Remfry & Sagar has created a pre-partnership career rung, promoting four managing associates into the partner-designate position effective from 1 April 2013.
Managing associates from the patents team Shukadev Khuraijam, Vineet Rohilla and Swarup Kumar, and Gaurav Mukerjee from the trademarks team were elevated as the first four partner-designates at the firm.
Khuraijaam graduated as a lawyer from Delhi University (DU) in 2004 to join Remfry. Rohilla also obtained an LLB from DU in 2003 and joined Remfry in May 2005. Mukerjee graduated from Symbiosis Law Pune in 2002 and joined Remfry in 2004, while Kumar joined the firm in April last year.
Remfry managing partner Ashwin Julka said: “[The new rung] has been a thought of the firm for a long time. There are different structures followed by different firms. Some firms keep [their retainers on the] senior associate [rung] for several years and then suddenly make them partners.
“[Through elevation as partner-designate] people understand that they are on the path to make partner if all goes well and if they work hard. It is good to have such rungs [signifying] positive growth in their career.”
He said that the partner-designate rung has also been introduced as a grooming period between the managing associate level and partnership where the firm can also assess the retainers.
“We did a restructuring in terms of the work flow, [so that] there is always a back up for every person,” he added.
Julka told Legally India that the firm saw a profit increase of 20 per cent last year - “radical” in light of the current economic climate - and hired 16 professionals including six engineers, eight paralegals and secretarial staff, and two trademark lawyers. Remfry’s base salary ranges between Rs 6 to 10 lakhs per annum, exclusive of bonus, varying across departments, said Julka, noting that patent lawyers were usually paid more than others.
Vikram Grover, an equity partner at the firm, left last month to start up his own practice, leaving nine partners at the firm including Julka.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
I know many people will disagree / find this offensive / argue that it is not a reflection on quality. Please don't argue for the heck of it. What I am saying is a fact, unless the photo was taken suddenly / impromptu.
Here's a conversation starter though: if lawyers aren't supposed to do marketing or PR, because it is a noble profession, shouldn't a non-professional photo be a point of pride?
umm... No.
there is a concept of first impression. its considered important. and its called a first impression for a reason.
While Mahatma Gandhi did not need a studio pic, those of us in service sector need to create a good first impression. A good pic therefore is important and relevant.
kian, look at your pic, you dont even need to make a first impression, and still your pic is so massively dashing. (do not edit)
As unfortunate as it may be, let me see how much will the clients be willing to pay to a firm who do that (on the pretext that being professionally presentable is marketing/advertising), for the same advise. Unless your client is Google, CPI, Ms.Patkar, which would be pretty cool in itself.
On a slightly serious note, Law as a career, while being a noble profession, is also on of the most traditional (other than Ayurveda Doctors) and conservative profession (other than being Sunny Leone's tailor) . Whilst it is good that we have done away with the wigs, the Delhi Courts allow lawyers without their gowns in Summer etc, but let us atleast, in the words of the wise man, Barney.....Suit Up!
@ Kian : It would be the start of a conversation. A very petty and pointless conversation. A well taken photo is'nt necessarily for advertising. Do you half expect Judges to pose in boxer shorts? Or AMSS partners in tank tops?
1. that only a naive person would buy this argument (ROFL),
2. how the nobility dresses up - in any case, the profession has a dress code: BLACK SUIT.
Limited point - solicitors who run firms should know how to dress. If they don't make an effort to dress, clients will assume they won't make efforts on the matters either. I know this is the first thing they taught you when you did your training contract. Firms in India, like in every other major jurisdiction, follow the concepts of beauty parade and dress parties.
My 2 cents - don't put up old photos unless expressly permitted. I would be very upset if you put up an old photo of mine which made me look bad. If the partners permitted the use of these old photos, we are back where we started i.e. they don't know the first thing about running the show.
But not sure it's such a big deal if someone doesn't have an up-to-date marketing photo. We've formally requested the firm to provide a more recent photo and will update if we get it.
However, all things considered this photo is not unprofessional - it's not like he's wearing a T-Shirt and shorts or anything... The only thing about the photo is that it looks like it was taken a long time ago, and the background is a bit 80s, but really, I've seen much worse...
Saurabh - thanks for your dashing comment, but my profile pic too must be 100 years old by now from back in my days at The Lawyer mag. Luckily, that was taken by a professional, but since then I haven't had time to get a new mugshot, so I certainly have sympathy for lawyers who have not updated theirs in a while, particularly if the firm's mentality may be a bit old school with respect to publicity or PR...
We should have asked the law firm for a more recent photo in the original instance rather than taking an older one from the web.
Will bear this in mind in future.
Best wishes,
Kian
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first