Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

Limit working hours for lawyers called to the Bar

I refer to The Big Read article “As supply of lawyers lurches from shortage to glut, spotlight falls on policies” (Sept 10).

Follow TODAY on WhatsApp
Ju Xiaoyong

I refer to The Big Read article “As supply of lawyers lurches from shortage to glut, spotlight falls on policies” (Sept 10).

The Chief Justice’s suggestion of the paralegal route for fresh graduates has potential consequences, not to mention the concerns of those pursuing a law diploma.

As a member of the legal fraternity, I would argue that another way to address the oversupply of lawyers is to limit, by statute, the working hours per week for lawyers called to the Bar.

This would crystallise the aspiration to a better work-life balance, drive up productivity, and generate higher demand for lawyers.

Obviously, there are other economic considerations: Proponents of free-market principles would frown upon tampering with market forces, and owners of legal practices would argue that this would increase costs and make legal services less competitive.

Most people may agree that the invisible hand of the market should be balanced by the visible hands of good governance and regulation to prevent market failure.

As with other businesses, legal practices are exposed to the risk of regulations and would be wise to price in such risks, whether during the recruitment of lawyers or the provision of legal services.

Long working hours are a factor in the mid-career attrition rate; it follows that a statutory limit on working hours is a straightforward fix to stop the haemorrhage of experienced practitioners.

I also think that a minor tweak to the qualification process — extending the training contract period — would serve as another remedy.

The current process for local law graduates consists of five months of studying for the Bar examinations and a six-month practice training period, whereas the process is longer for overseas law graduates.

The qualification period in Singapore is shorter than in England and Australia. In England, qualified solicitors must have first completed the legal practice course, similar to our Bar examinations, and then a two-year training contract.

In New South Wales, Australia, a barrister must have undertaken 12 months of training. Notably, however, law degrees in England and Australia can be completed in three years, compared with four years in Singapore.

Regulating the supply of qualified legal professionals is not an easy task; if the market is saturated, and we prefer not to do a U-turn on overseas graduates, we should focus on fine-tuning the process where the supply meets demand.

Ambition is indeed no substitute for ability as Singapore continues its efforts to establish itself as the legal hub of the region. And plainly, this potential glut is, in fact, an opportunity if it is managed properly.

Read more of the latest in

Advertisement

Advertisement

Stay in the know. Anytime. Anywhere.

Subscribe to get daily news updates, insights and must reads delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking subscribe, I agree for my personal data to be used to send me TODAY newsletters, promotional offers and for research and analysis.