Jump to content

Rashabon

Members
  • Content Count

    3011
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    29

Rashabon last won the day on September 11

Rashabon had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2161 Good People

About Rashabon

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

4731 profile views
  1. There used to be the occasional political issue of taking on activist investors in particular as clients (so not just general shareholder disputes that come up as matter of course) where you represent issuers, especially issuers that have been targets. But that has softened a bit over the years as service provider loyalty has shifted a bit. It's not nearly (and never was) as strong a business or political conflict as representing two major competitors within the same industry however.
  2. You're being insanely over dramatic. Just relax. It literally could not matter less.
  3. The guy who went the most nuts on this forum had job experience. Some people just aren't built for the 2L recruit (or Bay Street for that matter). It happens. If you want to rejig a process to address them, just wrap the universe in bubble wrap while you're at it.
  4. There's no chance they are making Bay Street salary off of Bay Street in this process, and I'm still not sure how your proposal allows for smaller firms to hire students but big firms can't? Fair point on the second, though that's a problem only introduced by punting OCIs to the end of law school. Otherwise the time between finals and the bar is sufficient for the vast majority of students to study for and pass the bar. I'm not sure I follow - they complete the process and then they pick up 20% from people who...just failed the process? How do they get hired? You've made it so all articling student hiring happens in the window after law school happens. If you think people are freaked out now, just wait until they have to graduate, fail the process, then try and claw their way back in. Also who is restricted from hiring? Just Bay Street firms? Can small firms hire whenever they want with no rules? I put my students to work every summer. Summer is slow, but it's not dead. Litigators may be different because courts close and judges go on vacation and you all put everything over anyway so you don't have to work. But the rest of the market is still churning through stuff at various points. You've also now eliminated opportunities for students to figure out what they want to do. I only realized I might have an interest in securities law as a result of my first year summer where I got to try some of that out. I then took some more business courses throughout the rest of law school, alongside some other stuff I would have taken regardless. I would have had no idea about any of that going into articling. There are a lot of benefits students get out of a summer which your proposal would completely remove.
  5. Wouldn't this get rid of north of anywhere between $24,000 to $50,000 for students during law school? Why punt the bar to after articles? It's educational and provides a learning opportunity for upcoming articling or LPP students. If this is how they get 80% of their articling students, where does the remaining 20% come from? Do firms just go through summers without any student support now?
  6. These rules were put in place because students complained. The old process involved way more stress as recruitment was theoretically infinite in duration and connections ended up mattering way more.
  7. ...it already is merit based. That's what gets you to OCIs. Straight C students don't make it to Bay.
  8. Sure, if you want to make the small firms even more second class.
  9. I don't know when exactly my firm finished but I got the list hours ago, so certainly not a full 24 hours by any stretch.
  10. It's in every thread about grades on this forum. I'm fine for you to complain, I'm sure it sucks not to get a job out of this process, I wouldn't know what that's like. But every year the same complaints arise and every year candidates go stomping around complaining about nepotism or the mysterious shitty students who are just so charming. As if the latter isn't a skill in its own right, leaving aside that they don't really exist in any meaningful sense at the top firms. The OCI process is arbitrary in many ways. You're only exposed to so many personalities, and have limited time to win them over. But don't get it twisted - every single person that walked the halls of those top firms alongside you during recruit were well-credentialed in their own right. The B/C student that's charming isn't going to charm the firms on paper. They get weeded out before OCIs. You tell me if that's fair, especially if skill as a lawyer isn't directly correlated to grades. I don't have any skin in the game, but that's how the process works, and that's a separate argument entirely. But the point is that the gregarious, charming candidate that you think won them over purely on personality? Their grades were perfectly fine, as was the rest of their paper credentials. The reality is, this is a difficult process, there's no science to it, the firms often end up just as confused as the candidates, and good candidates get left out all the time. But not because they get replaced by shitty nepotism hires or the guy or girl everyone thinks is a real charmer but is somehow a mediocre law student.
  11. Lol you got me, my typo invalidates my work and prior academic career. It's not really a straw man, you really did complain about this: "When ridiculously qualified candidates get left behind in favour of Alex whose family friend is a partner with a lot of pull at Stikes, or Sam who is simply quite charming and funny with straight Bs and a couple of Cs ends up at Osler, it just feels wrong" Guess what, every candidate who walks through the doors of the Bay Street firms is ridiculously qualified. I've never seen a single candidate with as shitty grades as your Sam at my firm or in the interview process, and while I've seen some folks here and there who have a connection to Bay Street, they all had the same grades and profile as every other "ridiculously qualified" candidate. It's well and good to whine that the deck is stacked against you from the start, but that's just the actual reality on Bay Street. You want to complain about nepotism, wait until the informal recruits, because that's where connections actually make a difference. I helped get my friend his articling job through my connection to a small firm. That would never work in the OCI recruit. Likewise, if you're a wet blanket with an A average, why wouldn't the firm prefer someone that isn't a pain to be around, especially when the conventional wisdom around here is that grades are somewhat arbitrary? I'm fine to argue the contrary, I graduated U of T with honours so I have no incentive to argue that grades have nothing to do with me just being good at this as opposed to largely arbitrary, but you can't have it both ways, that grades are arbitrary and therefore we should look holistically at candidates, while also arguing that you got screwed because someone with slightly worse grades got hired.
  12. I like the idea that roaming the halls of Bay Street firms are reams of unqualified candidates who only got their based on nepotism, and also that grades don't matter generally, but also do matter if you had good ones. Good stuff.
×
×
  • Create New...