Why do some law firms want to see VCE/HSC results? (1 Viewer)

[capa]

What's the point? Why do some law firms want to see VCE/HSC results for a law graduate?

I'm worried because I can't really remember year 12...

Seriously though, does anyone know?

To see how smart you are or something like that?

 

[santaslayer]

This was brought up in one of the UWS flamming threads I encountered. (There are many, ) The issue was that some graduates decided to brief the interviewers on their UAI to prove that they didn't go to a certain uni because they were restricted UAI-wise.

What does it achieve? Jack shit IMO.

If I go to the shittest uni in the world (reputation wise) and get a fucking holy immaculate academic record, esp in the PLT and later professional exams then I don't think they would give a rats arse about your UAI.



Anyway, my guess is only as good as yours.


EDIT: Which firms are you talking about? I've never encountered such questions. (Maybe coz I'm no where near graduating yet. )

 

[Frigid]

maybe they've run of out criteria by that stage...


interviewer: SO... how did you do in your Basic Skills test?

 

[= Jennifer =]

maybe they've run of out criteria by that stage...


interviewer: SO... how did you do in your Basic Skills test?

lol i dont think we had basic skills test we had the DART lol too old

 

[MiuMiu]

Haha how did you score in your driving ability road test?

 

[melsc]

lol it seems pointless, especially since most HSC subjects have nothing to do with law (except legal and english and even still) wouldnt uni results be a better indicator that results you achieved 5 years ago?

 

[011]

lol it seems pointless, especially since most HSC subjects have nothing to do with law (except legal and english and even still) wouldnt uni results be a better indicator that results you achieved 5 years ago?

You give that too...

The UAI is just another piece in the puzzle.

 

[capa]

Yeah, thats what I thought. When I saw to include VCE results I paused ...

Only thing I can think of is that it may be a reason to only hire graduates from the top uni's or maybe keep in touch with that old boys club tradition (to see what high school you went to)...

 

[melsc]

my high school is all girls

 

[Meldrum]

It won't be a major determinant of your chances of getting a job. Most (often transnational) employers want to see if you are consistently dedicated or if you just try at the end, which will be shown in the disparity between internal and external marks; with the HSC.

Also, they might want to see whether or not you've done Grad Law because you changed your mind or if you couldn't get into it.

But don't worry, HSC results are easy to fake to non-UAC peeps.

 

[MiuMiu]

Hehe yeah short of showing them the original certificate (which you can say was like up on the wall at home or something) you can tell them whatever marks you want.......they ask for your HSC marks....they don't specify whether they want what was your ideal HSC marks or actual Hsc marks

 

[Omnidragon]

A lot of things you do at uni are not relevant (maybe not law... but it's not as if you're going to be applying your difficult cases in real life when you start as a grad).

Say you apply for something like accounting, it's not as if what you learn about debiting and crediting has much to do with what you do.

I guess the subjects at uni are just an indication of how much effort you put in and what your potentials might be. The HSC score is just another factor with the same to show, though less recent.

 

[ManlyChief]

Hehe yeah short of showing them the original certificate (which you can say was like up on the wall at home or something) you can tell them whatever marks you want.......they ask for your HSC marks....they don't specify whether they want what was your ideal HSC marks or actual Hsc marks

Surely such a misrepresentation (or does it amount to fraud?) would render one an unfit and unproper person to practise law in the good and fair state of New South Wales ...

 

[MiuMiu]

Im sure it would

But I'd like to know how they're gonna find out its a misrepresentation...

 

[ManlyChief]

mmm ... isn't the whole point of ethical conduct that what matters is what one does when no-one is watching or has the possibility of finding out?

 

[MiuMiu]

So now you're trying to tell me all lawyers are ethical?

 

[ManlyChief]

So now you're trying to tell me all lawyers are ethical?

i did not say all lawyers. but i will maintain that the overwhelming majority of lawyers are ethical.

i really think lawyers, speaking of the australian profession as a whole, are among the most ethical professionals around. the standard and intensity of ethics training at australian universities, the post-admission ethics training and the stringent standards laid out by legislation (the legal profession act) and delegated legislation (in the form of the rules) and enforced by the courts, the law society and the bar association create and maintain an amazingly high degree of ethical practice in australian law firms and at the bar.

i fear lay folks in the community don't realise this and instead rely on the cliched attitudes toward lawyers they receive from an unhelathy diet of american television and australian-wannabe-american television.

 

[charlie_charlie]

But its so much fun watching American law shows and movies eg The Rainmaker.... You mean we can't have a courtroom brawl with a potential juror? :'(
Then why am I in this degree?!?!

 

[Omnidragon]

I don't know... I think a lot of commercial lawyers I've seen in real life are pretty unethical: whether it'd be ones that our business has engaged with or against.

And then... I find some of the kids of certain QCs at law faculty to be very arrogant. I can just see their unscrupulous behaviours when daddy gives them the grad job.

Did you guys hear about the two legal secretaries fighting over some lunch at AAR in Sydney... gee I think that said a bit about the ethical standards of professional peolpe.

 

[ManlyChief]

I don't know... I think a lot of commercial lawyers I've seen in real life are pretty unethical: whether it'd be ones that our business has engaged with or against.

Care to elaborate on the ethical rules you are claiming have been broken? Would you be so kind as to direct me to one of the professional rules and provide some evidence for this claim - or at least explain it in some detail??

Just because you may not like how something has been done or how someone has behaved does not make that behavious unethical.

And then... I find some of the kids of certain QCs at law faculty to be very arrogant. I can just see their unscrupulous behaviours when daddy gives them the grad job.

Mere speculation. And how, pray, would their daddies be able to give them grad jobs? The barristers' rules (NSW Barristers' Rule 81) require that barristers operate in solo practice meaning that they must not employ "any legal practitioner who acts as a legal practitioner in the course of that employment" (rule 81(b)). So, even if daddy QC gave these kids jobs they would could only ever be to do paralegal/secretarial services - which would rather defeat the purpose of spending all those $000s on a bachelor's degree ...

Did you guys hear about the two legal secretaries fighting over some lunch at AAR in Sydney... gee I think that said a bit about the ethical standards of professional peolpe.

Ah ... actually, NO. A petty office fight over lunch is not an issue of ethics (even if it did concern lawyers - which in this case it did not, as you conceed your example delas with legal secretaries) but rather it is nothing more than a juvinile office bithching session the likes of which one can find in any office around the counrty. It may not be nice to call people names as those women did, it may contravene accepted norms of office civility, but I do not think it rises to the serious level of a serious breech of ethics.