Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


epeeist last won the day on October 17

epeeist had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3472 Good People

1 Follower

About epeeist

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Why would you try to negotiate the time? To show how special and important you are? To suggest that you have something else more important to go to and you're fitting them in as an afterthought? Unless you're trying to fit in two dinners in a row (I leave it to current students to comment on the inadvisability of trying that!), what do you have going on that evening that's more important?!
  2. epeeist

    Did You Ever Really "Enjoy" Articling?

    With recent discussion of job satisfaction more generally and thinking of the original topic, hopefully there is at least some work one does while articling (and/or work one is exposed to even if can't do it yet, assisting a lawyer) that gives one more satisfaction, is more interesting, etc. And that's part of the learning experience, not just how to do law but what areas of law (or sub-areas if at a specialized firm) you prefer. That is, hopefully someone in OP's boat can try to mentally separate out unhappiness with the hours and workload, or personalities of some, from liking/preferring certain types of work. If you hate everything you do - not just the hours and workload and people, but the work itself - well, that's a much tougher situation.
  3. epeeist

    Thoughts about working at Davies?

    Agreed. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but even mentioning 9 to 5 to disclaim it, still suggests that the reality is within spitting distance of 9 to 5, which is the misleading aspect.
  4. epeeist

    Thoughts about working at Davies?

    Ah, not so much. I mean, Davies may well be better at disclosing something than most firms, but still, "long hours and personal sacrifices are sometimes inevitable" strikes me as misleadingly optimistic. Always or frequently inevitable, especially for articling students. Not 9 to 5 doesn't capture the actual reality, it's understated. Say what the hours are would be more informative. To be clear, I don't fault Davies in comparison to how other firms sell themselves, I say that none of them really advertise what it's like. So I do have some capacity for sympathy if someone who ends up working for them is surprised, because they made the mistake of accepting advertisements by firms at face value. Which is, in itself, part of the learning experience...
  5. [emphasis added, portion only quoted] I only quoted the important part of your post... As a splitter (very high LSAT but not GPA) I was a waitlist admit to several schools, the first one that admitted me was Queen's (where I went, very pleased with the law school education and experience - okay, advertisement over). I happened to be home that day, and awake in the morning when I received notification, so given the time of day friends/family were busy at least until the evening. So I went to see a double feature of action movies just to do something fun and self-indulgent (seeing two movies in a row) that didn't involve alcohol, let alone Cognac.
  6. epeeist

    Thoughts about working at Davies?

    Which comparison don't you see? Articling to indentured servitude comparison is hyperbole, sure, but they're both time-limited contracts which one had some choice (for some forms of indentured servitude, others like debt servitude not voluntary). One doesn't get compensated for all articles, for that matter, and if one quits whenever one wants, that is breach of the articling contract, and subject to law society consequences, and even aside from those two things the potential consequences of difficulty or impossibility of finding other articles (or affording LPP, if in Ontario and if continued). I'm not second-guessing, of course, your reaction to what this woman said, especially not in that context. Not just because you're entitled to your reaction, but because as you've described it, any reasonable person would rightly be offended/saddened by her serious comparison. I am however questioning the absolute ban, ever, on making comparisons of anything else to slavery. And questioning that all references to slavery are automatically presumed to be to colonial slavery of blacks, sometimes of Indigenous Americans. Slavery's never good, and less evil/wrong/bad is still evil/wrong bad (not even good as punishment for a crime, given abuses, still lawful to have forced prison labour, as Kanye West recently complained of); but that's not to say it has always, throughout human history, been as bad as it was in the Americas or Belgian Congo. Slavery under Jewish law was from what I've read nowhere near as bad as most Arab slavery for instance, slaves had some rights. I don't know details of the rights of slaves or not under Hammurabi, but his code allowed for selling oneself into slavery, as well as involuntary slavery. Roman gladiators were slaves and in fact had to be slaves to compete as I understand it (that is, some people who weren't slaves voluntarily accepted the status, not everyone was an unwilling would-be Spartacus even if most did not willingly become such, some did). Maybe a time and place, doesn't make it right, but Davies in chatter used to be referred to as "slavies" frequently (years ago). If that's stopped, good. If some people (not suggesting you!) continue to decry references to slavies in public but in private conversations continue to use it, or accept friends and colleagues using it, not so much.
  7. epeeist

    Thoughts about working at Davies?

    [portion only quoted] I also hate it when people use words like "rape" in a non-sexual assault sense to describe something trivial by comparison like doing badly in an exam, or use words like "nazi" to refer to those far less extreme (someone might be racist or even a white supremacist and that still doesn't justify trivializing nazism by using the word to casually refer to them). That said, for reasons below I don't necessarily see slave/slavery in the same way, perhaps because of my own background? Isn't it fair to compare articling to indentured servitude (which is arguably a time-limited form of slavery entered into voluntarily or at least with only economic compulsion, with legal enforced limits, rather than unenforced ones as in the US with chattel slavery)? While distinct from involuntary servitude or slavery, to a layperson the differences might be subtle enough that using the wrong term, slavery, is just a simple mistake? Also, as discussed in other threads, I tend not to think that topics are off-limit to humour (some Mel Brooks films etc.), though there are issues about compelled listeners/viewers but that's for OT. So I have more sympathy for making a quip which one realizes wasn't funny and was offensive as in the prior quote, but not your experience having someone say that in reference to a slavery museum (as you said seriously, not a bad attempt at a joke). My only anecdote about Davies is, if I'm recalling the firm correctly, a discussion in a social setting with a partner or senior associate at the time, who said they'd put in a relaxation room to take breaks in with a TV, couch, etc. Which he thought was stupid for articling students to use, he and others would go there whenever they needed someone to do something, in his view if you were done working you should leave the office, not sit around and risk being grabbed by someone like him... Which is a bit of an oversimplification (being available to new work is good) but I still found it amusing.
  8. A few thoughts some of which repeat what others have said - I've never worked in NY this is more from what I've read, anecdotes from people, etc. 1. Are you going to a state like NY or CA or another that accepts your law degree at par for purposes of eligibility to write the bar exam, or will you be required to get at least an LL.M. in the US? I knew (years ago, not recent) someone who moved to a US state and if I recall correctly they were planning to go to law school again in the state to get a US JD law degree. 2. I passed the NY bar years ago, but even right after I passed, I wouldn't consider myself ready to practice law there (even though legally I could have set up shop) - there's a huge difference between studying a system of law for 3 years versus for 6-8 weeks to pass the bar. Much safer (for you and the public) to be employed than solo. 3. Given as others (and many others elsewhere) have mentioned the number of US law grads, why would a criminal law firm want to hire you? I don't mean answer here, I mean you better have a good, persuasive answer. 4. Again as others have noted, not being a graduate of an ABA-approved law school is a huge impediment for government jobs at least (as well as citizenship?), plus an increasing number of so-called jobs that are unpaid volunteer positions for 6 months e.g. in ADA office, as a stepping stone to getting paid work (I think, don't know all the details). And reciprocity (if you move between states), my recollection is most states only grant it to ABA-approved law school graduates. 5. Given the many difficulties, why are you limiting yourself to criminal law? If you were willing to work in any field of law, wouldn't it be easier (though still difficult) to find a lawyer job?
  9. epeeist

    Best time to take vacation during articling

    I don't think OP has clarified why they were asking, if there was a specific reason other than curiosity, so I'll ask a question, how do religious holidays (that aren't already statutory holidays, or are celebrated by a different calendar e.g. Julian rather than Gregorian) fit into the you-may-not-miss-more-than-10-days model? That is, with accommodation etc. I assume people get the days off, but how are they treated by the law society (or is it just the employer acting reasonably wouldn't count it as a day off given the presumed long hours the student otherwise works, if that's appropriate, the language seems not so flexible?): "1.4. “Articling Term” means a period of 10 consecutive months of Articles that may include up to 10 business days of Time Off, or such abridged or modified articling term in accordance with the Policy."
  10. epeeist

    Why you shouldn't go to U of T Law

    In terms of those saying prospective students should know more before going to U of T, that may be a fair criticism. But shouldn't U of T also do a better job communicating? The U of T description of how a law degree from the U of T prepares one for anything is insultingly ridiculously laughable - this is from a youth outreach page, so presumably they start sending this message to minors well before they apply to law school, I assume similar messages are communicated later. "... Not sure you want to practice law? Fear not. The options are limitless Law school will provide you with an unparalleled education. Upon completion of your degree, you will be equipped with the skills and knowledge necessary to commence your career as a lawyer, but also equipped with the intellectual strength and roster of skills necessary to succeed in virtually any profession or job, including in business, politics, journalism, and virtually any other profession that requires strong oral and written communication skills, an ability to approach tasks in a clear, reasoned and logical way, and an ability to think through and effectively solve problems. Lawyers become professors, politicians, CEOs, mediators, arbitrators, union leaders, agents, doctors, teachers, and so much more. Getting a law degree is one of the best educations you can get; the possibilities are endless!..." [some bold emphasis in original, other emphasis added] https://www.law.utoronto.ca/admissions/youth-outreach/so-you-want-become-lawyer As previously discussed:
  11. epeeist

    Best time to take vacation during articling

    Just on this, I've met (and tutored!) some very smart people, who seemed to have the knowledge to become good lawyers, who had studied for but failed the bar exam (they failed before I tutored them! ).
  12. epeeist

    Why you shouldn't go to U of T Law

    As my later post indicates, I think it's a problem generally, not just U of T, so to that extent we're in agreement?
  13. epeeist

    Why you shouldn't go to U of T Law

    TL;DR: law school debt may have always been a massive pressure and motivator, but it's gotten significantly worse over 15 years, and legal salaries (mean and median) have not increased accordingly either, so it really does feel worse for those today. Just picking 15 years ago (not that I am admitting or denying that's similar to me), total tuition and fees at Queen's for law was $8600 annually. 2017-18 is a bit over $20K annually, so call it roughly 2.5 times higher, an increase of 250%. Inflation during that time, assuming about 2% annually, 1.02^15 is about 35% cumulative total. Very, very roughly, $40K tuition now "felt" like $30K tuition 15 years ago, while the actual tuition (at Queen's, not U of T) at the time was $8600. So present-day U of T was the equivalent of, 15 years ago, paying over three times as much annually (to compare a good, non-U of T law school). I'm happy to be corrected by someone who does this sort of stuff more regularly, I'm try to give a rough idea of apples to apples. If someone wants to look at non-Bay legal mean and median salaries in the same 15 years, from my recollection I don't think they've gone up nearly as much. Here's an ATL post (about Toronto/Canada) legal salaries from 2016, albeit Bay firms, that shows not much movement since 2003: https://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/the-view-from-up-north-why-are-toronto-first-year-salaries-stagnant/ Just giving a link to Queen's site with historical tuition fees, I know this thread is U of T but I went to Queen's for law and didn't find the U of T information as readily available: http://www.queensu.ca/registrar/financials/tuition-fees/archived-fees Add that it was more possible (though still not common) to go to law school after only two years of undergrad, and it's not really fair to compare costs (and debt incurred) now, with debt incurred then (plus, first undergrad degree tuition has similarly ratcheted up much faster than inflation generally, so add that).
  14. epeeist

    Why you shouldn't go to U of T Law

    OP/their group is at U of T right now, so they have a perspective about the U of T specifically, now, that others - including those who went in the past - lack. Doesn't necessarily mean they're right, of course, but what's wrong with someone arguing, tuition is too high for the value delivered? Or arguing that value is measured in ways that don't relate well to the quality of the education? And, for those complaining that people should have done research and known all this about faculty salaries etc. before they went, well, then, isn't it good that someone is communicating the information to prospective future students?
  15. epeeist

    personal statements

    No idea about Windsor or what they look for, but it strikes me that knowing multiple languages is a specific impressive thing. Saying you have "time management skills"? What does that even mean. That's the kind of thing that anyone who's ever met a deadline, ever, can claim. Not trying to be nasty, but why in the world would you fail to mention that you know multiple languages?!