Jump to content
lucus3245

Is Bay St the only way to make good money?

Recommended Posts

Thank you for your responses. I currently have a full time job that pays me $3000 and a business that makes me $2000 on the low end and $4000 on the high end per month. All figures are in net. 
When I start law school in September I will be quitting my full time job which will bring my monthly income down too 2000-4000 per month. (Yes I can continue the business while in school, I have trusted employees and I’ve gotten used to studying and working throughout my undergrad.)

 

One of the major reasons why I’ve even decided to go to law school in the first place is because I come from a family that highly values education over money. Having only a undergraduate degree is highly looked down upon, hence I have a very high motivation to pursue higher education. i understand there is a high monetary opportunity cost to pursuing law school, but I believe the non monetary utility from becoming a lawyer will make up for it somewhat.

 

My realistic goal is to bring my base employment income up from 3000 now to Atleast 4500 after becoming a lawyer. That way with my business combined, all else equal I can bring my income to 6500-8500 post graduation (within a couple years). 
 

Thank you guys for recommending personal injury law. That is not an area of law I have given thought too, but I will definitely look more into it now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely not. Lawyers do very well. Maybe we don't all have the same idea of what "very well" is, but we're not living hand to mouth. Some lawyers have small family firms with low overhead that have clients lining up. In my jurisdiction (not GTA), some criminal defence lawyers that are the same vintage as me (junior) are pulling in much more money than the associates at national branches. Similarly, lawyers at small shops that would be years from partnership in Big Law are starting to get their hands on some equity. 

The thing about Big Law is that, generally, you don't need to be particularly entrepreneurial to make a comfortable base salary as an associate. You do what you're told. Whereas if you put someone with a strong business sense and willingness to grind out hours into a smaller firm environment, they'll be very financially successful. 

Now, with respect to "net" income - if you're in Ontario, you would need about $120k of income to "net" $7,000/month. Chances are you won't be making that kind of money for the first couple years of practice outside of Big Law, but it's definitely not an out of reach figure for the rest of the profession. 

Edited by setto
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rashabon said:

Yeah. Bay is not the only way to make good money but it’s the easiest and fastest.

Exactly this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Start in big law, make a bit of cash, then do something else and make more. How do you make boatloads more? You need to figure that out yourself. PI is one way, but you can do PI many different ways. Are you going to be the big money trial lawyer? Or the volume settlement lawyer? Or something in between? It really depends on your skill set and preference. 

There are plenty of other good practices outside of PI. 

Also, if you go and work for someone who has a lucrative small practice that doesn't mean it's going to be lucrative for you as an employee. Just keep that in mind. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's certainly possible to make more than $100,000 gross, in other areas of law outside of Bay Street. You probably won't make that in your first year of practice, of course, and many small firms won't make that, but sure, this is an achievable number.

That said, the real question isn't whether you can make $X per year, it's whether the delta between what you can make, as a lawyer, and elsewhere, will be sufficient to eat up the opportunity cost (school and articling) that becoming a lawyer requires, to say nothing of the actual deficit from a tuition and housing perspective. My general belief is that with this lens, as compared to many other equally lucrative careers, it's much harder to justify the ROI for many individuals. I think that's what this question really gets at.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PI in BC is about to become way, way less lucrative.

The second reading of no-fault public auto insurance legislation is being presented as the first item of business when our leg opens Monday after the COVID closure.  This means that in about 3 years, PI for the most part will be shut down here.

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

    • I got a reference from a professor who gave me a B+ that was stronger than the one i got from a professor who gave me an A (in a more difficult course). 
    • A few things, my man: -I don't think @JusticeLordDenning was making the sort of value judgement you read in to that. Asking how students fare outside the formal recruit is not saying that the formal recruit jobs are necessarily the best jobs out there. -Both the DOJ and provincial Crown prosecution service participate in the formal recruit, so that's a poor example to illustrate your point. "Jobs in the recruit" isn't synonymous with "BigLaw." -I highly doubt that there is a huge difference in the level of interest in the formal recruit between Canadian law schools in general, and especially between Queens and Western as a specific example. And just to be clear, I'd be the last person to boost BigLaw or claim that working at a smaller firm outside the GTA is somehow inferior.
    • Some of this is might be based on what I consider to be a false assumption:  That law students who secure jobs at big firms in an urban area have succeeded while those who do not have failed. For example, a Queens student may have the career goal of securing a foot in the door with the Crown in a rural area and a Western student may want to get into business law with a small firm in a medium sized city.
    • Having those two years working with members of Parliament is an added bonus, the significance of which is proportional to the nature of your role. You should get one or two acceptances from those law schools provided you keep your grades up. You seem like the type of person who will make the right decision about this. Good luck!
    • Probablement parce qu'ils n'ont pas reçu assez d'applications? J'espère quand même qu'ont va commencer à recevoir des réponses en mars...

×
×
  • Create New...