Clifford Chance sizes up options for Australia launch
December 13, 2010 by Damian
It looks like the Australian market is bracing itself for the arrival of another international heavyweight, judging by this story in Legal Week :
Clifford Chance (CC) has been looking again at entering the Australian market, two years after informal merger talks with Mallesons Stephen Jaques ended in 2008.
The magic circle law firm has been considering options in the region and has held discussions with a number of firms on the ground in recent months.
Perth outfit Cochrane Lishman Carson Luscombe and Sydney firm Chang Pistilli & Simmons are among those CC is understood to have talked to within the last two months; however, discussions with both firms are now thought to have been concluded.
Seven-partner Cochrane Lishman Carson Luscombe was set up by two partners from Mallesons, Ian Cochrane and Michael Lishman, in 2006.
Seven-partner Chang Pistilli & Simmons was set up the same year by a group of partners from Sydney outfit Atanaskovic Hartnell, including dispute resolution partner Diana Chang and M&A partners Mark Pistilli and Danny Simmons.
News of the talks comes after informal merger discussions between CC and Mallesons ended in 2008 as a result of the market downturn. The firms had previously talked in 1999.
Name partner Ben Luscombe said: “This firm has been approached by inter-state and overseas firms interested in establishing a presence in Perth, but it is not our policy to comment on those approaches.”
CC refused to comment on its intentions but a partner conceded the firm was looking to launch via a team hire.
Allen & Overy (A&O) and Norton Rose have both launched offices in Australia within the last year. Norton Rose tied up with Deacons, while A&O hired a group of partners from Clayton Utz and Freehills.
As the article states, it is not the first time that Clifford Chance has looked at establishing some sort of presence in Australia. However, with the arrival of A&O and Norton Rose, it looks like they have made the decision to look at it again, albeit in a more understated way than was planned with the Mallesons merger.
Looking at it in a broader sense, it is rare that where one international firm goes, the other international firms do not follow (unless you are talking about Slaughter and May). As such, in the coming few years, it would not be a surprise to see some of the other leading international firms making their way ‘down under’ and establishing a foothold in Australia.
Whether any of them will decide to travel the extra few miles to have a look down here is anyone’s guess but it would certainly make life interesting if they did!
New Rules For Migrants In The UK
November 26, 2010 by Damian
I have just seen this article in the ALB and thought that it would be worth sharing. It seems like not only are there currently fewer jobs in the UK but the government are making it harder for overseas lawyers to have access to them.
Australia lawyers thinking of heading to the UK in the near future will need to consider their options carefully following changes to the British skilled migration rules. From April next year Australians and other non-European Union nationals wishing to work in the UK under the skilled migrant visa will need to have a job before they can apply. The number of migrants able to apply for a skilled migrant’s visa without a job offer has been cut to 1000 per year and will only apply to people of “exceptional talent”. The tier one general category has been widely used by law firms to bring in new recruits from overseas; law firms will now have to apply under the tier two general category for skilled workers, but will be restricted by the new annual migrant cap of 20,700 per year.
“In recent times some employers have preferred for staff to come on a tier one visa, as they don’t require a sponsorship and the individual is responsible for themself. But that option is no longer available to lawyers. If you are a lawyer, you will now only have the tier two option available,” said Mary Horniblow, manager, private practice and international, Mahlab.
Applicants under tier two are required to apply for a visa from the UK Border Agency through the PBS, will have to be of graduate level, be sponsored by an employer and will be awarded points based on scarcity of skills and salary. “Because they have limited the tier two numbers and severely limited the tier one cap, there will be more competition for skilled migrant visas,” added Horniblow.
The new limit will also affect law firms which swap staff with “best friend” firms in other jurisdictions, but will not affect intra-company transfers where the income of the professional is more than £40,000. However, those professionals are limited to a five-year stay. This may lead to more Australian and New Zeland based lawyers trying to get jobs in UK firms with offices locally, said Horniblow.
Australians who can show British heritage can still apply for ancestry visas, while those under the age of 30 may still apply for working holiday visas. However, those professionals who enter the UK on such a visa will need to re-apply for a skill migrant visa if they intend to stay past their 30th birthday or longer than two years.
Notwithstanding the fact that there is now a limited amount of visas available, this is similar to the system that was in place before the introduction of the Highly Skilled Migrant Visa which did seem to work reasonably well.
However, my view is that although these rule changes are understandable given the current state of the market in the UK and the amount of locally qualified lawyers looking for work, if and when the UK market picks up again and staff become increasingly harder to find, they could be very detrimental to UK firms who rely heavily on recruiting overseas lawyers when they are busy.
When that scenario eventuates, I would not be surprised to see some loosening of these restrictions to allow UK firms to hire good quality overseas lawyers in order for them to function properly. When that will be is the million dollar (or pound) question.
Beauty Is In The Eye Of The Beholder
September 3, 2010 by Damian
Sorry – it has been a long time since my last blog but just in case anyone is interested, the reason is that there has been a very recent and delightful addition to the Hanna family which has taken up quite a lot of my and more of my wife’s time!
Anyway back to recruitment. Recently, I have been working with two candidates whose individual experiences, I think, highlight the unpredictability of the job seeking process and how regardless of how good your experience is, the intangible ‘team fit’ can be the most important criteria of all.
Without going into too much detail, these two candidates – Candidate A and Candidate B – have very similar backgrounds. They have roughly the same amount of pqe, come from comparable firms, have experience in broadly similar areas and have the same reason for wanting to move roles.
Luckily for them, I had two good roles for them to consider and both decided to apply for both roles. Based on their CVs, both managed to secure first interviews with both firms and here is where things started to get interesting.
With Firm X, both candidates interviewed with the same people but came out with completely different feedback. Candidate A found the partners to be really warm and friendly, Candidate B thought that they were a little standoffish and distant. Candidate A really liked the sound of the work and Candidate B wasn’t sold at all. Candidate A wanted to progress and Candidate B did not really care whether they made it through or not.
The feedback from the firm mirrored the candidates’ feedback. They really liked Candidate A. They commented on his pleasant and engaging personality and thought that he would be a great addition to the team and moved him through to 2nd interview. The feedback on Candidate B was positive but in the end, it was felt that the candidate just wasn’t a ‘good fit’ for the team and they decided to end their interest there.
On to Firm Y and the situation was almost completely the reverse. Candidate B was much happier with the interview than Candidate A and Candidate B made it through to 2nd interview and Candidate A was not taken any futher, again for reasons of ‘team fit’.
So in the end, the result for both candidates was a positive one in that both managed to secure the job that they wanted over one that they were not so keen on. The question is, given that both candidates were so similar and both interviewed with the same people, why the divergence of opinion from both candidate and client on whether to hire them or not?
The answer to this question is easy to state but very difficult to elaborate on. The answer is that certain people warm to particular people more than others. There is a ‘connection’, a ‘click’, an instant rapport that is struck up with some people and not with others. If this connection or click happens in an interview, you invariably know it and you come out feeling confident and keen to progress. It is equally as noticeable if it is absent which leads one to think more negatively about the role and the employer – a feeling which is almost always felt by the interviewers as well.
What this ‘click’ or ‘connection’ is, I do not know but I do know that it cannot be manufactured or faked. All the interview preparation in the world is not going to matter if that connection is not established. Similarly, some candidates whose experience may not be that strong ‘get over the line’ because the interviewers really liked them and thought that they would be a ‘good fit’. If asked to quantify what a ‘good fit’ actually was, most employers would not be able to give more of an answer than – ‘it’s just a gut feeling that I have’.
The upshot of all this is that no matter how good your experience is, how well you prepare for an interview, the reality is that you will not get every job that you apply for. This is not because of something that you have any control over. It is just because some people get on better with particular people than others do. However, what this also means is that if you miss out on one opportunity because of a lack of a ‘good team fit’, you will almost certainly get the next one for exactly the same reason!
As the situation with the two candidates above highlights, beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder as what one interviewer likes, another may not. The key is to keep searching until you come across the organisation that is going to see and appreciate your inner beauty over someone elses!
Rose Tinted Glasses – Don’t Make That Mistake
September 22, 2009 by Damian
It has been pretty obvious to everyone that getting a job in the last 9-12 months has been very difficult. The number of vacancies has shrunk dramatically while at the same time, the numbers and quality of applicants has increased in a similar vein. This has left some good people either out of a job or sitting very unhappily in their current one, desperately wanting to be somewhere else.
Recently, there has been a marked change in the mood around the job market and the country in general. The general consensus is that the worst is behind us and that the recovery, although it may be slow, is on its way.
I agree with this sentiment and god knows I hope that it is correct. However, I have already started to pick up a sense from people that they think that, once business confidence has been restored and the markets have stabilised, changing jobs will be as simple as sending in a CV, having a chat with a hiring manager and signing on the dotted line.
I think there is a serious case of people looking through ‘rose tinted glasses’ at the pre-credit crunch job market. I read an article in a reputable online legal magazine by a partner in a firm in Dubai who said they used to hire people purely and simply because they had the letters ‘LLB’ beside their name. Obviously he was over-simplifying things but the message that he was sending out was, in my opinion, a dangerous one.
It was not (and never will be) very easy to change jobs. Back in the ‘good old days’, I know that there were some people who secured jobs in firms who, in reality, were not strong enough for them and were completely out of their depth. However, those people were the exception, not the rule but their experience has lent creedance to the belief that changing jobs is as simple as changing one’s hairstyle.
I, like everyone else, am looking forward to a job market where people have options. A ‘normal market’ should be one where a person does not have to sit in a job that they really dislike or is unable to move locations due to a lack of suitable opportunities.
However, I think that everyone needs to get some perspective on how the market will actually look in the coming months and years. It will not be a matter of just applying for the job you want and getting it. You will still need a strong CV that showcases your skills and experience. You will still need to demonstrate that you can add significant value and that you have the potential to go far in the organisation. In other words, you will still have to work hard to get a job.
Those who are looking back through ‘rose tinted glasses’ and think that getting a job will be easy, even when the market does improve, are going to be in for a nasty surprise.