Jump to content

BlockedQuebecois

Members
  • Content Count

    6897
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    51

Everything posted by BlockedQuebecois

  1. Yeah I just ignored it and put see transcript or whatever. I don’t think schools really care about the bio, and to the extent they do they’re not going to care that you didn’t figure out who at your schools bureaucracy would confirm you received an award that’s printed on your official transcript sent directly from the school. If you care you can go through the process of finding out who to list, but I didn’t.
  2. I would probably include them, but I would just put “transcript” as verifier or something. For stuff like that I either put “transcript” if it was on my transcript or “supporting documentation available” if I had documents I could send if they asked.
  3. Yeah, absent a pre-existing arrangement between the schools (such as the one osgoode and u of t have) an LOP is likely your best bet, OP. Note, however, that you usually pay the receiving school’s tuition, not your home institution’s. So if you’re thinking of going to Ontario, it could be pricey.
  4. Ah, i thought you were going into 1L. I don’t know if you noticed, but many students spend an absolutely insane amount of studying. I never understood why, but it’s absolutely true that many 1Ls couldn’t handle a job and study the amount they want to
  5. Fair enough, and re: the other posts of it’s more malleable than simply hitting an hours target. Would you say it’s common for people who make partner to be just hitting target, or do most people who make partner regularly exceed target? Adjusted of course for the fact that if you don’t want to make partner, you’re probably not working your ass off to exceed target. Just trying to get a grasp on the relationship between hitting/exceeding target and making partner. ETA: perhaps a better way to phrase this is how important are hitting/exceeding hourly targets as an associate for making partner, or is it purely a question of how much business you bring in/the firm hopes you bring in.
  6. It's not uncommon to have legal officers deploy aboard ships. At one point it was standard practice for at least one legal officer to be deployed aboard each ship during a deployment, but I'm not sure if that's still the practice. Best I could find from a quick search is that there was a five member legal officer team sent along with the five ships we sent to RIMPAC 2018. To the extent that a legal officer were to deploy aboard a ship, the experience would be pretty much the same as any other officer aboard a ship. Also as a complete aside, interesting case out of the military court system today: LS CD Edwards v R, 2020 CM 3006. The Deputy Chief Military Judge held that the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) order appointing the Deputy Vice CDS as the commanding officer with respect to disciplinary matters of military judges violates LS Edwards' s. 11(d) right to a trial in front of an impartial tribunal. The end result was a stay of proceedings, and this decision, if upheld, would mean that any proceedings against service members pending or brought in the future should be stayed until such time as the CDS reallocates disciplinary matters relating to military judges to the Military Judges Inquiry Committee. It also calls into question all decisions handed decided since the CDS order went into effect on 2 October 2019. This concludes today's episode of fun military justice facts with BQ.
  7. You've said before you usually did about 50 hours a week, 35 of which were billable (1750 for the year), but that wasn't partnership material at your firm. Out of curiosity, what would you say is partnership material? 2000 on the year (so roughly 57 hours a week, 40 being billable)?
  8. I think OP was probably looking for a job where they only have to be at work for 40-50 hours, not a job where they're docketing 40-50 hours per week but at the office for 60-70. So utilization rate (which seems to be defined as hours billed/hours at work) is a really important question. I think it's fair to say that being "at work" for 40-50 hours per week is an unrealistic goal on Bay Street, at least for junior associates.
  9. Nobody is docketing 100% of the time they're at work, that's unrealistic and would be a red flag. There's just too much task switching, informal conversations, dead time, etc. for people working on Bay St to be reliably docketing that much of their time. I think @conge's range of 60-80% is more realistic. Really productive (and really busy) people might be pushing up to 90% of their days billed on a regular basis.
  10. Yeah you can definitely do that. 3 hours on Saturday mornings is like... less time than most 1Ls spend hungover in bed on Saturdays. You’ll be fine
  11. Rotation system are usually on the firms website under the student section, work allocation generally isn’t. During interviews, the interviewers will generally ask if you have any questions towards the end of the interview. It would be appropriate to ask then. That said, I think you should disuade yourself of the notion that you’re desperate to get a job and can’t be picky. Being picky is important – you don’t want to end up working somewhere you’re miserable. I was fortunate to have a lot of options as a student, but I think that even students with more limited options should be more willing to figure out where they would be happy and turn down offers from places where they wouldn’t be happy. But I know that’s easier said than done.
  12. If money is no object, then possibly. Your two concerns would be burnout and the LSAT retake limits (3 per year, 5 in a 5 year period, 7 overall).
  13. It’s quite common for bipoc individuals from upper class or upper-middle class families to apply via the special considerations or similar categories, just for other readers. Thank you for the information re: first generation immigrants
  14. I’m not picking a fight, I’m honestly confused. I read OPs post and thought they were surely eligible for the special considerations category, but the advice they’ve gotten is that they’re not. I’m not even sure what you think is the debatable point here. OP seems to me to clearly qualify, so if the advice is that they don’t I’m either missing something (and thus I’m wrong) or the advice is wrong (and if the advice is wrong, that’s important information that OP should know).
  15. POC being the POC part of biPOC First generation Canadian being an immigrant, contrasted with second generation Canadians, who are the children of immigrants. Am I going crazy? What’s going on in this thread?
  16. OP said she is, didn’t she: Am I missing something?
  17. Being an immigrant and bipoc would seem to satisfy the “membership in a historically disadvantaged group” criteria for the special considerations category, no?
  18. I know that one big firm has indicated to its associates that total compensation is expected to be in line with last years figures. This is a firm that didn’t cut salaries, had good hire back numbers, and is by all accounts still quite busy.
  19. The two most important things for me were rotation system and work allocation system. Some firms have strict rotations that force you to change practice areas with x frequency, which can be nice if you want to try different things but a pain in the ass if you’re not interested in the area you rotate into. Other firms don’t make you rotate at all. Some are in between. Work allocation systems can vary a lot, too. Some have work go out on “the wire”, and whoever has priority has the right of first refusal on it. Some have emails go out to all the students and it’s first-come-first-served. Lawyer utilization of the system is also important. Some firms make all work go out to all the students, while others are happy to let you build an internal referral network. After that, I considered things like firm structure (I’m rather outspoken against the verein structure), partnership track, group structure, type of client, etc.
  20. Context is important here. OP has essentially done corporate document review for their entire career. They’ve been out of school for five years and called for two of them. My comment was made in response to advice to set up shop in criminal law, immigration law, family law, or similar. We have essentially no indication that OP has any competence in any of those fields, and I would argue we have some evidence that OP is not competent in those fields. That’s not an indictment of OP, who may very well become competent (and I’ll note, Diplock’s early advice was essentially to find a job as an associate so that OP could become competent in a marketable area like estates or RE). To the extent my comments can be read (or have been reinterpreted to be) an argument that inexperienced counsel are bad, I retract them. I don’t think that’s a fair reading of my comments, but oh well. I do not and never have thought that the existence of inexperienced counsel is a significant problem in the legal system. I do think that incompetent counsel serving vulnerable individuals is a major problem in our legal system, and I’m not really interested in debating it. If Mal or others want to argue that incompetent counsel are better than self reps, they can do so. I disagree, but I don’t think it’s a debate worth having.
  21. You’re right. The point of my post was not to provide advice to OP. It was to flag the problem that other users had glossed over while telling OP to hang their own shingle – while that might be good career advice, it’s not necessarily a responsible suggestion when you consider factors other than OP’s own personal wellbeing. Two observations, and then I’m done defending myself and you can call me all the mean words you want to. First, I think you’re projecting a bit, and you may want to reflect on that. Second, I think your moral outrage is misplaced. You’re mad at me for suggesting that incompetent people probably shouldn’t hang their own shingle. What you should be mad at is the suggestion that incompetent people should hang their own shingle. Because my post, at worst, hurts OPs feelings for a little bit. The alternate suggestion, though, ruins people’s lives.
  22. I never canned my policy answers (nor did I ever really prepare for them), and I did well. I think they might be useful if you find yourself routinely failing to finish exams in the allotted time or if you suffer from test anxiety, but otherwise I think they’re largely a waste of time.
×
×
  • Create New...