses that made it impossible and other such acts of life that no one can control).
  26. 2 points
    I dropped my caviar spoon on the floor and you’re really not supposed to clean those with soap so I had my manservant fetch me a new one. Edit to Add: I realize now that the privilege here isn’t clear. You see, the caviar prunery was closed, so my manservant had to find the prunier at home to get the new spoon. We all had a good laugh.
  27. 2 points
    For what it's worth, I'm becoming increasingly unconvinced that reason for attending law school is all that relevant. It seems like a good chunk of students go to law school to "help people" and "fight for justice" or similar, and then most of them apply to corporate law firms during OCIs so that they can represent forestry companies in their fight to chop down trees on Indigenous land or whatever. Some people stick to their guns – providence, Diplock, and Hegdis come to mind as people who seem to have stuck with their principles – but the vast majority of students don't (at least in 2L). Of course, a huge chunk of those ones fail to land OCI gigs and then go right back to being passionate about protecting people from the injustices of large corporations, but by then their claims are a bit hollow. And OPs stated reasons for doing big law are far from inaccurate or uncompelling: Lawyers on Bay Street do get all the perks of working at a big firm. They get free coffee, free snacks, free drinks, excellent secretarial and clerk support. Most have window offices to themselves on the top floors of those shiny towers downtown. That's a great environment to work in! And you know what, there's nothing wrong with wanting to work in that environment over the environment of your average family or criminal lawyer, say. At the same time, there's nothing wrong with wanting to work in a small firm. I get the feeling that providence loves her office and her partners, and I doubt she would be all that happy at Stikemans, even if (or perhaps because) her office would be on the 34th floor (or whatever). Lawyers on Bay Street do tend to live, and can afford to live, in the heart of Toronto. They make good salaries that easily position them to purchase a condo downtown relatively early in their career, particularly if they're partnered with another professional. The most successful ones can afford houses close to downtown, and even those that aren't can generally afford houses in the suburbs. The same isn't necessarily true for other practice areas, particularly early in one's career and particularly if one has to start and build their own practice. So yeah, for what it's worth, OP, I don't think your reasons are all that bad, and even if they were, I'm not convinced it matters.
  28. 2 points
    For law school and recruitment, nobody needs a $1000+ suit that is 100% guaranteed to get past every fashionista's "cheap detector". My law school suit was a cheap off-the-rack polyester blend. I received interviews that went well. I was offered great jobs that I really wanted. I generally had terrific prospects, and was not a Gold Medalist easily forgiven for shoddy style. Nobody ever commented negatively on my threads; I typically received positive remarks. Once or twice, I was explicitly told my cheap, off-the-rack suit was a "nice suit". Now, I know it is not a nice suit. And I know that in the summer it made me crave death. But when I put it on for interviews, I felt like a cool, affable, not unattractive dude. Presumably, that's what my prospective employers saw in me, and not the brutal stitching. In sum, for law school you need one--maybe two if you sweat or are a sloppy eater--respectable-looking and relatively conservative suits (navy, charcoal, or gray; matte not shiny; no flashy pinstripes or patterns). They need to fit you well and make you feel confident. No matter how much you pay for your suit, if you do not feel confident in it, you wasted your money. I felt like a million bucks in my good-looking-albeit-garbage-quality suit, and that was enough to convey to employers that I was not a garbage candidate. Most employers are looking for the confidence, not the stitching--unless of course that stitching is unraveling at a marvelous pace such that you wind up naked by the end of your interview. Tiger has dece sales though. I bought a suit there for under $800, it is possible. For $800 you could also probably get something dece at SuitSupply or Surmesur (though I have no experience with the latter, I've heard it's a slight cut above Indochino.)
  29. 2 points
    I haven’t had to pack a lunch in years.
  30. 1 point
    As I get closer to graduating and getting a better sense of what type of income I'm looking at - 1, 5, 10, etc years into my career, it's becoming increasingly obvious just how much the profession is privileged. It can be humbling to overhear certain Things, and humorous at times. So I'm thinking we can mark here our experiences which either show the privileged positioning of lawyers, OR funny anecdotes of people being clearly oblivious to their own privelege (in law or otherwise). To start.. I was at a Yorkville store to buy some clothes the other day. I overheard this couple talk about how their combined income of 250 grand just isn't cutting it in this city, and how living costs are getting outrageous. I couldn't help but smirk, and did my best to not literally laugh out loud. Then I realized my privilege of even being in that store as a shopper in the first place (it certainly wasn't cheap).
  31. 1 point
    They do work for the firm that is then billed to clients. They work hours the firm specifies, on projects the firm directs, in a location the firm controls, using tools that belong to the firm. Even if an articling student is not an employee for the purposes of employment standards legislation, their relationship with their principal/firm is certainly that of an employer-employee, and they should be treated accordingly. A principal has certain obligations to their student, and I think there is at least a moral obligation to pay them enough to live. Fair enough. I haven't done any legal aid, so I have no idea how that works. But I know enough to say it's still a stretch to say a student contributes absolutely, literally nothing to their firm from day one to the end of their articles. Whether that's billable hours, office tasks, diarizations, being on-call, interviews, whatever. While I appreciate the advice, I'm fortunately not in a position where I need to look for work. My concern is purely for others whose financial situation might be taken advantage of. I really don't see why a person is worth minimum wage before they go to law school, yet when they come out the other end they're somehow worth less than that. And again, I'm not arguing for Bay Street salaries for everyone. Just the ability to pay for pesky necessities like groceries and rent while they "prove their worth." An employer who expects to pay less than survival wages is not an "employer" worth having. A conversation where one party is comfortable minimizing and justifying this kind of abuse on the basis of academic grades isn't worth having either.
  32. 1 point
    But if there are too many students, won't that lead to some students still not being employable, or offered work for free/eat what you can kill scenarios, and then complaints that government/the law societies need to bail them out and give them a wage because they invested in law school or have debt? Instead of an articling crisis, won't it just create an associate crisis? edit: or soles who have no clients/can't run a business/aren't making money wanting a bail out and complaining about their debt... not to mention not serving the public properly....
  33. 1 point
    I would have to disagree with this. I'm sure that in many situations even if the student is not performing exclusively billable work that the student is contributing indirectly to the financial success of the firm. Someone needs to answer the phone or make copies or run to the courthouse or whatever the case may be. In fact, there are many law clerks whose time is not billed- does that mean they shouldn't be paid either? "Avoid being a marginal candidate" is a nice sentiment, but does not reflect the reality of the labour market today's law students find themselves in. Quite simply, law schools are graduating far too many students for the demand. And many of these students are talented and bright. I was an A student and found myself waiting tables during my articles to scrape together enough pennies to afford to bring a lunch every day. There are a lot of students who fall in the cracks due to bad luck or bad odds through no fault of their own. It is certainly not a reflection of their quality as a lawyer or their worthiness of being admitted to the profession. The current articling system is an unfair barrier to entry for many. Let students become licensed and their worth to the profession can be ascertained at that point.
  34. 1 point
    No, but it is where the logic of toads post leads
  35. 1 point
    Literally no-one is saying that.
  36. 1 point
  37. 1 point
    It’s not that it won’t be reviewed prior, but if you’ve indicated that you’re rewriting, the adcom might hold judgement on your app, if they feel it’s borderline, until your new scores come in. Otherwise, they might waitlist instead of admit you, or just straight up decline. So I would always make sure to indicate whether or not you’re rewriting.
  38. 1 point
    This is an important point. The OLSAS conversion can be brutal on some applicants (it certainly was for me.) Thankfully, non-Ontario schools don't use your OLSAS grades so Psych is correct that you're probably more of a 3.4 than 3.2 to all the other schools. Your GPA could even be higher than that depending on the spread of your grades and how that converts with certain schools and drops. Going to an Ontario school is not the be all and end all. It's obviously preferable to attend law school in the province you wish to practice in, but there are countless graduates from every other law school in the country who go to Ontario to practice. At most, it may just mean that you have to do a little more leg work in trying to find a job. Not a huge deal.
  39. 1 point
    In as of 10 minutes ago. Best of luck to everyone remaining on the waitlist and hope to see you all in a few weeks on the other side:)
  40. 1 point
    I mean that's my only option if i don't get in, i'm not going to just ditch law school because i didn't get in the first time around. Plus, the way i look at it, I was never "actually" rejected, just got on the waitlist (don't take that away from me haha).
  41. 1 point
    well, if we make comparisons like that people are just gonna drive themselves crazy - there is probably someone in a third-world country working even harder than her and making even less, but you are not about to turn to the single mother and ask her to donate her money to the third-world worker (because she's the one who's technically "more privileged" in that comparison). if you really pretty bad about other people's plight, nothing's stopping you from making some voluntarily donations...
  42. 1 point
    I was just offering some advice, based on my experience. For the record, I'm doing law school because I got experience working with the law during my undergrad and I have a pretty good idea of what I'm getting myself into. The only thing I was getting at is that you're only just finished first year. A lot can change in undergrad. Also, it was specifically this line that made me comment: I just gave my advice the same as I've given other first years in a similar position. It's not meant as an insult. If it doesn't apply, just ignore it, and maybe it'll be helpful for someone reading the thread later.
  43. 1 point
    Thank you. It becomes tiring hearing over and over again why wanting to work in Big Law for the sole purpose of working in big law is "bad". It simply is not a bad thing, and even if it was, does it matter?
  44. 1 point
    I'm going to present an opposite view as food for thought. I didn't finish my undergrad degree and know a few others who didn't. It worked out fine for everyone that I can think of. Yes, some people probably need the extra year of maturity, but others are fine. It would depend on the person. In terms of needing something to fall back on, universities generally give you a really long time...maybe 7 or 8 or years...to finish your undergrad degree. So if you went to law school and hated it, you could go back and finish your undergrad.
  45. 1 point
    When planning trips, I don't even look at accommodation with <4 stars.
  46. 1 point
    I'd consider this a classic case of lifestyle inflation. It scares me that I thought I'd be living nice and content with a 60-80K a year job when I was finishing undergrad, but just shopping for everything I need before 1L (and all the stuff I've neglected to replace over the years) to appear professional has my budget for a lot of things just ever expanding. Legitimately not sure if this is worse for one's wallet or waistline
  47. 1 point
    This made me think of an interesting question: do you think marginalized students would be at a disadvantage going into 1L if there was more flexibility in the curriculum? If course selection happened before school started, I could easily see a system where students with connections to the legal world are able to select courses that set them up well for certain career paths (say, big law). Marginalized students, who likely wouldn't have access to the same institutional knowledge, could be disadvantaged and possibly even rule themselves out of some career paths they may enjoy based on their choices.
  48. 1 point
    It depends on the person. I personally made connections last summer that carried me through the OCI process. While I did not get a job through the OCI process, meeting those people continued to open doors for me that would not have been possible without these connections. My articling recruit experience so far has been extremely positive because I have kept and maintained these connections. These firm tours are also extra helpful to me because they provide me access to a world I previously had no been given much exposure to. I am the first person in my family to make it to University (let alone Professional School) so my immediate circle never walked me through what it is like to "behave like a professional". Firm tours are absolutely helpful for me to learn and develop these skills. That being said, not every firm tour results in that kind of connection. But that's fine - even the best elite major league players only bat .300. If I can meet 1 good connection out of 20 firm tours, then I've won. I believe some people may sour on firm tours because there is no tangible or immediate result that comes from attending them. You are not likely getting a job at Morgans because you spoke to a Partner there. However, don't dismiss the possibility the person you met at Morgans may be the reason you could possibly work at Morgans in the future. Connections and Networking is an investment.
  49. 1 point
    Forgive me for my bluntness, but I honestly cannot think of another way to answer your question: we're not in Ontario, so we do not use the Ontario Law School Application Service. We convert the GPAs of all applicants who apply to our JD program to our 4.0 scale, so that we assess all of our applicants using the same standards. If there are both percentages and letter grades on your transcript, we will use the letter grade; if there are only percentages, we will convert them as shown on the conversion chart in our GPA FAQs. Our GPA is based on the last 20 half courses of your undergrad work, up to December 31 of the year you submit your application. Cheers! Malina
  50. 1 point
    1) Don't think OSAP covers it 2) NCA can take about a year, most likely a year and a half 3) Yeah you have to write your bar exam after your NCA if you want to practice law in Canada 4) You should focus on getting into law school in Canada if you want to practice in Canada
This leaderboard is set to Toronto/GMT-04:00

  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
  • Create New...