Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sc313

Surviving low salary for Articling student

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, sc313 said:

My apologies, I'm trying to figure out what you are trying to say in relation to this post.

His practice is way more boring than a criminal lawyer's.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, artsydork said:

His practice is way more boring than a criminal lawyer's.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Although I would say corporate or commercial real estate is even more boring that land development law. Anyways, good luck in your articles and I hope that after you get through your 10-months of articles that you will get some great experience you can (a) leverage to get an associate position or (b) set up your own shop if you want that kind of independence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard a colleague describe articling as "indentured servitude", but how did the "Surviving low articling salary" thread turn into the "Let's abolish prisons" thread? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New to the forum 👋 just wanted to add a quick two cents/clarification: a friend of mine articles at [mod edit] and their net salary until COVID was just over $600 per week. They need to pull in at least 45 billable hours per week, so that works out to around $13 per hour of billable work.

Their salary is now cut in half due to COVID-19, to around $300 per week.

I article at a different crim firm in Toronto and [firm] students' salary is definitely a bit lower than mine, by around $400 per month. I don't find that particularly fair- they're expected to pull in more billables than I am per week- but my friend seems okay with it. Crim is crim I guess. You don't get into it if you're expecting to make bank.

Share this post


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

New to the forum 👋 just wanted to add a quick two cents/clarification: a friend of mine articles at ___ and their net salary until COVID was just over $600 per week. They need to pull in at least 45 billable hours per week, so that works out to around $13 per hour of billable work.

Their salary is now cut in half due to COVID-19, to around $300 per week.

I article at a different crim firm in Toronto and __ students' salary is definitely a bit lower than mine, by around $400 per month. I don't find that particularly fair- they're expected to pull in more billables than I am per week- but my friend seems okay with it. Crim is crim I guess. You don't get into it if you're expecting to make bank.

You may want to edit out the firm name.

It's a small firm and there are only 3 articling students.

 

Edited by Toad
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, msk2012 said:

I see value in discussing pay rates at different firms openly.

People are free to do so, but they should do so with the knowledge that their posts become permanent after 1 hour and that talking about small firms does not grant the same anonymity as large corporate firms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jatthopefullawyer said:

I always liked the idea of criminal law as a 0L, the salary prospects here are making me reconsider corporate law. 

 

It's even worse than it looks. A lot of students rely on EI if they do not get hired back. If a person receives a very low salary during articling (or nothing) then they can't rely on EI to make ends meet while they are searching for an associate position.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, jatthopefullawyer said:

I always liked the idea of criminal law as a 0L, the salary prospects here are making me reconsider corporate law. 

Why would you jump from an interest in criminal defence to an area that could not be less similar? 
 

Or are you just using “corporate law” as a catch-all for any type of law where you work on boring stuff in a tall shiny tower? 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said this before and will say it again - once things get sorted out, there will be a glut of cases moving through the courts. People will be hiring. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As my post did not indicate that my friend said anything the least bit controversial or uncomplimentary about their firm, I would argue it's fine. In any case, I have said friend's permission to post here.

Discussing salary is a perfectly acceptable activity, no need to edit out the firm's name. But thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, msk2012 said:

I see value in discussing pay rates at different firms openly.

same. but i guess everyone is a little sensitive when it comes to pay. on a related note i was waiting to see what kind of changes the Pay Transparency Act in Ontario would bring, if any, but of course Doug Ford stopped that from ever coming into force. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, DavisFromCornerGas said:

As my post did not indicate that my friend said anything the least bit controversial or uncomplimentary about their firm, I would argue it's fine. In any case, I have said friend's permission to post here.

Discussing salary is a perfectly acceptable activity, no need to edit out the firm's name. But thanks.

Trust me on this - it will be fine until the employer realizes the student is discussing firm business (ie what a firm can afford to pay its people) publicly and online. There is no scenario where this would reflect well on the student.

The best case would be the employer shrugs and doesn't care. The worst case is a very unpleasant conversation and the employer taking mental note about this person's concept of discretion.

 

Whatever your friend thinks would happen, I personally wouldn't risk it. I am trying to protect this person because no one needs the stress nowadays.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate that, I really do. I just fail to understand how me posting this for them is any different from the post earlier in this thread (I believe it was from Deadpool) breaking down the salaries at top firms. I don't see a difference myself.

In any case, they don't anticipate any consequences, and they know their employer better than we do, so I'm going to go with it. Thank you for the concern, but if they aren't worried, neither am I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should mention their placement ends in two weeks and they already know they're not going to be at the firm after that, so I'm sure even if they're misjudging the firm's reaction any potential consequences don't matter to them.

Anyway, I've derailed this thread enough. Sorry all! Back to the topic at hand, and I'll go back to just lurking 🙂

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DavisFromCornerGas said:

I should mention their placement ends in two weeks and they already know they're not going to be at the firm after that, so I'm sure even if they're misjudging the firm's reaction any potential consequences don't matter to them.

Anyway, I've derailed this thread enough. Sorry all! Back to the topic at hand, and I'll go back to just lurking 🙂

I know I'm not paying attention to your desire to move the thread back on track, and I apologise for that - but I really wanted to address the bold to anyone who harbours similar views - the potential consequences matter. Especially once you start breaking it into practice areas in cities, the legal world is small, and you really don't want to get a reputation for talking about things that you shouldn't be talking about. 

Sure, in this situation, it might not affect your friend (I don't know, and won't comment). But broadly, simply leaving an employment doesn't mean that the old employer's opinion of a person doesn't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I wanted to highlight - the community is struggling, but it is a community. While it's not a good time to be in the vulnerable place between student and lawyer, your colleagues do get it, in a way that other professions might not. Law is a small group, even in large cities, and we do try to take care of our own.

All this just just to say that it's ok to not be ok, that reaching out is smart, that we here on the forum are here too. So hang in there - this is some weird and awful shit none of us have been through before but the more senior people are in fact turning their minds to what our juniors are going through. We might not have solutions, but we do have compassion.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, lookingaround said:

I know I'm not paying attention to your desire to move the thread back on track, and I apologise for that - but I really wanted to address the bold to anyone who harbours similar views - the potential consequences matter. Especially once you start breaking it into practice areas in cities, the legal world is small, and you really don't want to get a reputation for talking about things that you shouldn't be talking about. 

Sure, in this situation, it might not affect your friend (I don't know, and won't comment). But broadly, simply leaving an employment doesn't mean that the old employer's opinion of a person doesn't matter.

I personally believe discussing your salary does not fall into the category of "things that you shouldn't be talking about". I disagree that it's personal firm business- once it's in your pocket, how much you're being paid is YOUR business, and you have a right to compare notes to see if you're being treated right. I wouldn't want to work for an employer who thought otherwise.

There is a big difference between revealing confidential client information or telling the world what your team discusses in their meetings, and telling people how much you're getting paid. Otherwise the Sunshine List would be on dubious ethical footing. Students are within their rights to talk about how much they're getting paid, online or otherwise. I doubt firms are unaware that we discuss these things amongst ourselves. They may dislike it, but that doesn't mean the student is actually doing something wrong.

Sorry, now I'm breaking my own rule about not derailing the thread. Last time, I promise.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Recent Posts

    • Your grades are quite good so I would apply broadly and cross my fingers. The only Canadian law school I've seen that accepts a lot of US transfers from bottom tier schools is U of T. But your grades have to be really good. I'm not sure how they will view your B's. Good luck. 
    • yeah it was a mistake. I posted this in law students when I meant to post in articling students and lawyers and I couldn't delete it after it had been posted. I think I mentioned it in this thread or the one that you linked. 
    • There's been a lot of focus here on IQ but one of the things that makes a good lawyer is a heavy measure of EQ and our friend here McGillicutty has demonstrated why many of my former STEM colleagues lack even a smidgen of EQ.
    • The only thing that matters is that you can get funding at a good interest rate. Scotia has the best offerings, but that doesn't mean that you're out of options if they decline you. In my experience, the bank that you have the longest history with is the one that usually helps you out in situations where your credit isn't up to snuff. 
    • I think you are slightly confused maybemaybe, so I can clear this up for you:  2 year applicants are those that are in their second year of their undergrad degree (will have 60-89 completed credits) by the time they enter law school and they are the ones who require exceptional stats (3.7 and 90th percentile); see excerpt from https://apps.admissions.ualberta.ca/programs/la/la020 ("There is no direct entry from high school into the Juris Doctor program (JD). Exceptional students may be admitted to the program after completing two years of university study with a minimum GPA of 3.7 and 90th percentile Law School Admission Test (LSAT) score. All other students must have completed at least the first three years of a degree before being admitted to the JD."). This applies when you apply in your second year of undergrad.  3rd year applicants are those that are in their 3rd year of university and who will have 90 or more credits by the time they enter law school and they are treated the same as those with degrees. Excerpt from same website " All other students must have completed at least the first three years of a degree before being admitted to the JD." This applies when you apply in your third year of undergrad.  Hope this clears everything up! 

×
×
  • Create New...