Jump to content

BlockedQuebecois

Members
  • Content Count

    6158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    38

Posts posted by BlockedQuebecois


  1. 2 hours ago, whoknows said:

    They're slowly shedding this rep a little. Like they work their associates and students hard, but I can think of two firms whose rep is far worse. 

    Whose? Amongst students it’s definitely still widely regarded as working their people the hardest, and the “Slavies” moniker is still widely used. 


  2. 20 minutes ago, OzStudent said:

    Any updates on firms that have matched this particular scale? I’m curious if Davies will be allowed to be outlier (forever), or if another firm will tip this set of dominoes yet again 

    Davies has always been an outlier, I can't imagine them bumping is going to materially impact the market. 

    If any firms do raise associate salary, I expect the driving force is going to be the shrinking gap between articling students and first year associates, not the gap between Davies and the rest of the street. 


  3. Just now, pzabbythesecond said:

    Yeah. Not a B+, though I don't know what a b+ is at other schools, but you can study for admin in 2 days, or even less, and grab a decent grade.

    To do well in admin can be tough, because there are only so many ways to apply dunsmuir and/or Baker to any set of facts.

    Once the vavlov trilogy comes out the class might get even easier, if Justice Abella has her way.

    Calling it now, Vavilov won't change anything meaningful. Except spec will have to learn four cases instead of three in his bird course. 


  4. Admin law is absurdly easy. There's like, three cases that matter, and the answer is always "reasonableness". 

    You could pass admin law without reading the exam by typing "Based on the facts and a careful weighing of the Dunsmuir factors, the proper standard of review is reasonableness. In this case, the Tribunal's decision was reasonable and should not be interfered with." Honestly, that might be good for a B+ in admin. 

    • Like 9

  5. 1 hour ago, Ryn said:

    Well I can't speak for BC schools, but it's possible to get as much as $10k in bursaries, with an additional $10k bursary available in 3L for a select few who have very high educational debt. I think that's pretty decent. Your mileage may vary of course.

    Bursaries go up to $15,000 now, but regardless of that, a $15,000 bursary still puts you at $11,000 in tuition charges. That's why I said the generosity is rather disappointing in relation to the cost of tuition. Somebody in the level of financial need required to get $15,000 in bursaries from Oz, and thus paying $11,000 in tuition charges, is probably paying a few grand tops at UBC. 

    • Like 1

  6. 4 hours ago, Ryn said:

    That said, the bursaries starts Oz are very generous so long as you can demonstrate financial need.

    I disagree with this statement, depending on the context. I've found Osgoode's bursaries quite disappointing compared to the level of financial aid I would have received at UBC or UVic, once you take into account the absurd tuition Oz charges. If you're limiting it to Ontario schools, then I tend to agree.


  7. 4 hours ago, erinl2 said:

    It is greatly exaggerated how many 3Ls do not attend class. In my opinion, anyone who does that is foolish and short-sighted. You have an articling position lined up? Great. What happens if you don't get hired back and you are back in the job search for an associate's position. What happens if you end up at a firm that routinely culls the 2nd year associate group?  In my experience, you're going to have to provide a transcript for ~5 years when you're applying for jobs. 

    Law school is expensive. Why would you waste the opportunity to further learn the law? 

    You're working off the base assumption that attending class is helpful in getting a good grade in the course. For many people and many classes, that's a faulty assumption.

    • Like 3

  8. I don’t know, there are some pretty diverse student classes. 

    To pick just a random example (literally just the first firm I thought of), Bennet Jones has 18 students in their Toronto office. Of those 18, 8 are women and 9 are people of colour. Of those 18, only 5 are white dudes. Considering 72.9% of Canadians are white, and 50% of Toronto is white, Bennet Jones seems to have a pretty diverse student class. 

    I actually think @Deadpool‘s point about socio-economic background is more pertinent. My experience with Bay Street student classes has been that everyone presents as being from a wealthier background, although I also know for a fact that some people who seem to come from higher socio-economic backgrounds actually don’t. 

    ETA: none of that is to say diversity in the profession isn’t a problem. Just that the assertion that student classes aren’t diverse across the board doesn’t line up with my experience. 


  9. 1 hour ago, advantagepackage said:

    I don't know of A+ averages, but I know people got A averages.

    But what I'm surprised no one mentioned, is that these are just simply smarter people. There's no secret they have. They probably work just as hard, or even less, than other students. They just grasp the material better, have higher intellect, can spot issues then analyze more efficiently and quickly then most, and are skilled at writing a law school exam. Its kind of just in them - they just intuitively have better competence. 

    Dude, I’ve said like 15 times that it comes down to intelligence. 

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

  10. 53 minutes ago, HouseOfPolycarbonate said:

    Eek, not sure what you mean by bare minimum work ethic, although you've perhaps elaborated a bit with your reference to "needed to review a good summary or create your own". But as someone who knows a few medalists (although not intimately), work ethic is a core component of their academic performance. It is certainly no where near what I would call "bare minimum". They're all absolutely among the hardest workers (not saying that there aren't students that work harder, there may be?). 

    From personal experience, I don't think that's true. Work ethic was a core component of my undergraduate performance, but it's had literally no effect on my law school performance. If anything, the more I've sat back the better I've done. 

    • Like 1

  11. 56 minutes ago, harveyspecter993 said:

    When you talk about wise course selection, do you mean picking courses which gunners wouldn't typically take?

    No. Anybody smart enough to graduate with an A+ average isn’t going to need to have worried about avoiding certain classes. Think about it – to get an A+ average, you realistically need a mid to high A average in 1L. That means they’ve already gone up against the gunners in 1L and came out on top. 

    I fully disagree with pretty much all the other factors @Toad suggested, too. It’s going to boil down to intelligence and exam/essay writing ability, plus a bare minimum level of work ethic. 

    Asking “what does it take to get an A+ average” is really the same thing as asking “what does it take to get an A+“ a bunch of times. And the answer to the second question is intelligence plus exam or essay writing ability, plus the bare minimum level of work ethic needed to review a good summary or create your own. So logically, the answer to the first question is the same thing, but a bunch of times. 

×
×
  • Create New...