Jump to content
Ghalm

Bay street articling salary increases?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Rumour has it that one large bay street firm has increased their articling salary from 1450 a week to 1700 a week. Also, Law and Style magazine reported a month ago that Bennett Jones and Davies raised their articling salaries to 1850 a week (https://lawandstyle.ca/law/on-the-record-why-did-bennett-jones-and-davies-reward-their-articling-students-with-a-raise/).

So, what do we think? Is this an indication that the large firms on Bay street will increase their articling student salaries? What does it take for that to happen? Is one firm moving away from the norm enough?

Edited by Ghalm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one additional firm blinks and follows the move to $1,700, I think that'll be the domino to tip it across Bay Street. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, FingersCr0ssed said:

I’ve heard rumours of immediate salary increases even amongst summers.

Great news for students

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, CorporateAlligator said:

Rumour has it a second Sister firm is following suit. 

You can't leave us in suspense like this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, OzStudent said:

Great news for students

Id be surprised if anyone follows suit for this summer term though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This is hearsay and unsubstantiated gossip, but heard that the salary increase made by one of the national Bay St firms came about over threats to unionize, and the student group uniformly holding off on accepting their articling offers until they got the pay raise.

That's a bold strategy, Cotton. But looks like it paid off. 

Edited by Cripes
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skinner said the teachers will crack any minute, purple monkey dishwasher.

  • Like 6
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Cripes said:

This is hearsay and unsubstantiated gossip, but heard that the salary increase made by one of the national Bay St firms came about over threats to unionize, and the student group uniformly holding off on accepting their articling offers until they got the pay raise.

That's a bold strategy, Cotton. But looks like it paid off. 

I heard about the "threats" to unionize but it came from a few students and was received pretty coldly. Is this fanfic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Cripes said:

This is hearsay and unsubstantiated gossip, but heard that the salary increase made by one of the national Bay St firms came about over threats to unionize, and the student group uniformly holding off on accepting their articling offers until they got the pay raise.

That's a bold strategy, Cotton. But looks like it paid off. 

I can’t imagine students having that much leverage over a firm, especially a Bay Street one. If a set of students refuse to article unless they receive a higher salary, there’d  an eager line of students waiting to take their place.

Edited by corruptfate
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or the likely reason is because student salaries have been stagnant forever and firms want to remain competitive with NY/other industries 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't think Davies decided to raise their student salary the last time they did because students had "leverage" over them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Trew said:

Yeah I don't think Davies decided to raise their student salary the last time they did because students had "leverage" over them.

What, you think they did it out of the goodness of their hearts? 

It’s entirely about leverage. Just because an increase isn’t spurred by a threat to unionize or quit doesn’t mean it’s not about leverage.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

What, you think they did it out of the goodness of their hearts? 

It’s entirely about leverage. Just because an increase isn’t spurred by a threat to unionize or quit doesn’t mean it’s not about leverage.

It is probably because they wanted to increase the leverage they already held, which was pretty high.

Edited by wtamow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, wtamow said:

It is probably because they wanted to increase the leverage they already held, which was pretty high.

It’s really not that high. The students going to a firm like Davies have other options, both in the Toronto market and outside of it. If Davies were to cut pay, or let their pay fall below the street, they wouldn’t be able to attract and retain the talent they do.

And talent is all a law firm has – nobody is going to Davies because they have a nice painting in their boardroom. 

Does the balance of power rest with the firm? Absolutely. But to suggest that it’s a truly one sided relationship is just silly. 

Edited by BlockedQuebecois

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

It’s really not that high. The students going to a firm like Davies have other options, both in the Toronto market and outside of it. If Davies were to cut pay, or let their pay fall below the street, they wouldn’t be able to attract and retain the talent they do.

And talent is all a law firm has – nobody is going to Davies because they have a nice painting in their boardroom. 

Does the balance of power rest with the firm? Absolutely. But to suggest that it’s a truly one sided relationship is just silly. 

Didn't say anything about paycuts or letting their pay fall below street. In the lawandstyle article that was posted about this, most Davies students said that the salary increase did not have a significant effect on their decision to go there. I really doubt anyone is choosing to work at Davies over Blakes because of $150 weekly salary increase. In my opinion, that is a really bad way to decide which firm you want to join. So I would assume you, Davies and I are all in agreement:

Quote

Mahil, for her part, doubts that Davies has ever landed a top student on salary alone, but she’s certain the firm has never lost a great applicant because it doesn’t pay enough. “Compensation isn’t the top driver of talent,” she says. “But we don’t want it to be an issue that comes up at all.”

Is it good PR? Sure.

Would they attract the same caliber students if their weekly articling salary remained at 2017-2018 levels (i.e. what the rest of Bay St is at)? Of course they would.

As a fun exercise, I wonder how high articling salaries would have to rise in order for firms such as Davies to compete for the candidates that go to NY.

Edited by wtamow
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Students frequently have an inflated sense of their value to an employer. This thread is no exception. ;)

  • Like 8
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, wtamow said:

in order for firms such as Davies to compete for the candidates that go to NY.

They already do. Many students who can do better than either NY firms or Davies choose other opportunities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • You just completed your articles in insurance defense and yet claim to have vast knowledge in the field of medical and health law. You've also got an  LLM that focused on 11 different topics unrelated to insurance or civil lit.  But the type of law you are really interested in is IP law.   And you intend to tell employers about your poly marriage?  During interviews I assume?  Only way it could be a red flag is if you told someone unless your last name is Blackmore.  
    • The reason many 1Ls get crushed after grades come out is because they mistakenly carried the "hard work means good grades" mentality into law school. The bolded part of your post is me pointing out that you're making the same mistake. What I think you really need to do is change how you prepare for exams. My advice to you FOLLOW AT YOUR OWN RISK I'm a fellow slow worker. When I prepared for midterms like everyone else, I got the same marks as everyone else. When I prepared for final exams like a slow worker, I beat the curve in 6/7 courses. The only course where I didn't beat the curve was also the only class I made the mistake of not doing the aforementioned. Understand that you can't do all of the assigned work. It may take other people 1 hour to do a 30 page reading while it takes you 4 hours (I personally need to read every word on the page). Doing all of the assigned work is just not feasible for you because its not an efficient use of time. There is absolutely no shame in admitting this or accepting this. Doing all of the assigned work is just one of many different ways to prepare for the exam. You should let my exam grade determine whether your unique method of preparation is right or wrong. Understand that doing all of the assigned work doesn't mean you shouldn't be doing any work or even less work, it just means you should be doing the work that helps you best prepare for the exam. Doing the readings - Your main focus should be to make the most efficient use of your time (i.e. doing the type of work that helps you, as an individual, best prepare for the exam) First, check the syllabus to understand the place of this reading in the class (you'd be surprised how many people overlook the value of the course syllabus). The question here is: what am I reading? What topic is this reading on? How many days will you be dealing with this topic? How many pages is it? Is the topic a standalone topic or one piece of a bigger topic? This will give you a rough idea of how much time and concern you should give to this topic and also generally primes you for the work you need to do. Second, very briefly skim the reading while paying attention to the structure of the reading. Read the headings, intros, conclusions, etc. This will help you understand the skeleton of the reading.  Third, once you understand what you're reading (i.e. after completing the first two steps) your next question is: why am I reading this? Why has the professor assigned this reading? In other words, what does your professor want you, as a student, to get out of this reading for the purposes of their class? To answer these questions, look to course summaries/CANs from upper years who have taken the same course with the same professor.  Fourth, now you know what you're reading and why you're reading it. The question now here is: what does this reading say about that? If you're a person who's comfortable relying on a summary/CAN, then rely on your summaries/CANs to provide answer the answer to this question. If you're a person who's more comfortable doing the reading, then let the summaries/CANs create the signposts of what's important in the reading so you can focus on that and allocate your time effectively.  For example, if you're dealing with the topic of sexual assault in 1L criminal law, then you're probably going to want to read all of Ewanchuk and only focus on the bare essentials in every other case (e.g. R v Chase - only matters because it tells us how to interpret the sexual nature element of the AR; R v Cuerrier - only matters because it tells us when fraud vitiates consent and what L'Heureux Dube and McLachlin say in their respective dissents, respectfully, doesn't matter for the strict purpose of your exam unless your professor cares about policy; R v Mabior - only matters because it tells us when non-disclosure of HIV status vitiates consent/constitutes fraud; R v JA - only matters because it tells us to how interpret consent and, respectfully, Fish's dissent doesn't matter unless your professor cares about policy; etc)  Lectures - The purpose of lectures isn't for the professor to spoon-feed you the material, for you to practice your skills as a typist and copy the lecture verbatim or for you to get your online Christmas shopping done. The purpose of the lecture is for the professor to: Confirm to you that you're on the right track (i.e. you've done the aforementioned Reading stage correctly and understand what the topic is, why you're doing the reading, and that you know what you need to know) Clarify anything in the readings and/or correct any mistakes/things missing from your understanding/notes or the summaries/CANs you've relied on Provide you with their unique perspective/opinion/approach to the topic at hand. You're going to keep this in mind when writing your exam in order to cater to their beliefs, prejudices. For example, if you have a feminist professor, don't argue that sex work should be criminalized on an exam. Present both sides to the argument, and in one sentence say that you support it even if you don't. As a future lawyer, you're going to be arguing a lot of things you don't agree with or believe in for your own personal gain. Might as well start early   Give you any hints about the exam. Professors notice if/when the herd thins out during the school year and some times will be inclined to reward students for attending. There have been multiple times that I've gotten useful hints about exams from a professor simply for being present during a boring lecture in the middle of October Exams - Exam-writing is a skill. Learn it. Read books on how to develop the skill. My recommendation is "Law School Exams: A Guide to Better Grades" by Alex Schimel. Create your own outline. In your 5 to 15 page outline, you should have every piece of the "what you need to know" part of each of your readings. There should be absolutely no superfluous bullshit, fluff or fat on your outline. You've literally condensed the entire course into those 5 to 15 pages. Your casebook, other peoples outlines/CANs, etc were all just tools for you to arrive at your own outline.  Learn your outline cold. I mean cold. This doesn't only mean just memorizing it. You should be able to open up ExamSoft and type out the blackletter law part of your future exam answer on demand and at near-lightning speed. The only class that I actually did this properly for was the one I finished at the top (and despite missing a major issue on the exam) and the other class that I did this, but sort of half-assed, I got an A- despite writing one paragraph for a question worth 33% question because I blanked out. Once you've learned the outline cold, take a few old exam questions and do timed exams on ExamSoft. Your focus is to type out the blackletter law as you've been doing and then actually apply it to the facts. Review your answer by yourself, then with a professor (if you can reach them/they'll allow this) and finally compare against old exam answers. Many people will disagree with this but once you do a few of these timed exams, you'll start to notice repeating patterns in terms of the issues tested, answer structures, etc (there can only be so many and also many professors are creatures of habit). 
    • Had a similar thing happen: What can you tell me about person X? Should I know person X? They mentioned you in their interview... I have no idea who this person is...
×
×
  • Create New...