Giving excess work, denying weekends, not giving good perks, etc. In case of Senior Advocates, paying almost nothing. Why do they behave like this? This is a genuine question. I am curious about whether there are deeper sociological factors at play here.
Way too much supply of lawyers thanks to explosion of law schools (and seats in existing law schools) in the post-liberalization era (especially post 2000s).
In fact we should be thankful that a big chunk of the law student population from colleges like GLC, ILS, and other Government Law Colleges do not even attempt to get into "Commercial Law" (whether Litigation or Corporate) but make their way to their hometowns for practicing in Sessions Courts or line up for Government job exams.
The best thing you can currently do for the profession is discourage 14-17 y.o. relatives and acquaintances of yours from doing an LLB.
Demand and supply. Too many people too less jobs. I personally think as soon as foreign firms come in this is going to change. Also, too many NLUS and that's not good either. Apart from the top 10 NLUs, rest should be shut down immediately. Also, I don't understand why our papers are open book and so easy. Look at CAs or Doctors, doesn't matter from which college they are their degree itself holds so much value but in India everybody can become a lawyer just because how easy it is to get licence. We need to stop the influx of lawyers, shut down below par colleges and make it extremely difficult to get licence. As soon as the supply decreases the money will increase automatically and so will the respect.
Even CA and Doctors go thru training for peanuts. But the main difference in them and a lawyer is the practical training is before degree. Once you qualify, you also have a decent practical experience in case of CA and Doctors, which lack in lawyers (and please don't compare the internships with law firms / senior with internships by CA and Doctors). That's why even freshers in these profession command more value.
I speak for Mr. Fali Nariman. He did'nt pay much because if good money is payed to juniors they will never venture out on their own. May jump ships but opening their own practice is a step they will never take. They may even complain in canteens that their senior does not pay them enough. So either you have to have perseverance or a godfather which is a strength in itself. And I honestly also think good advocates will not rise if they take litigation as a secured salaried 'job'. But I have qualms about too low a pay. I think the seniors should have a sort of 'lowest sum I will give to my junior' worked about amongst themselves like ,say, 30000.
A mix of several factors - 1. They have been treated like this as well. Mnntality of "Hum ne ghisai hai aur galaiyaan khai hai toh tumhe bhi khani chahiye, spoilt brats". 2. too many lawyers and law graduates, and too less jobs. (covered already) 3. they know the law, therefore they don't have to be afraid of anyone suing them, cuz they use the loopholes slyly. 4. lack of practical skills and knowledge in law graduates (not saying that it is an issue with the current-gen only, previous gens were way worse in terms of academics, resourcefulness, exposure and efficiency as compared to current gen) 5. Snobby and iknowitall nature of law students and law grads (this is more of an issue with current gen students and freshers) this leads to battle of inflated egos of established lawyers and snobby freshers. 6. insecurity among seniors of losing to a fresher and of "kal k aaye" juniors eating up their clientele (cuz a lot of them are doing this by cutting the prices and giving better services) 7. Exploitation culture in India. It is very common in India in general, not limited to legal careers.
I know the perfect person to answer this question.....ask it to Cyril Shroff to get the perfect answer,one that will convince that your question is so false.
In fact we should be thankful that a big chunk of the law student population from colleges like GLC, ILS, and other Government Law Colleges do not even attempt to get into "Commercial Law" (whether Litigation or Corporate) but make their way to their hometowns for practicing in Sessions Courts or line up for Government job exams.
The best thing you can currently do for the profession is discourage 14-17 y.o. relatives and acquaintances of yours from doing an LLB.
So either you have to have perseverance or a godfather which is a strength in itself. And I honestly also think good advocates will not rise if they take litigation as a secured salaried 'job'. But I have qualms about too low a pay. I think the seniors should have a sort of 'lowest sum I will give to my junior' worked about amongst themselves like ,say, 30000.
1. They have been treated like this as well. Mnntality of "Hum ne ghisai hai aur galaiyaan khai hai toh tumhe bhi khani chahiye, spoilt brats".
2. too many lawyers and law graduates, and too less jobs. (covered already)
3. they know the law, therefore they don't have to be afraid of anyone suing them, cuz they use the loopholes slyly.
4. lack of practical skills and knowledge in law graduates (not saying that it is an issue with the current-gen only, previous gens were way worse in terms of academics, resourcefulness, exposure and efficiency as compared to current gen)
5. Snobby and iknowitall nature of law students and law grads (this is more of an issue with current gen students and freshers) this leads to battle of inflated egos of established lawyers and snobby freshers.
6. insecurity among seniors of losing to a fresher and of "kal k aaye" juniors eating up their clientele (cuz a lot of them are doing this by cutting the prices and giving better services)
7. Exploitation culture in India. It is very common in India in general, not limited to legal careers.
All depends on d junior - I have trained sum who r brilliant & hav recvd only respct from me n the profssn.