Jump to content

Adrian

Members
  • Content Count

    2540
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    19

Adrian last won the day on August 12 2016

Adrian had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1830 Good People

About Adrian

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It was competitive enough that not everyone got to go back when I was there (which admittedly was 13 years ago now). I can only imagine it has remained the same. Back then I think the best chance was to get your application in as soon as possible. More recent Queen's people can advise if they have changed the process from what was first come first served.
  2. Probably a repeat, but I doubt that lawyers will object to talking about themselves again. I don't practice anymore, but when I did it was in Labour and Employment (with more of a focus on labour than employment). I can pinpoint the pathway pretty easily: 1. Go through the employment law section of 1L Contracts. Enjoy the material. 2. Apply to Labour and Employment boutiques along with full service firms (with a focus on litigation) for 2L summer. 3. Snag a 2L summer job at a boutique firm. 4. Get exposed to more labour files than employment files during summer and articling. 5. Decide to try and focus on support the firms broader public sector clients, which generally meant more labour than employment work given the higher rates of unionization.
  3. To clarify, it wasn't air tight, but I recall that there were the people who did the employment litigation/judicial reviews and the people who did labour law (with human rights a mix between the two). Of course associates would support whoever, but once the associate got linked to their partner(s) they would get sucked into the segregation as well.
  4. I would agree that if the goal is to branch into labour that it would be next to impossible to do that staying where you are at. Its interesting though that your goal would to try and do both employment litigation and labour. My experience was in a management side boutique, and people tended to segregate between one and the other.
  5. Last year when I was travelling out west for the first time (Alberta, not B.C., but specifically to the Rockies so I think this story is relevant) my wife and I struck up a conversation with another passenger on our flight. He was from Calgary heading back from his first time visiting Toronto. We asked him about what to expect about Calgary/Banff/Lake Louise/Jasper (we did all that in like 7 days), and he gushed about all the normal stuff you would think (the beauty, the outdoor activities, etc). He really talked it up. We then asked him what he thought of Toronto since it was his first time, and he marveled at the number of highways there are in the GTA. That was his only comment. If I remember correctly I think he mentioned going to Niagara Falls, but only in the context of the highways you can take to get there.
  6. To be clear, I went to law school and practiced law for a couple of years before I left to non-practicing roles.
  7. I think the point is that there is going to be a long tail of learning in this (and any) profession in any event and so the idea that school is not properly preparing people is not necessarily a safe assumption. I'll also note the value of spending dedicated time simply learning the law, which you won't really get again.
  8. I think an answer you'll get is that it is difficult/impossible to really teach the practice of law in an academic setting. This is why there was significant skepticism to the LPP as an alternative to articling. I don't personally think its unreasonable to argue that "mock" practice exercises have real merit (I recall a lot of Law Society approved CPD being essentially mock activities). However, I think that its probably an unbridgeable gap to create a law school experience that actually prepares for the practice of law given that one is school and the other is not school. I think about my experiences now in a non-law field (labour relations) and how there really is no substitute for actually doing the work as a part of professional development and career growth. School can teach you all about the labour relations act, and may even send you through mock negotiation exercises, but the day to day is much more complex and nuanced than all that. I would actually be very concerned if someone came out of school with the feeling that they know everything about the day to day of the work.
  9. This is why I was always frustrated by people who dabbled in employment/labour law. Its actually incredibly complicated but there is some belief that its simple or something. Note, I'm not saying its more complicated than other areas of law, but for some reason I feel like there is a larger cohort of lawyers who think you can give information off the cuff about it. Further note, this is not a slam on OWH or anyone, just a call for recognition that there is a lot going on with this stuff.
  10. Especially when every single lawyer has sent the oopsie email and asked the other side to kindly delete. Forbearance and discretion is the name of the game.
  11. Wow. This reads like I wrote it. Although I think overall you probably did more theatre in undergrad than I did.
  12. Hard to elaborate more. I am no longer a practicing lawyer. Rather I am in a HR leadership role focusing on labour relations in the broader public sector.
  13. Heck, you can even did what I did and go into a labour relations professional role after practicing for a few years.
  14. Can we get this pinned somewhere as a general response to what seems to be a pretty common issue?
  15. This is exactly right. The most practical answer for anyone who has any level of marketability in the labour market is generally to vote with your feet.
×
×
  • Create New...