Amid downturn, more pupils not offered full employment, asked to foot law course fees of $5,000
It is widely perceived to be a profession well buffered from the effects of economic downturns. But the current crisis has seen fresh graduates entering the legal sector this year having to battle much tougher conditions.
The situation is serious enough that Law Society president Michael Hwang has penned a note of concern in the society’s latest monthly publication - particularly regarding some law firms’ treatment of pupils who have not been offered full-time positions.
Where it used to be a near-certainty for fresh graduates to clinch employment in a law firm after serving pupillage, a significant number from last year’s batch have had to scramble for jobs as a result of a dramatic cut-back in hiring.
“Owing to the current economic situation, it is not surprising that many law firms are not offering permanent employment to all of their pupils,” wrote Senior Counsel Hwang in the May edition of the Law Gazette.
Urging “all law firms to bear the cost of the Practical Law Course (PLC)”, he noted: “It has been the general practice that law firms pay for the PLC fees of all pupils except those who choose alternative offers of employment, and Council hopes that this practice will continue, especially at this time when pupils may not be flush with cash or find employment as quickly and easily as they have done in the past.”
Law school graduates serve one year of pupillage from June to May - during which they must undergo the PLC and pass a Bar exam - before they are called to the Bar. Near-full retention of pupils - particularly in larger firms - was not uncommon.
Typically, pupils foot all PLC-related costs - which amount to about $5,000 on average, but these are reimbursed by the firm upon employment, unless the pupils choose to move to other companies.
Today spoke to five young lawyers -some of whom work in Singapore’s most prestigious firms - who have had to bear the fees themselves. All spoke on condition of anonymity.
“I thought I could still recover my PLC fees because this is a large company, but I ended up having to pay for everything myself,” said a 24-year-old lawyer.
Two others managed to get their new employers to absorb the fees - but at a price.
The hazy economic outlook has meant that the days of plum pay packages are gone and all five lawyers - who have since found employment in new firms - had either headed to a smaller-sized outfit or settled for significantly lower salaries. One of them took a $1,000-a-month pay cut after scouring for a job unsuccessfully for two months.
“It gets stressful after a while. Instead of bearing the PLC fees myself and remaining jobless, I figured I should settle,” said the 28-year-old lawyer.
Today also understands that some lawyers have switched to specialities outside their preference in order to keep their jobs. Because of the difference in pay, many young lawyers favour corporate law, instead of criminal law or litigation, for instance.
Mr. Hwang, however, sees a silver lining: The legal sector may become more vibrant. For small- and medium-sized firms “who have been complaining for the last few years” about losing out on hiring fresh talent to bigger names, now is their chance, he wrote.
“This may be the time for smaller firms to invest in the future growth of their firms by taking advantage of the pool of able lawyers who are, for the first time in a long while, available to the not-so-large firms, and hopefully this will mean relatively good news for everyone,” he wrote.
1 comment:
Recession hits young lawyers
Teo Xuanwei, TODAY
23 June 2009
Amid downturn, more pupils not offered full employment, asked to foot law course fees of $5,000
It is widely perceived to be a profession well buffered from the effects of economic downturns. But the current crisis has seen fresh graduates entering the legal sector this year having to battle much tougher conditions.
The situation is serious enough that Law Society president Michael Hwang has penned a note of concern in the society’s latest monthly publication - particularly regarding some law firms’ treatment of pupils who have not been offered full-time positions.
Where it used to be a near-certainty for fresh graduates to clinch employment in a law firm after serving pupillage, a significant number from last year’s batch have had to scramble for jobs as a result of a dramatic cut-back in hiring.
“Owing to the current economic situation, it is not surprising that many law firms are not offering permanent employment to all of their pupils,” wrote Senior Counsel Hwang in the May edition of the Law Gazette.
Urging “all law firms to bear the cost of the Practical Law Course (PLC)”, he noted: “It has been the general practice that law firms pay for the PLC fees of all pupils except those who choose alternative offers of employment, and Council hopes that this practice will continue, especially at this time when pupils may not be flush with cash or find employment as quickly and easily as they have done in the past.”
Law school graduates serve one year of pupillage from June to May - during which they must undergo the PLC and pass a Bar exam - before they are called to the Bar. Near-full retention of pupils - particularly in larger firms - was not uncommon.
Typically, pupils foot all PLC-related costs - which amount to about $5,000 on average, but these are reimbursed by the firm upon employment, unless the pupils choose to move to other companies.
Today spoke to five young lawyers -some of whom work in Singapore’s most prestigious firms - who have had to bear the fees themselves. All spoke on condition of anonymity.
“I thought I could still recover my PLC fees because this is a large company, but I ended up having to pay for everything myself,” said a 24-year-old lawyer.
Two others managed to get their new employers to absorb the fees - but at a price.
The hazy economic outlook has meant that the days of plum pay packages are gone and all five lawyers - who have since found employment in new firms - had either headed to a smaller-sized outfit or settled for significantly lower salaries. One of them took a $1,000-a-month pay cut after scouring for a job unsuccessfully for two months.
“It gets stressful after a while. Instead of bearing the PLC fees myself and remaining jobless, I figured I should settle,” said the 28-year-old lawyer.
Today also understands that some lawyers have switched to specialities outside their preference in order to keep their jobs. Because of the difference in pay, many young lawyers favour corporate law, instead of criminal law or litigation, for instance.
Mr. Hwang, however, sees a silver lining: The legal sector may become more vibrant. For small- and medium-sized firms “who have been complaining for the last few years” about losing out on hiring fresh talent to bigger names, now is their chance, he wrote.
“This may be the time for smaller firms to invest in the future growth of their firms by taking advantage of the pool of able lawyers who are, for the first time in a long while, available to the not-so-large firms, and hopefully this will mean relatively good news for everyone,” he wrote.
Post a Comment