Jump to content

BeetleGirl

Members
  • Content Count

    66
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

48 Decent People

About BeetleGirl

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. $160 is simply a mathematical placeholder, for the user of the formula to replace with their own rate.
  2. Hi - Below is the formula used in our firm (boutique practice in Metro Vancouver) to arrive at a ballpark annual salary. By no means am I suggesting that this is the standard formula across the industry. However, I know this formula has been spoken of on this forum before so its not rare/novel either. Even if this formula is not used in your firm, it should give you a good ballpark. To use the formula, you will need to know two pieces of information (the info should be in your offer, if not ask your partners): 1) What will be your initial billing rate - I am assuming $160 2) What is your billing target - I am assuming 1600 hours Your ballpark salary : 1600 hours x $160 x 0.33 = $84,480 The 0.33 is based on a 1/3 arrangement. 1/3 of your total billings is your salary, 1/3 goes to overhead, remainder 1/3 to partners. This ratio may vary by firm.
  3. In my opinion, whatever factors acted against you getting a position in the first round will be exacerbated in the second round, as employers will note that you sat out a year. So you should make a decision based on the assumption that your chances will be lower next year. Basically, consider what @TrialPrep said.
  4. It is perfectly reasonable to either (1) ask Toronto if they are open to discussing terms earlier, or (2) ask Victoria if they can give you till end of next week. The worst is they will say no. My general sense is that, since this is not articling season, they will be flexible, but particular circumstances can vary.
  5. As is the nature of this forum, everyone and their half brother wants to question and comment on the OP's motives rather than offer an answer to the explicit question asked by OP. *My own comment is Exhibit A to said tendency!*
  6. I am only a 1 year call but can offer the following based on what I have received negative feedback (explicit or implicit) for from senior lawyers. It reflects what others have said above, but with concrete examples: 1. "Before you come back to me with questions, please make sure you have exhausted all reasonable research resources at your disposal." 2. "Work won't walk in your door as a new associate, reach out to lawyers to introduce yourself and that you are interested in getting their work. So what if its on zoom, call them." 3. "When you send me a draft opinion to review, I don't want to correct your typos and drafting errors. Even if you used a precedent which had those errors, you need to catch all that before you send it to me." I have more, but enough self-flagellation for the day lol
  7. PLTC material is already super-condensed and is designed specifically for exam takers. As @TrialPrep asked, why would you look elsewhere?
  8. I got my articling position through cold emailing. I never called anyone, it was strictly email-only. I was in a management position in my pre-legal career and I never appreciated or had time for cold callers, and I applied my own experience forward. I am not saying this is as a general proposition, but this is what I did and it worked for me. I never attempted to meet any lawyers before "to learn more about the firm". Honestly, I think that concept is a little redundant in today's world when you can mine more information form your desk than over lunch with a lawyer. What I would do is thoroughly review the website and other resources (e.g., have key lawyers been speaking or publishing on certain subjects?, look up decisions that key lawyers have argued, look up glassdoor). Then, I would try to customize my resume and my cover email to make sure I draw a direct connection between what I can offer and what that firm does. Good luck.
  9. #1 and #2 have frequently been discussed on the forum and in those posts you will find links to tables that folks here have created/updated. Once you look at those tables, your #3 (the second #3 lol, as you have two) would also be answered.
  10. Great idea OP. May not be the newest idea on the block, but in an industry dominated by old ideas and old postures (uhh see thread above), anything like this is refreshing. I do hope the response you get here does not surprise you or discourage you. Obviously, when you walk into a lion's den and ask 'hey do we really need lions in this forest?', you are not going to get out of the den alive, but know the rest of the forest agrees with you.
  11. Sorry, no. The point of time in the history of civilization when humans helped each other Google stuff passed about 15 years ago.
  12. No experience with Iridium but do have a pre-law background in accounting and billing and I can confirm that each term you stated in your question is a standard (or somewhat standard) accounting term. The meanings of the terms transcends Iridium or the legal industry for that matter. I just googled a couple of the terms, and could see there is a lot of explanatory material out there, some from legal timekeeping sources such as PCLaw, but mostly from general accounting sources.
  13. "Can't stand federalism"...made me chuckle, for real. Consider practicing in China lol...the CCP issues edicts and everyone follows, those who squabble about jurisdiction are sent to the gulags. Jokes aside, difficult to think of environmental issues that do not involve federalism. My firm helps small businesses getting permits from municipalities, and even at that level, we are quick to point out that certain environment permits are outside the municipality's jurisdiction because, uh, federalism! In other words, federalism is actively practiced even at the level of environmental issues of small towns, and it gets intensified if your work related to the environment deals with provinces or the feds.
  14. I have nothing substantive to offer but I will say this: Notwithstanding criticism from others, I really appreciate your thoughtfulness and initiative in asking these questions. When I look back at my law school career, I can tell you that those who had questions like these buzzing in their heads on day one were more motivated and successful in school. You are 0L...if you aren't the one asking stupid and ill-informed questions, who will? Thank you for considering a career in criminal defense and for being bold enough to ask your questions.
×
×
  • Create New...