Jump to content

pzabbythesecond

Members
  • Content Count

    4198
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Everything posted by pzabbythesecond

  1. I think the individual got a position through the recruit and is asking when it would start.
  2. You already agreed. You can try, but they likely (most certainly) won't budge. And if you reneg on the agreement, well, you've reneged on the agreement. If you don't reneg, but you negotiate under the possibility of reneging on the agreement, that's negotiating in bad faith.* *not legal advice; is moral advice; may or may not have legal implications.
  3. Ignoring class strengths because I really don't think there's enough to distinguish there, Queens has a higher curve. It's literally easier, all else equal, to get a B+.
  4. Many jobs open up throughout the year for second year summer. But yes the vast majority are hired through this recruit (for 2L summer toronto).
  5. Isn't that still only one pot? The government makes two decisions with regards to money, broadly. How big of a pot it should have. And how the pot should be allocated in different areas. The way I see it is that it is very rare for one "cause" on its own to influence a government to make the size of the pot bigger. That's much more often (if not always) taken at a macro level, with regard to the economy. Exceptions would be things like war, emergency disasters, etc. Once the pot size is determined, it very much is a zero sum game, between the different areas a government can spend in. This naturally gets broken into smaller and smaller pieces. But it doesnt change the fact that it remains "one pot", which is split up.
  6. It is a zero sum game. Whatever money is being spent in one place but the government means it is not in another. Where money is spent is based on policy choices. There is only one theoretical "pot" that government money comes from. If Crowns were equally and poorly compensated as the defence side (at least on legal aid matters), then less lawyers would become Crowns. Prosecutions would fail, potentially as a result of the under-competence of those who choose to take those jobs. It seems symmetrical to the issue of the defence side losing competent lawyers because compensation on legal aid matters is too low. It's market economics. If prosecutions started to fail at an alarming rate, politicians would be more willing to spend money on the criminal justice system. Naturally though politics as it is would dictate the money going towards crown side rather than legal aid. Which brings us to where we are today.
  7. I agree. Especially since it seems finances won't be that big of an issue for OP. Take care of yourself first and foremost, OP I'll just add, which you've already likely thought about, that doing some other line of work could be just as draining. I'm not sure how you react to the work you will be doing, but just make sure your break really does give you.. a break. if that means taking a two month holiday from working, whether traveling or not (depending on the person, travelling can also be tiring), then try to do that somewhere in this year off too. Good luck.
  8. I don't mean this is an insult, but inevitably it will come off like that. You need to work on your English as soon as possible. I can't see how you will carry on any sort of professional job with your demonstrated level of writing. If your speaking and/or reading comprehension is similar, then even more so. Seriously. Go take English classes.
  9. "So, those raptors won the super bowl eh? Must be nice, since the leafs havent been able to win the world series since '67."
  10. On a very quick skim, of not all the cases you just stated, are you trying to say that by helping insurance companies avoid paying out damages to plaintiffs, you're in fact "helping" people by supposed reductions in premiums resulting from such cases? Seriously? I really need to find a way to get into PI law, I guess.
  11. Sarcasm? I'm genuinely curious to understand if you meant this genuinely.
  12. Not to sound cold blooded, but was there ever any litigation out of that?
  13. Might not be the best thing to say at an insurance defence cocktail?
  14. This idea that you will do well in law school, in spite of the fact that you performed exactly average at an average university undergrad program, and average on the lsat, is mindboggling. I'm going to say something that may be controversial, but I feel confident enough to say it at this point. Your grasp of english seems poor. Whether that is or isn't because of your immigrant background, I don't know. I'd assume yes, but I personally know many immigrants who never bothered to improve their english to passable, despite living in Canada for a decade, as a teenager. Law is very demanding, and one of the critical aspects is a solid grasp of language. You don't seem able to write a competent or coherent sentence, and seem to have a very bad grasp of grammar. With this in mind, it would be very difficult for you to succeed in law school, where you're expected to read thousands of pages of case law (often in very old english), and where your grades will at least be somewhat affected by your ability to write and communicate your ideas in time pressure exam conditions. Whether or not you will get into a Canadian law school, I don't know. I'd be surprised, but I've seen canadian law school admissions which raised both my brows. Whether you should go to law school is another question, and with the little I've seen of your writing, I personally would tell you not to. At least not yet. Work on your English and get it up to a university level of writing. Then if you still want to go to law school, rewrite the lsat and see where you stand.
  15. It depends on the posters personal circumstances. My CDO confirmed that people have done this before, and some were even successful (as in, did the 2L recruit, weren't successful, then did it again in their final year, and were successful). The poster wouldn't necessarily be those people. It depends on how their profile has changed, what they intend to do in their gap year, how they struck out (as in nothing wrong, went far, but just missed, or totally botched the process, or were already a fringe candidate and that hasn't changed). Anyway. I've said my piece. I think law as a profession does an injustice to itself by being overly fixated on rigid processes and timelines. Yes where you start your career matters. Yes you can theoretically overcome a start where you're not where you want to be. But it isn't easy, nor will it necessarily work out. But that's just my opinion. Take it for what it's worth.
  16. Yep, I agree. Though the brunt of the 2L work is done prior to the deadline, which is fast approaching, so really it's a question of whether OP has a week around OCIs to prep for (any) they get, and two weeks for prep+interviews for (any) in firms they get, on top of the world required to secure an articling position outside of recruits during the year. It's not easy. Arguably inadvisable. But possible. Again it REALLY depends on OPs personal circumstances.
  17. Nothing stopping OP from applying to the 2L recruit while also applying to sporadic articling positions posted in the coming year.
  18. I don't think you understand the process. OP would be applying as a 3L. Not an articling student. Articling students can't apply for other articling positions. There are special rules surrounding the articling - principal relationship. That's not relevant here. OP would need to explain what they intend on doing during their gap year, and would have to somehow have a stronger application than the last time around. We've agreed that it's not an easy path, nor even recommendable path. It depends on OPs personal situation, financial situation, strength as a candidate, what area of law they want to do, etc.
  19. I'd argue that's only true if you don't care what kind of job you do.
  20. It turns on when you want to article. The rules from my memory stop you from doing the recruit too early. There's nothing mentioned about doing it later. So you're fres to apply and be considered, knowing there would be a gap between your summer job and articling year. I'm at mcgill. But this is not unique to mcgill.
  21. Interesting how you can be certain on a subject without any knowledge on it. To the person who asked, yes some people have done it (at least at my school). It's not easy. You have to explain your off-cycleness with a motivating reason. So you risk losing out on other opportunities in the meanwhile, while forgoing a year of income and experience, for a "chance" at the 2L employers.
  22. I think you'd have to look at numbers to make any such conclusions. I don't think Canadian big law firms do nearly well enough (relatively) to the kind of international power houses down south to pay their associates 200k plus bonus as a first year. Further, it would be interesting to see what the loss rates are like from first year associates to second year associates, since that's more akin to articling to first year associates in Canada. How much can a firm really learn from a student in a summer to determine whether to keep them on or not? A year though is arguably enough time to make that type of decision.
×
×
  • Create New...