Ultra Vires Vol 16 Issue 3: 2014 November by Ultra Vires

NOVEMBER 26 2014 | ULTRAVIRES.CA

THE INDEPENDENT STUDENT NEWSPAPER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO FACULTY OF LAW

of students said their financial situation (i.e. debt load) influenced which employer they chose to apply to

of students who applied to at least one job got an offer

of students were satisfied with the outcome of the process

Toronto Fall Recruitment Special 2014 RELIEVED Exhausted

I honestly found the process much less cutthroat than I was led to believe

Glad it is over and looking forward to never having to go through it again Like a weight has been taken off my shoulders

Not sure where it all went wrong

Disappointed with TO approach. It felt very artificial, rushed, manipulative â&#x20AC;&#x201D;like terrible speed-dating. New York just felt like... job interviews.

Exhausted and dazed, but could not be happier

Relieved that it's over and couldn't be more excited to have a job with the firm I'm going to summer at... I got what I wanted

It's not the end of the world, but it is rather dispiriting

Drained and slightly bitter Excited to get started Unhappy

Interview with Incoming Dean Iacobucci Also: Report from his recent Town Hall PAGE 4

Mental Health: Exploring the link between student debt and depression PAGE 3

Point | Counterpoint â&#x20AC;&#x201D;Is it better to go out with law school friends, or normals? PAGE 21

EDITORIAL/NEWS

2 | NOVEMBER 26, 2014

Editors' Letter PALOMA VAN GROLL (3L) & DAVID GRUBER (3L) IT’S THAT TIME OF YEAR AGAIN. No, not the time for friends and family and taking a moment to reflect on the important things in life. The one where 2Ls get in line to ride an emotional rollercoaster for the opportunity, the possibility, the hope that they will be allowed to exchange their labour for money. When you’re in the throes of it, ready to step over your own grandmother for the chance of a call-back, it’s easy to lose sight of what’s actually at stake: a four month summer contract job that may (or, crucially, may not) lead to a ten month articling position, which may (or may not) lead to an offer of regular employment, which may (or may not) lead to a meaningful and fulfilling career. So while getting a job through this process may feel momentarily monumental, it’s really just one hoop in a long series that began with writing the LSAT, continued with getting into law school, and shall now be called your “career.” And yet here we are. Every year students complain that they want to see more emphasis on non-OCI, non-Bay St. careers. The curricu-

lum, the Career Development Office, and yes, we your humble servants, are all at fault. Contrary to what you might think from looking at this issue alone, there are plenty of other—and in certain senses, better—ways of finding student law jobs. There’s the summer articling recruit, lots of opportunities at the Attorney General of Ontario (of which only a few participate in OCIs), and the wide world beyond. Still, it seems that the On-Campus Interview process in general, and Bay Street in particular, is still the dominant source of summer law jobs. In a way, the hype is justified. A 2L summer position is still among the best ways to secure an articling position—positions which are in short supply lately; not many want to take their chances with the slapdash Law Practice Program experiment. And so once again we took a deep look into how it all went down. This was a survey-heavy year for students. In addition to UV’s annual exercise, both the Career Development Office and the Law Society

ran their own surveys. Students were under the microscope this year more than ever, but we’re not convinced that this has resulted in better, more reliable information. Compared to the comprehensive studies that go on in legal recruiting in the United States, these unsynchronized efforts seem disjointed and scattered. We hope that in the coming years the legal profession can get its… err… act together, and combine efforts to provide students with as much information as possible. If nothing else, information should be made available before recruitment takes place, so that students can actually use it to prepare. As in previous years we received varying feedback on the timing of our survey. Some students thought that sending out our 2014 Fall Recruitment survey within an hour of the 5 p.m. offer window was harsh. And we get that. But after years of experience we’ve found that we get the most thorough, most visceral, and most candid responses when the experience is fresh. At the end of the day, our goal is to give you the best possible information. This year’s 2Ls did not disappoint. Our editorial team read through stacks upon stacks of responses. The high praise for Emily Orchard and the Career Development team demonstrated that there is one administrative office out there that’s earning its keep. Your comments on the process itself suggest that change is greatly

ultravires.ca needed, especially on easy-to-fix things like call day, which resoundingly got a bad rap. Of course we couldn’t fit everything you told us into these pages. We’ll be posting the answers to all the qualitative (i.e. “feelings”) questions online. We received comments from a number of students to the effect that this helped them prepare for their interviews this year. That made us feel warm and fuzzy inside, so we’re doing it again. The more-or-less stagnant job numbers in the face of absurdly-high-and-getting-higher tuition is just one of the many challenges facing incoming dean Edward Iacobucci. UV sat down with incoming “Dean Yak,” to get his preliminary thoughts on the active issues at the law school: tuition, diversity, the changing role of the legal profession in Canadian society, and getting some fucking power outlets in the exam rooms. While Iacobucci was less candid in his answers than our survey respondents, he maintained his commitment to an intellectual and academic approach to legal education, called financial aid “a priority,” and suggested “Yak’s Snacks” for the moniker of our monthly breakfast feast. However you came out of this process, triumphant or battlescarred, or if it’s still ahead of you or a distant memory, we hope you find some data here that helps you get to where you’re going.

Special thanks to Christopher Tron for his help in designing this month’s cover.

Iacobucci Consults JD Students LEANNA KATZ (2L) OVER THE LUNCH HOUR ON November 20, Dean-designate Iacobucci spoke with U of T Law JD students about their thoughts on “priorities for our law school going forward.” The town hall was part of a listening tour for Iacobucci in advance of taking office in January. He has been attending meetings with multiple stakeholders, including graduate students and alumni. Fewer than twenty students were present at the outset of the event, including just one 3L. But, by the end of the event, Vic 215 was near full of students from every year of the JD program. Iacobucci expressed his appreciation for the “opportunity to listen” to students’ concerns and ideas. Wearing a U of T tie, he struck an open tone, but was reluctant to offer firm commitments prior to taking office. Students asked questions about Iacobucci’s vision for the Faculty of Law, how to develop this vision, and the position U of T occupies in the Canadian legal market. Students also raised issues related to tuition, financial aid,

the grading system, and career choices. In his answers, Iacobucci often returned to two main themes: endorsing the Faculty’s status as a top academic law school, and his commitment to improving financial aid. Iacobucci explicitly told students that financial aid would be his highest fundraising priority once the building campaign is complete. One student flagged the issue that employers in less lucrative practice areas, like criminal defence, are concerned about whether U of T students will be able to work in such fields given their debt loads. Iacobucci responded that he wants to ensure “career choices are not distorted on the back end.” Another student raised concerns about the availability of debt relief for students who want to work in public interest law. Iacobucci said that being an accessible law school is an important part of being a great law school, though he didn’t refer to accessibility as an end in itself. For Iacobucci, U of T’s strength is the breadth and depth of intellectual discourse, which he

says is broader than at other law schools. Being an “academic law school defines us and is vital to our success.” Iacobucci invoked the foundations of the modern Faculty of Law, including its second dean, Cecil Wright, and the debate between an apprenticeship-based approach to learning and formal legal education. He argued that the academic approach is essential if U of T is to continue encouraging students to become innovative problem-solvers. The debate over the academic role of law schools continues today, with an increasing push from the profession to get students out the door and into practice. For instance, Iacobucci expressed misgivings about whether the new Law Practice Program, which emphasises the business and administrative side of legal practice, helps students become creative and critical thinkers. Iacobucci spoke to the need to engage with institutions like the Canadian Bar Association and the Law Society of Upper Canada, as well as look to other law schools in Canada and

abroad. But one student’s question gave him pause for thought. The student asked, in defining our law school, how much thinking is done within as opposed to comparing ourselves with other law schools? This raises questions about whether we conceive of our success as an institution in terms of rank among other law schools, and whether we define our mission to be about meeting legal needs in our community, offering leading thought on legal and policy questions, or providing the best student experience. Being part of a great institution does not ensure the quality of an individual’s experience. Looking externally can offer metrics for measuring the student experience. But looking internally to students can provide a sense of how we see ourselves and where we would like to see U of T Law in the coming years. This town hall was an important first step in that process, and Iacobucci expressed a keen interest in receiving ongoing student input.

Ultra Vires is an editorially independent publication. We are open to contributions which reflect diverse points of view, and our contents do not necessarily reflect the views of the Faculty of Law, the Students’ Law Society, or the editorial board.

Editors-in-Chief Editor-in-Chief, Emeritus News Editor Features Editors Opinion Editors Diversions Editor 1L Editors Web Editor Layout Editor

David Gruber & Paloma van Groll Emily Debono Brett Hughes Alex Carmona & Tali Green Marita Zouravlioff & David Pardy Alanna Tevel & Lisana Nithiananthan Michael Robichaud, Nathaniel Rattansey & Rona Ocean Ghanbari Aron Nimani Alyssa Dow

ERRORS If you find any errors in Ultra Vires, please email ultra.vires@utoronto.ca

ADVERTISING Advertising inquiries should be sent to ultra.vires@utoronto.ca. SUBMISSIONS If you have an article submission or a tip for us, please contact us at ultra.vires@utoronto.ca. Ultra Vires reserves the right to edit submissions for brevity and clarity.

ultravires.ca

FEATURES

New Research Suggests Link Between Student Debt and Mental Health MICHAEL ROBICHAUD (1L) LAST YEAR, THE LAW STUDENTS’ Society of Ontario (LSSO) conducted a survey that asked students from across the province what impact they thought debt was having on their mental health. The results were perhaps not surprising—those with larger amounts of debt were more inclined to report that financial stress was impacting their psychological well-being—but speak to a recent feeling that student loans can affect more than your credit score. The LSSO survey results come in the wake of campaigns by the Canadian Federation of Students’ Nova Scotia and the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations to put postsecondary mental health issues on Ottawa’s radar. One of the main psychological stressors identified by both organizations: crushing student debt. With many campus mental health services struggling to keep pace with rising demand for student counselling, and tuition rates going up across the board from Halifax to Victoria, it’s no wonder student organizations are starting to take notice. But how real is the link they posit

between the amount of debt we shoulder to pay for school and the way we actually feel at the end of the day? Well, according to a heap of new research, pretty damn real. Recent studies out of the U.K have shown that high debt correlates with a host of negative outcomes like depression, neurosis, alcohol dependency, suicide, and psychotic disorders. The causal directions aren’t always obvious, and underlying variables abound (for instance, students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds are more likely to report depression or stress disorders, as well as to have to borrow more money to pay for school) but if the LSSO survey results tell us anything, it’s that for many Ontario Law students, the connection is clear. And it doesn’t stop at mental health. A 2013 study by researchers at Northwestern University suggests that debt can be a contributing factor to high blood pressure and low self-reported general health scores amongst younger respondents. While more research is needed into the mechanism by which debt and health interact, the numbers

as they stand look pretty ominous. Doron Gold—a therapist specializing in the legal profession—provided some insight into the complicated relationship between debt and well-being for law students. “Not only is [debt] impactful due to the sheer size that one must carry due to law school, but the ability to pay it back coexists with a student’s concern about how their career will unfold.” “If your ability to secure employment is in question, your ability to repay loans is compromised and you’re left with the stress of both a debt load and a career beginning on what feels like the wrong foot. It attacks one’s sense financial and professional security. The stress can be overwhelming and often is for students.” Mr. Gold points to an important facet of the debt/well being dichotomy for students staking their finances on professional degrees: the perception that good grades equals a high paying job, equals the ability to pay off loans. “I’ve had students anxiety-riven because they’re afraid that if they don’t do well on exams, they won’t get the marks they need to secure the high paying job they need to pay their debts. In other words, they

NOVEMBER 26, 2014 | 3 are going to law school to help pay for law school.” This might sound depressingly familiar to those struggling to make the grade with creditors circling overhead like carrion birds, and Mr. Gold urges indebted, heavily stressed students to reach out to a counsellor. “The story one tells oneself in one’s own head is usually a distorted, pessimistic one. Getting another person’s perspective is very therapeutic. They should seek out counselling, including through the MAP (Member Assistance Plan), or a peer volunteer.” At the national level, there are also a number of practical suggestions being forwarded by the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations (CASA). In their recent policy paper, the organization advocates that Canada’s next government allow graduates dealing with mental health problems more time to pay back their debts without penalty. While it’s uncertain whether any of the major parties will incorporate CASA’s proposals into their 2015 election platforms, students suffering from debt stress in the here and now should know that they don’t have to do so in silence. “The key for those struggling with these issues is to talk to someone,” says Mr. Gold, “Isolation and myopia are the enemies of well being.” Conquering them can be as easy as sending an email.

Member Assistance Plan offers free personal and financial counselling to law students and legal professionals: http://myassistplan.com. Counselling & Psychological Services (CAPS) provides U of T students with short-term individual counselling, assault counselling, psychotherapy, cognitive-behavioural therapy, workshops, and psychiatric medication services: http://www.caps.utoronto.ca/main.htm

Be who you are. Law is what we do, but it doesn’t define us. We’re looking for individuals who are passionate about everything in life, including being a lawyer. If this sounds like you, please check us out at www.torys.com to learn more about us.

4 | NOVEMBER 26, 2014

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

Inaugural interview with Dean-designate Iacobucci BRETT HUGHES (2L) & TALI GREEN (2L) FOLLOWING HIS FIRST TOWN HALL meeting with JD students, future dean Iacobucci sat down with Ultra Vires to chat about his vision for the law school, tuition, diversity, the selection process, and more. While a common refrain was some variation on “it’s too early to say,” Iacobucci did share some insights on how he conceives of the law school and his intent to pursue a collaborative approach to leadership. This interview has been condensed and edited. TG: What do you want students to call you? Professor Iacobucci, Dean Iacobucci, Ed, Edward, etc.? It’s entirely up to the students. I imagine things will get done with my last name over time, some variation on “Yak” or something like that… BH: Relatedly, going by Facebook, the main concerns of U of T Law students are power outlets for exams…and the name of the Dean’s monthly snack morning. Have you done any brainstorming?

bility]. Tuition outpaces financial aid, salaries keep going up, the [$50 million] building campaign took money from donors that could have gone to financial aid. Can you talk about the tension between maintaining excellence and maintaining accessibility? You’re framing that as a tension and I’m going to resist that framing, in the sense that we can’t be the institution that we are unless we’re attracting people from all kinds of backgrounds with all kinds of aspirations. I think it’s vital to excellence to maintain access. There are lots of other reasons to maintain access, from a public perspective. I don’t see these two issues as being in a tension. What we have to do is to make sure that the choices that we make are furthering the objectives of having an excellent institution, and having an excellent institution requires great students. My challenge right now is figuring out where we should be going. Financial aid is going to be a priority for all kinds of reasons, but including that reason—I don’t think we can continue to be the place we are without the quality of students that we have. Photo from the University of Toronto Faculty of Law Website

The only one I’ve got seems a little too obvious and not that interesting, which is Yak’s Snacks. It’s something to build on, and I’m sure the creative minds around here will come up with something better than that. TG: Was Yak your nickname in law school? It’s been my nickname at different points. At different stages in life it stuck more than at others. BH: Can you talk in general terms about your vision for the Faculty of Law, including things you value about the status quo and areas that you think need to change? Our commitment to providing [an] intellectual and academic approach to a legal education was our initial raison d’être and has served us incredibly well. It is important for our students, the legal profession, and other walks of life. The emphasis on teaching creative and critical problem solving is one of the most vital aspects of this academic approach to a legal education. I think that’s one of the reasons we see our alumni do so well in so many different areas— the judiciary, the political domain, the business world, social justice advocates—I don’t think that is a coincidence; I think we played some part in helping build that skillset that allowed them to succeed. What that requires is great faculty and great students—faculty thoroughly enjoy being challenged by the students here. I don’t think I would want to change those fundamentals. I think that mission has really been key to our success and is in many ways, with the pressures that are out there, more important than ever. I think we can think about ways of delivering on that mission in ever improving ways. We should not embark on new enterprises without a good understanding of how they connect to this mission of educating great thinkers. BH: In recent years, [affording that vision has come at the expense of accessi-

TG: Many students have a sense that U of T law is losing its status as a Canadian law school as it tries to become a leader in the international sphere. Some recent hires have little to no background in Canadian law, yet they are teaching fundamental Canadian law courses. What are your thoughts on that? Ideas travel. It would be almost antithetical to intellectual enterprise to not be curious about what people around the world are saying about a similar problem. It would be unduly narrow to say we are going to look at ideas made in Canada only. Legal problems, though they vary around the world, have a lot of commonality. I would aspire for us to have the greatest thinkers on a particular conversation that we want to be having. That sometimes means having conversations in Europe or overseas…and I also mean conversations metaphorically in journals and the like. I don’t think this is inconsistent with being a great Canadian law school. I think you couldn’t be a great Canadian law school if you did not engage with the great thinking that is going on around the world. To be a great Canadian law school requires having an aspiration to be a participant in the global conversation. BH: Part of what I think being a Canadian school means is that we are in a context with more of a commitment to public post-secondary education. Do you see it as a problem that costs are being shifted more on to individual students? What is clear to me is that accessibility and financial aid are the priority. I would get there on my own, but there’s been resounding support across the board, not just from students—it’s faculty as well. You can have all sorts of conversations about what’s gotten us to where we are, but what I’m focused on is where we are and where we’re likely to head. I’m trying to work on the margins [where] there are opportunities for gain, and I’m hoping that prioritizing access will be one where

we can really maintain and ideally enhance access over time. TG: Do you think that the law school should be charging as much as it can as long as it is able to fill classrooms? No. The idea of auctioning off spots to the highest bidder is unattractive to me. Because the system depends on having the best students. Financial aid is targeted at the students on the margins. We are not about increasing revenue. TG: But there are so many applicants that you’re likely to find excellent applicants who are willing to pay a lot to come here… I’m very proud of our approach to admissions. The fact of whether someone is needy or not is not something that we look at when we’re trying to decide whether to admit. BH: What does diversity mean to you? What kind of role does the Faculty have in recruiting students from diverse backgrounds and supporting them once they’re here? It’s early for me to be talking about particulars, but I know we have an admissions process and emphasis on trying to reach out to communities that we’d like to see better represented here. I’d love to explore means of increasing that. What that might look like, I’m not sure, but I think there are communities that historically, and to this day, aren’t as represented in the legal community generally as we would like. It would be great to think about ways that we can reach out to these communities. TG: Lots of our tuition dollars are going to fund faculty research. How does such research benefit students? I will focus on the connection between research and teaching. I don’t think there’s any

question that one of the reasons our degree is so valuable is because the teachers are some of the leading thinkers on some of the topics being discussed in that classroom. So students coming in to this place are fantastic and you need fantastic teachers for there to be a fruitful exchange. And a fantastic teacher isn’t just someone who is bright. It must be someone who has worked out conceptions of law that they can bring into the classroom. I think that there is a natural connection between the kind of work that goes on here and what goes on in the classroom. There are a lot of ideas embedded in legal problems and people who are doing terrific research in an area are that much better able to discuss those ideas in the classroom as a consequence. BH: There is an access to justice crisis in Canada. What kind of role do you see law schools generally, and U of T Law in particular, having to play in helping to address the crisis? I’m not an expert on the access to justice crisis, so it almost makes me a little uncomfortable to say one way or the other what U of T’s precise role is. I’ve heard this, and I need to hear more about what the connection is between what we do and the access to justice crisis. My sense is that it’s not obvious to me that what we’re doing is influencing that. I need to hear more about it and I’m open to hearing more about it. I know that colleagues here have certainly been attentive to what’s going on in access to justice—Michael Trebilcock, Albert Yoon, Kent Roach, and others have been looking at various aspects of the access to justice crisis for a while. I also think that we have some programs here that are terrific. Pro Bono Students Canada (PBSC) was of course started by the University of Toronto Faculty of Law. I just had a meeting with Nikki Gershbain yesterday, and I think that organisation is an example of where the law school is making a great contribution, Continued on page 7

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

NOVEMBER 26, 2014 | 5

Embrace T.O. But Campus is Alright Too SAMUEL LEVY (1L) THE READING ROOM IS GETTING pretty packed, isn’t it? Well, it’s not surprising. Close to classes and the B.L.L.L., where else would you want to be come exam period? But if the buzz from the overhead lighting is getting a little bit too loud, or if the collective stress becomes a bit too palpable, here are some great gems around campus that offer some reprieve. The U of T, bastion of higher education that it is, boasts over 30 libraries on St. George Campus; not surprisingly, there are a few decent ones near the law school. In addition to Emmanuel and Pratt (come early to claim the spacious 3rd floor reading room), there is Graham Library at Trinity College, and OISE library at Bloor and St. George. Both of these libraries have study rooms to reserve (OISE can be reserved online). Hart House Library is smaller but usually empty, and the dependable Hart House cafeteria— Sammy’s Student Exchange—is just a few flights down. Just next to Hart House is Gerstein library, the second home for thousands of life science students. There, it’s easy to find a desk with a large window and lots of natural light (no overhead buzz to be heard). And now we come to St. George Street, with the two best study spots at U of T. First, I recommend Caven Library in Knox College, where you can find future Christian ministers and engineers alike. The peaceful courtyard within Knox itself makes for the perfect break. Second, U of T’s academic hub: Robarts Library. Some say it looks like a peacock, others say it’s more like a maximum security prison—I like to think it’s something in between. Try the fourth f loor course reserves area if you feel like some uninterrupted reading—beware: no outlets. On the

eighth f loor, the East Asian and Hong Kong libraries are also worth the trek. These spots boast comfortable seating (leather couches), the best views, and the most space. Take note, the only way to get there is by taking the P4 elevator from the second f loor. Robarts also attaches to the most interesting library on campus: Thomas Fisher. This collection boasts the university’s rarest books, as well as its most selective hours. You may also have to pretend to need one of their books to enter, but ultimately your productivity will be worth the hassle. Okay with books, but not with campus? The Toronto Reference Library is your spot. Located on Yonge Street, just north of Bloor, the TRL has multiple, expansive floors with plenty of light and large desks. It was designed by famous Canadian architect Raymond Moriyama, who added features like a fountain at the bottom of the central, winding staircase, and study pods that look suspiciously like the ‘cone of silence’ from Get Smart. Perhaps Moriyama took the name ‘Reference Library’ a bit too literally. Complete with a Balzac’s on the main floor, it’s easy to see why this library got four stars on Tripadvisor. Though Vic is located near the affluent Bloor-Yorkville neighbourhood, there are plenty of places to go for some more cost-effective fare. On Bay, New York Deli offers a satisfying breakfast special that comes out hot and fresh in minutes. Nearby is Avocado Sushi, which has a 10% discount for students if you ask. And on Wednesdays, Victoria College makes free pancakes in the Goldring Centre for most of the afternoon. You might also be pleasantly surprised by the complete meals at Bloor Street Market, in the Manulife Centre. Lastly, if you’re missing the quantity-over-

quality dining experience that is res food, Burwash Dining Hall might be worth a visit. Every meal at Burwash is all-you-can-eat, with different drinks, a salad bar, hot entrées, fresh produce and a very respectable ice cream selection. The menu is online and, on the right day, the $13.50 can go a long way. In short, these options and others definitely get

the job done; the five-course meal can wait until my Crim final. Just because we’re stuck with our books this month doesn’t mean we need to be stuck to our seats. With all of the great study and meal options nearby, even exam period can be a time to uncover a great new find just minutes away.

any of you have noticed white paint on the back of one of my jackets, this is the reason. The construction workers got a pretty good laugh out of it, so there's a plus. So that day kinda sucked. But just kinda. And I realized it pretty quickly, too. Fortunately (in retrospect), I had experienced about two months of steady failures in the process. First it was fewer OCIs than I had hoped, and then there was only one in-firm. But at least I hadn't spent all Monday and Tuesday and even Wednesday scampering around downtown. I actually got pretty far in Mass Effect 2 instead. And I did manage to milk that one dinner for all it was worth. My dad was right: I will find a job. My girlfriend already did—she's moving up to the state senate. There are a ton of great opportunities still available for next summer, and even more in the articling recruit. If I'm honest with myself—judging partially on the fact that nobody wanted to hire me—I probably wouldn't fit in that well at those firms anyways. I'm getting excited about other areas of law that flew under the radar for me a bit dur-

ing the OCI process. Most importantly, this is as good a time as any to check my privilege. I had to work hard to get here. But although I don't come from a wealthy background, I do come from a comfortable one that affords me an incredible amount of support. My debt will be formidable but it will not be crushing. Society is structured in a great deal of incredibly complicated ways that has helped me further, and will continue to cushion my failures. There are many people at this school for whom this is not true. And all of us are lucky to be here, at this school, and in Canada. So this process kinda sucked. But just kinda. This is a good opportunity for perspective. Failure happens, and often that can be a good thing. I'm thankful for the opportunities that are still out there. And we can all be thankful for one more thing: that it's over.

Striking Out An Offer Day Debrief ANDREW LYNES (2L) WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 5TH, 2014 —known as "Offer Day" to an infinitesimally number of people—was a bit of a weird one for me. I suffered a string of defeats that can now only be described as minor and wryly amusing. Most of them didn't really feel like that at the time. First and foremost, as I'm sure you've probably guessed by now: I got no offers! Watching 5:00pm approach on my phone… then pass… then slip further and further away – that was probably the most stressed I've ever been playing video games since dying in GoldenEye scared me as a young child. Second, my girlfriend essentially lost her job. She was a legislative assistant in Washington State, working for a State Representative. The race was too close to call on election day but as the ballots continued to come in and the gap grew, it became apparent that the writing was on the wall. On to the fun stuff. Partially to cope, and partially just to have fun, I decided to ply myself with alcohol in the company of good friends. (One thing I learned that night is that I am a

poor judge of how much whiskey my flask actually holds.) While excessively inebriated, I received the following text from my father: "Just landed. Very disappointed about the job. Got a text from mom." That reads pretty bad, eh? Now, I know my father, and although he can get on my case sometimes, he's not really the kick-em'-whenthey're-down type. But when you first scan the words that definitely feels like a bit of a kick in the groin. After giving it a couple seconds I realized he must have meant that he was disappointed with the situation, not me. So s'all good. I can count the number of texts I've received from my father on both hands – he's still getting a hang of this thing. My charitable interpretation was subsequently vindicated with the next text: "You will find something." Finally—and this one is probably my favourite, because it's entirely avoidable and entirely my fault—after sobering up, I rode my bike home and blissfully ignored the many, many pylons demarcating what I was about to learn was fresh paint outlining the bike lane. Yup—I got it all over my tires, and all up my back. If

6 | NOVEMBER 26, 2014

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

The Good Ol’ HACCkey Game 3rd Annual Competition a Success NICK ROSSI (ALUMNI) ON OCTOBER 24TH AND 25TH, THE University of Toronto Sports and Entertainment Law Society (SELS) hosted its third annual Hockey Arbitration Competition of Canada (HACC). Administered exclusively by U of T law students, the HACC is a moot competition designed for law students interested in sports law. The competition simulates the salary arbitration procedures used in the National Hockey League (NHL). This year’s edition of the HACC attracted 32 teams from 15 law schools across North America and included its first two American teams. The teams were judged by associates and partners from various law firms, NHL player agents, and sports executives. U of T Law student Amir Torabi (2L) served as this year’s Chair and enjoyed every minute of running the event: “Organizing this event was an absolute pleasure for a massive hockey fan like myself. It is an unprecedented opportunity for law students to speak about subject matter that is so familiar to them, in front of lawyers who share the same passion. All the while, stu-

dents are improving their oral and written advocacy skills. It's an all encompassing opportunity and memorable experience.” Teams were randomly divided into four divisions of eight teams. They were then assigned to either the player or club’s side in each case. The three players/cases selected for this year’s competition were Toronto Maple Leafs’ defenceman Cody Franson, Montreal Canadiens’ forward Lars Eller, and New York Rangers’ forward Derick Brassard. All three players were arbitrationeligible during the summer of 2014, and the salary that each player signed for during the summer was used as a midpoint for the competition. Depending on which side the teams were appointed to, their objective was to argue that the player was worth above or below the midpoint salary. Each team competed in three matches on Friday, the 24th. The top two teams in each division (based on Friday’s performance) then advanced to the singleelimination playoffs on Saturday, the 25th. The teams were judged and scored based on their written briefs and oral arguments.

The closelycontested final match featured the Derick Brassard case; U of T battled the University of Western Ontario, with Western prevailing by the slimmest of margins and winning the HACC Trophy. Clifford Hart, a partner from Borden Ladner Gervais; Don Meehan, President of Newport Sports Management; and Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs’ General Manager and current President of Hockey Operations for the Calgary Flames judged the finals. Fraser Malcolm, a member of the U of T team that competed in the finals, valued his experience at the competition: “The HACC was an amazing opportunity to develop and practice my advocacy skills. Getting to argue cases in front of some of the most senior practitioners in the field is a rare experience at law school and being able to do it in the context of hockey so familiar to them, in front of lawyers who share the same passion. All the while, students arbitration made it all the more fun. I would encourage anyone to participate next year and hopefully a U of T team can finally take home the trophy!” Thanks to the HACC’s sponsors, the winners

won two round trip flights with Porter Airlines and two passes to this year’s PrimeTime Sports Management Conference. The competition concluded with a sports law panel, which featured Trevor Whiffen, Governor of the London Knights; André Nowakowski, Partner at Miller Thomson; Don Meehan, a prominent hockey agent; and Brian Burke. Moderated by David Goldstein of Cassels Brock, the panel discussed hot issues facing hockey today, including the value of sports analytics, implications of NHL expansion teams, domestic violence policies, and amateur sports policies. Indeed, the event’s success is evident. Since debuting in 2012, the number of participants competing in the HACC has significantly increased and has attracted prominent leaders in the sports industry. More importantly, the law students competing gain an invaluable experience to both develop work product and network with industry professionals.

Nick Rossi graduated from U of T Law in 2013 and is currently an associate at Gibson&Barnes LLP.

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

NOVEMBER 26, 2014 | 7

The UTSU’S Defeat Reflects Crisis of Legitimacy SPENCER BURGER (2L) THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO Students’ Union recently suffered a significant and shocking upset. At this year’s Annual General Assembly, the UTSU’s governing executives (who are part of a slate that has been in power for a decade) failed to pass their proposal to radically change the UTSU’s board structure. Their Board Restructuring Proposal would have ended college and faculty representation and eliminated the law faculty’s sole representative position at the UTSU. Why was its rejection so surprising? Because the UTSU’s governing slate has a longstanding record of always getting what it wants—regardless of the costs to democratic principles, campus unity and student life. The UTSU wanted to remove college and faculty representation and replace it with a set of Equity Directors. The opposition was not necessarily against giving more representation to equity groups that are perceived as underrepresented. However, they saw the proposal for what it was: a desperate reaction by the UTSU to its deepening crisis of legitimacy that would have increased the UTSU’s already excessive executive power at the expense of the colleges and faculties and at the expense of democratic representation and principles. How does all this affect the Faculty of Law (and you)? The Faculty of Law is a part of the undergraduate UTSU student government body. That means each law student pays approximately $350 annually to an organization with which they have little to no contact. The law faculty’s current representative at the UTSU was acclaimed last year—without a vote. Thus, even though this organization may sound foreign to

you, it actually handles a significant amount of your personal funds that are automatically charged to your ROSI account. And unfortunately for us, the UTSU seems to be increasingly unaccountable, not just to law students, but to the University of Toronto generally. The governing UTSU slate has been plagued for years with serious allegations of outright corruption and of using their incumbency power to abuse the democratic process. In an ongoing issue reflecting a profound conflict of interest, the elections officer responsible for supervising the UTSU’s elections is appointed directly by the UTSU executive, which is controlled by the incumbent governing slate. More serious allegations have ranged from not giving students notice of elections and other bylaw violations to damning allegations that the incumbent slate has been fixing election results. Last year, in an unprecedented but necessary move, the Vice-Provost for Students, Jill Matus, asked the UTSU to seal ballot boxes after several close races that the incumbent UTSU slate almost lost including an unusually high number of spoiled ballots – raising suspicions that elections staff had disqualified legitimate ballots that went to non-incumbent slate candidates. The UTSU ignored the request entirely. In light of the UTSU’s past behaviour, and because we disagreed with the proposed UTSU board structure changes, the Students’ Law Society (SLS) released a very strong statement opposing the proposal and expressing concern over the UTSU’s alleged violations of the democratic process. Still, we did not expect our statement to have much of an impact, and we certainly did not expect the result to be anything other than what the UTSU wanted based on past precedent. So it was extremely surprising that the

UTSU lost its bid to solidify its power by altering its governing structure. Indeed, it was all the more surprising in light of a number of inappropriate shenanigans at the AGM itself that seemed to reflect an attempt to illicitly influence the result. For one, the UTSU staff member who wrote the board restructuring proposal also “happened” to be the same person counting votes. In addition, almost all of the proposal supporters (the governing slate’s supporters) had eleven proxy votes, the maximum allowed (the UTSU allows for proxy voting whereby students can sign their votes to a proxy at the AGM). By contrast, the opposition’s voting placards ranged significantly, with very few elevens. When I remarked upon this to one of the leaders of the opposition, she explained to me that her proxy votes had been systematically reduced by the UTSU staffers that validated the proxy forms – without any explanation whatsoever. Indeed, these staffers refused to provide any documentation to justify the disqualification of students’ proxy votes. She explained that this had happened to many students from colleges that were known to oppose the UTSU’s governing slate. In other words, there are serious allegations that the UTSU attempted to rig the vote by disqualifying the proxy votes of students from certain colleges and faculties. In addition, in a completely new addition to the AGM, the UTSU hired bouncers from the Mississauga campus bar to provide “security.” These big, bulky men, dressed entirely in black uniforms, often formed lines around where opposition students were sitting. They were noticeably very familiar with the UTSU executive, much of which is from the Mississauga campus. Students complained that this entirely unfamiliar presence of “security” men paid by the UTSU executive and who

INAUGURAL INTERVIEW WITH DEAN-DESIGNATE IACOBUCCI Continued from page 4 as are other law schools, by these really terrific students doing pro bono work to help in areas of laws that don’t get the attention from public funding. Obviously the clinics can play an important role there as well. So clearly we’re engaged intellectually with the problems in a very real way, with some of the programs that we run. I’m proud of those. TG: [On the selection process.] What do you think about the secrecy? Was it important to you that it be a secret process? Do you think it impacts the credibility of the process? I’m probably the wrong person to ask, right? This is very standard across the University. This is the way U of T runs their searches, and it’s the Provost who runs the searches. BH: Part of it, though, is that it’s based on assumptions about the pool of candidates—that people would decline to be considered if they knew it would be public knowledge. Would that apply to you? Would you have taken your name out of consideration if you knew that it would be public?

I don’t know. I don’t know… I understand where the question is coming from, and I understand how there could be a debate about what the best process ought to be…It’s not for the law school to say what the process ought to be…It’s hard for me to say. BH: One of the biggest effects a Dean can have on the Law School is through hiring decisions and helping to shape the Faculty body. What will you be looking for when you’re making new hires in the years ahead? First of all, again, it’s a collaborative process. There’s student input, there’s faculty input, so it’s not simply up to me, and that’s important. I think that we’ve been very fortunate in the kinds of opportunities we’ve had to make the kinds of hires we’ve had in recent years. I think we made some great additions. What we look for, what we have looked for, I will continue to look for. So people who are creative, imaginative, scholarly, legal scholars who we have a sense would be great in the classroom and would be great researchers and great citizens around the school. Those are the criteria that we always have looked for and I wouldn’t feel myself wanting to change those priorities.

BH: Any closing comments? I’m really excited about the job. I’m excited about where the law school is. There are lots of challenges, but lots of opportunities. I care about this place a great deal. The experience for me as a student before law school was that…I enjoyed school; it was fine. But when I came here, it was transformative for me as a student. I loved it. That’s when I knew I wanted to be around the world of ideas for a career, and teaching and scholarship. I’ve been lucky enough to have ended up here and I’m thrilled about this next chapter. It really comes from both a deep affection for, and a real belief in, this place. So I’m looking forward to it.

were known to have good relations with UTSU executives was intimidating to students opposing the board proposal. Certainly their presence within the AGM room itself— including during votes—was grossly inappropriate and uncharacteristic of any university AGM I have ever experienced. Still, despite their best efforts, the UTSU’s executive failed to push through the most significant of their controversial reforms (another bylaw change that effectively removes the requirement to provide students with adequate notice for AGMs was passed). Its loss reflects the profound crisis of legitimacy that the UTSU is facing: the vast majority of students at the St. George campus no longer respect the UTSU as an organization and are very aware of its alleged abuses of the democratic process. How does the law faculty fit into this? Under President Natalie Lum-Tai’s leadership, the SLS has attempted to take a more assertive role, reflecting our exasperation with the UTSU’s alleged abuses and undemocratic tactics. But perhaps more is necessary. As law students we should be especially sensitive to abuses of power; we have a special responsibility to ensure that violations of the democratic process and the rule of law have consequences. I am not yet sure what those consequences should be. But what is certain is that the UTSU’s ongoing crisis of legitimacy means real change is coming—and that the law faculty should play an active role in shaping that change.

SPECIAL FEATURE

8 | NOVEMBER 26, 2014

ultravires.ca

Recruitment Numbers Recover… … Kind Of, Sort Of, Not Really IN 2013, WE REPORTED THAT FALL recruitment was a “bloodbath.” While we’ve documented some signs of improvement – such as an increase in the overall number of students hired through the process—these numbers are accompanied by a necessary assembly of qualifications, disclaimers, and asterisks. Last year we documented 351 students hired at Toronto firms and government offices. This year that number is up to 399. But that’s not the end of the story. There was also a Heenan Blaikie-sized hole in the recruitment numbers this time around (Heenan hired eleven students last year). On the other hand, we included data from a dozen offices that previously hadn’t been accounted for, including more provincial government offices, Legal Aid Ontario, and some private firms, which could account for the bump. We also reached out to a number of employers who never got back to us, suggesting the final tally might be a tad lower than it should be. Despite this increase in total students hired, the number of U of T students who got jobs has held steady in the 90s for the last few years. Both Osgoode and U of T haven’t recovered from the dip they suffered after 2010, when the number

of U of T students hired dropped from its height of over a hundred. However, both Osgoode and McGill have the biggest jump in numbers (an increase of 8 and 12, respectively), while both Queens and Western show a very incremental increase from last year. There is no decrease in numbers for any of our reported schools. The “Seven Sisters” continued to dominate hiring: their hires accounted for 39% of all hires through the OCI process. While 2014 saw a significant increase in the number of students hired at the Sisters, the percentage of these students who come from U of T has held steady in the low 30s, meaning U of T hiring growth at the Seven Sisters does not outpace other schools. How do we know all this, you ask? We used largely the same process for collecting data as in previous years. We have two main sources of information: we talk to employers about how many students they hired and from what schools, and we survey everyone at U of T who was eligible to participate in the OCI process. This year, we also did something a little different. With the help of the Law Students’ Society of Ontario, we sent the survey to other On-

tario schools, namely Lakehead, Osgoode, Ottawa, Queens, Western and Windsor, who will analyze and report on the results from their student bodies. The response rate from U of T students was significantly higher than from

of all students hired are U of T students

most other schools, so we didn’t get to do as much comparative analysis as we would have liked. We’re hopeful that this collaboration between schools will continue, and in future years

we’ll be able to present you with even more information about the legal job market. There are limits to our data. Because we rely on self-reporting, we aren’t able to know exactly how many students participated in the OCI process. We also face a self-selection bias whereby some students choose not to fill out the survey. The firm numbers include some returning 1L hires, which masks the number of students hired specifically through the fall process. Also, for some firms, the numbers will continue to increase due to this year’s 1L hiring process (which, at least at U of T, might as well be called the “JD/ MBA Recruit”). That said, there’s a lot in this issue that we think you’ll find it interesting and valuable. We would like to note that none of it could have happened without the help of our stats guru, David Pardy, and his team of number-crunchers, Chad Cogar and Ramin Wright. And nothing brightens up these pages like some expertly-crafted illustrations, so we’re grateful to Alex Wong for putting her talents to work for UV yet again.

Seven Sisters Stats

30%

of total students hired are at Seven Sisters (131)

of students hired at Seven Sisters are from U of T (46)

BLAKES STIKES

Last year’s cover!

• Osler: 17 → 25 = 47% increase • Stikes: 18 → 24 = 33% increase • Davies: 13 → 17 = 30% increase • Cassels: 17 → 12 = 29% decrease • Blakes: 37 → 32 = 13.5% decrease

STUDENTS

STUDENTS 33% OF HIRES

Firms with biggest changes in summer students numbers (keep in mind these firms will likely be participating in the 1L recruit this year):

OSLER

40% OF HIRES

STUDENTS 32% OF HIRES

m ber u n t s e h h hig Firm wit students hired of U of T

SPECIAL FEATURE

ultravires.ca

NOVEMBER 26, 2014 | 9

Job Distribution by Firm and School FIRM Aird & Berlis

TOTAL STUDENTS

U OF T

OSGOODE

WESTERN

Baker & McKenzie

Bennett Jones LLP

Bereskin & Parr

Blake, Cassels & Graydon, LLP Blaney McMurtry LLP Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

7 20

Brauti Thorning Zibarras LLP

Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP

Dale & Lessmann LLP Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP

OTTAWA

WINDSOR

DALHOUSIE

OTHER

1 3

1 1

4 1

1 2

1 1

1 3

Davis LLP

Dentons LLP

Dickinson Wright LLP

Dimock Stratton LLP

Edward H. Royle and Associates

Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP

Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP

Fogler, Rubinoff LLP

Gardiner Roberts LLP

1 2

1 1

Goodmans LLP

Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP

Hicks Morley Hamilton Stewart Storie LLP

Gilbert's LLP

MCGILL

1 17

QUEENS

1 2

Legal Aid Ontario

Lenczner Slaght Royce Smith Griffin LLP

McCarthy Tetrault LLP

McMillan LLP

Miller Thomson LLP

Ministry of The Attorney General —Crown Law Office—Criminal (Toronto, ON)

Ministry of the Attorney General —Family Responsibility Office

Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP

Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

1 2

Koskie Minsky LLP

1 3

1 1

Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP

Reisler Franklin

Rueter Scargall Bennett LLP

Shearman & Sterling LLP

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Smart & Biggar

Stikeman Elliott LLP

Thorsteinssons LLP—Tax Lawyers

Torkin Manes, LLP

Torys LLP

WeirFoulds LLP

Wildeboer Dellelce LLP

399

1135 (Ontario)

194

306

176

173

390

174

228

170

7171

50.00%

27.12%

27.27%

26.59%

8.97%

15.52%

11.40%

8.82%

2.79%

TOTAL Approx class size (based on 2013 OLSAS/LSAC first year registrants) Approx % of Class with Toronto Fall Recruitment jobs

1 1

1 1 1

1 4

2013 total

351

2012 total

379

2011 total

403

2010 total

444

104

10 | NOVEMBER 26, 2014

SPECIAL FEATURE

ultravires.ca

What Helps You Get an Offer? We delved into the survey results to determine what factors had a significant effect on the probability of getting a job offer. Here we present to you factors that seem to be significantly helpful, factors that are significantly harmful, dubiously harmful, and then, those factors that just plainly don’t do anything.

of students with offers had some kind of contact with the employer before the recruitment process even started

100

of JD/MBA respondents who applied got a job (5/5)

SIGNIFICANT HELPFUL FACTORS

DUBIOUS HARMFUL FACTORS

INSIGNIFICANT FACTORS

These are variables which have a significant, helpful effect on the probability of receiving a job offer. “Significant” means that we are statistically 95% sure that the observed effect is not due to random chance. They are listed in decreasing order of effect: • Being a JD/MBA student • Having high 1L grades • Self-reporting oneself as an extrovert • Typically supporting the Conservative Party

This factor is highly correlated with both having high 1L grades and having a high LSAT. As such, we would expect it to be insignificant. And it is. But the inclusion of this variable affects the significance of other variables, so we should point out its unique role in this study. • High undergraduate GPA

These variables produced no statistically significant observable effect on the probability of receiving a job offer. • Gender—being male isn’t an advantage • Telling a firm they’re your top choice • Having high parental income • Being active on Facebook • Having an Arts undergrad • Having a parent who is a lawyer

SIGNIFICANT HARMFUL FACTORS This factor has a significant harmful effect on the probability of receiving a job offer. • Having a high LSAT

Firms v Government Of the students who applied to firm jobs, over

received and accepted an offer

Of the students who applied to government jobs, over

received and accepted an offer

ultravires.ca

SPECIAL FEATURE

“The evils the law society rules were intended to correct have simply morphed into something more insidious. The process is dominated by nudges and code words. The impossibility of clear expression and the tight time-frame of in-firms make for a very harrowing and opaque process.”

NOVEMBER 26, 2014 | 11

Do grades matter?*

of those with 4+ Hs participating in the process got an offer

75%

of those with 4+ HHs participating in the process got an offer

“Indirect pressure to get a sense of my intentions (ex: consistently asking me at a reception ‘is there anything else you need to know to make your decision’). As a result I felt a lot of pressure to explicitly say they were my first choice, especially after hearing horror stories about students not getting a job without saying those magic words.”

“If someone tells you a firm really cares about hearing "first choice", believe them. I heard this about one of my top choices, but they seemed so nice that I thought it wasn't necessary if I expressed enough interest. Totally not true. A friend was interviewing at the same firm and she used a lot more language very similar to first choice and they called her mid-afternoon Wednesday to confirm that they were her first choice. She eventually caved and told them they were her first choice, but I have no doubt that if she had not, there would have been no offer. At the end of the day, they completely lead you on and don't feel bad about it at all if you don't tell them they're your first choice.” For goodness' sake, tell a firm they're your #1—they may still not give you an offer but reading between the lines after speaking with the student directors, I know of at least 2 firms who quite simply took me out of the running because I didn't tell them I loved them. Look out for number one. Tell every firm they are your top choice. I didn't and it hurt me in the short term, but probably the right choice in the long term.

62%

of U of T students who applied to at least one OCI job got an offer

49%

of those with 4+ Ps participating in the process got an offer

of those with 0 HHs participating in the process got an offer

of those with any LPs participating in the process got an offer

*These are hard categories. I.e. Neither the 4+ HHs category nor 4+ Hs would include someone with 3 Hs and 3HHs.

12 | NOVEMBER 26, 2014

Class Profile

U of T OCI participants are generally quite Liberal:

Over half the class will graduate with a significant amount of student loan debt: 28% of students expect to graduate with debt between $50-99k; 24% of students expect to graduate with debt between $100-150k; 3.5% with over $200k.

SPECIAL FEATURE

ultravires.ca

SPECIAL FEATURE

ultravires.ca

NOVEMBER 26, 2014 | 13

WHAT’S SOMETHING YOU DIDN'T WANT YOUR INTERVIEWERS TO KNOW ABOUT YOU

“Honestly I was mostly just myself, which probably had something to with the 0 in firms I got from my 7 corporate OCI's.”

I didn’t want to end up on Bay Street “Corporate law is not my end all and be all. That I'm not the type of person that wants to work insane hours and weekends. That I have a strong social justice orientation”

“How much I want kids.” Realities “My socioeconomic background”

“I've never been interested in business—until I wrote that cover letter.”

“That I spent 2.5 hours stalking each on Twitter.”

“I don't plan on sticking around Bay Street once my loans are paid off.”

“I had a concussion during in-firms.”

“I see the job as a temporary solution to pay off debt.”

“How few interviews I had.” “That I had only one in firm interview (and it was with them). I hid that, and had to dodge questions about how busy I was during the in-firm week.”

“How little I understood corporate law.” “My total disinterest in an area of law that they thought I was interested in.” “I'm concerned about the long hours I'll have to work at a Bay street firm. I was too afraid to ask about work-life balance or billable hours for fear that they would assume I wasn't prepared to work hard.” “I hated every minute of this process.” “I hate all of their clients.”

“I want to work in the public interest. HIDE ANY DESIRE TO WORK IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST IF YOU WANT A JOB!!!”

Personality, i.e. I have one

“How nervous I was and how inadequate I felt.”

“I was essentially braindead talking to them at their cocktail reception.”

My heart was in other places “All my non-Crown options were backups.”

“I purposely worked the word ‘flagrant’ into each and every one of my interviews just because I think it's a funny word.”

The CDO DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON YOUR CDO’S SERVICES? What you had to say about the CDO

Love letters to Emily Orchard, Director, Career Development Office

“Fantastic” “Emily Orchard is a god. Worship her.” “Great” “Really great”

“Emily Orchard is the reason I have a job. She better be where most of my $30K in tuition is going this year.”

“Excellent” “So helpful and patient!” “They did an amazing job” “Wonderful” “Lifesavers!” “Perfect job. So well prepared and knowledgeable.” On the other hand “The CDO does a great job. Unfortunately it is impossible for them to know what employers are looking for… “Need more attention to boutiques and non-Bay St firms.”

“Emily and Jordana are so generous with their time and support.” “Emily is lovely. I would be lost without her.” “Emily and Jordana are just amazing. They are incredibly supportive and offer level headed advice when you aren't feeling the most level headed.” “Emily is particularly lovely and really cares about the students she meets with. She regularly followed up with me about small things which made me feel really supported.” “Emily, Jordana and Ann were very accessible.”

of students who participated in the process felt that theCDO was knowledgeable

of U of T students found the CDO to be helpful or very helpful in preparing them for the recruitment process

SPECIAL FEATURE

14 | NOVEMBER 26, 2014

ultravires.ca

The Process The majority of students who were eligible for OCIs, but didn’t participate, had already obtained a job, either through the 1L recruitment process (14 people), or through the NY recruit (9). ONE PIECE OF ADVICE FOR NEXT YEAR: Plan ahead “If you want to work on Bay Street, make your interest very clear … take corporate courses in 2nd year, go on firm tours, and make it known that you are genuinely interested in the firm.” “Get to the firms in the summer… Make your judgments on firms then while you're in a low-stress environment.”

Scheduling… “Recognize your limitations. If you feel like you are only comfortable with doing 3 interviews during Interview Week, don't schedule 6 just because other people are doing the same. And don't be afraid to cancel on the last-on-your-list firm if you are feeling overwhelmed —use that opportunity to re-bait your line for bigger fish.” “Shore up your emotional energy, and don't spread yourself too thin. Put a lot of thought into who you apply to for OCIs and who you accept in-firms with.”

Network Know what you want “Meet widely with lawyers at firms you are interested in.” Do your homework “Speak to upper years! They were so valuable in giving me tips and advice.” “Talk to as many people as possible. Make sure you have a select group of people who have been through this that can help you with split second decisions during the day.” Be prepared “Start early! Prep takes longer than you think it will!” “For OCIs, don't overstress it, especially if you are not going for the hypercompetitive Bay St jobs.”

of U of T students felt prepared for the process

Interviewing… “Practice the ability to answer questions that are awkward. Get someone to ask you random questions to test your ability to answer questions, coherently and professionally, on the fly.” “You can't control everything. Something will go wrong at some point: don't panic and stay positive, you will be fine.” “Have fun with it—firms want to interview people who are excited to meet with them.” “Try and appear very confident and "fake it 'till you make it."

“Only apply to places that you are genuinely interested in working at, and concentrate all their energy on preparing for these interviews.” “If applying to a boutique, make sure you have a damn good reason why you want to practice law in their area.” “Think about what you actually want —you do not have to get sucked in and take part in the process if it's not what you're looking for.” “Step outside of the chatter and groupthink that happens at the school around fall recruitment, and approach the process with your own judgment and intuition.” Play the game “Take initiative! I didn't get a response regarding an in-firm with one firm that I really wanted, so I emailed the student director expressing an interest and I ultimately ended up with an offer from that firm.”

“Recognize that even if you are never pressured to say "first choice", you are communicating your intentions implicitly by your scheduling on the Tuesday and Wednesday.” “Signaling to firms is a real thing, even for the big ones. Don't put all your eggs in one basket and don't count your eggs before they hatch.” “This is one exercise where it's desirable to be a "split": be an A+ candidate in one employer's books and a C candidate in everyone else's, rather than a B+ all around, and you'll be laughing come 5pm Wednesday.”

“Be strategic. Don't give up opportunities with ‘second choice’ firms. If you want to get hired, you've got to flirt with everyone. Make them think you're interested. Don't feel bad about being enthusiastic about firms where you're not entirely sure you want to work. Figure out who's the love of your life, but until the ring's on your finger feel free to flirt shamelessly with everyone else.” Take it in stride “Accept that even if you do everything you can, you still might come up short. It will be hard to realize at the time, but this says nothing about you as a person. This is not the end of the world.” “It’s a lottery—just play along and hope for the best.”

1/4

of students who participated in the process cried at one point in the process

SPECIAL FEATURE

ultravires.ca

NOVEMBER 26, 2014 | 15

Firm Behaviour and LSUC Compliance

of U of T students witnessed employers breaking LSUC rules IF YOU WITNESSED ANY LSUC VIOLATIONS, PLEASE DESCRIBE: Reports regarding violations of LSUC rules were similar, and could be grouped into the following general categories:

9 8 7

students reported offers communicated prior to 5pm on Wednesday students reported indirect or borderline rule-breaking

students reported that they were asked where the firm stands

6 5 3

felt aggressively pressured to indicate where else they were interviewing felt pressure to commit prior to offer day

told that students who did not say “first choice” would not be considered for offers

“One smaller boutique firm told me at the end of the interview that I would likely receive an offer, then called me on Tuesday and basically said I would receive an offer. They didn't pressure me to accept before the offer period, but did pressure me to respond quickly either way so they could find someone else, which I thought was fair enough.”

BESIDES LSUC VIOLATIONS, DID YOU OBSERVEANY OTHER INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOUR? “They skirted really close to the edge of violating LSUC guidelines. They didn't break the bright letter law, but I'd say they violated the spirit of those laws.”

WHAT WERE THE MOST INAPPROPRIATE, AWKWARD, OR UNEXPECTED QUESTIONS YOU RECEIVED? “I had some but it was a blur and I'm drunk now so I can't remember.”

“I was asked where I was 'from' based on my last name. I replied: 'Canada'. This did not seem to be a good enough answer and the person pressed further.” Awkward “Do you have a lot of friends?”

Inappropriate “How old are you?” “Are you Hindu or Muslim?” "Explain how & why you are a feminist?" “I lost my voice throughout the process and one interviewer told me he found my huskiness ‘attractive’.” “One employer asked me if I had smoked marijuana while I was in Amsterdam.” “Some misogynistic comments made by male partners about how the ‘girls in the department could hold their ground’.” “I was frequently asked to be critical of my school and of the LSUC process.” “Invitations to second interviews, followed a few hours later by a rejection.” “I did get asked multiple times who else I was interviewing with (and this information was noted down on their interview notes).”

“If you were in an elevator with Donald Trump, what would you say to him about yourself.” "Most people hit 1L out of the park and that didn't happen for you. Why?” “What are you going to do if you have to help a company with controversial environmental policies? No, really WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO?" “I was asked if I had any questions—and I could tell it was to ask about the diversity policy. I mean it was nice to talk about, and was important to me, but it did put me on the spot to come out as gay.” “Have you read Eichmann in Jerusalem by Hannah Arendt?” Unexpected “What more can I tell you to help you make a decision?” "How long have you and your boyfriend been together?" “What do you most dislike in a person?” "Why do you speak X language?" “What are three things about you I will only learn after working with you for a year?”

16 | NOVEMBER 26, 2014

SPECIAL FEATURE

ultravires.ca

What Would You Change About the Process? “Everything.” “I would advocate moving to the New York model, with a more relaxed and flexible interview schedule, a 28-day offer window, and none of this messing around with regard to trying to determine whether you'd accept an offer before one is actually made. That said, I understand why Ontario firms do things this way: every offer a firm makes is a commitment to employing somebody for summer and articling, so they have to be careful. They are not big New York firms that can get predicting yield down to a kind of science, and for whom one student is numerically insignificant (in the grand scheme of things). So a move towards the NY model seems unlikely to happen.”

of students were surprised by the offers they got/didn't get based on how they felt interviews went

“Get rid of rules if you're not going to follow them.” “Change call-day into an automated online system.” “Everything. Do it like New York. And do it over the summer.” Rolling Offers “Employers should be able to make offers before Wednesday at 5.” “Would have been nice to be able to get offers on a less rigid basis. There were firms I knew I didn't want to work at that I kept as back up because my top choice could only hint and not tell me for sure. I would have preferred to have not had to string anyone along.” “The offer time is too late in the day. The wait is too painful.”

Less “signaling”

“Remove the dinner component and the thank you emails (which were probably the worst part of the process).

“The first choice hype. It's ridiculous.” “It's really hard having to signal interest in particular firms after just one or two interviews. I wish there was either more time, or that offers were sent out in some other way—so that firms would not be so concerned about whether they are your first choice.”

Maybe it’s the only way? Very little. There are lots of terrible things about it, but people rarely consider what the alternatives would look like. The world without this process would actually be more exploitative and unpleasant for students. This is shitty, but it is inherent in the inequality of bargaining power between candidates and firms. If you think about it, this system is about as close as you can come to fair. Slow it down “Have a mandatory 24 hour period between when interviews conclude and offers go out—give the poor student's a night of rest to think through what they want instead of bullying them into making a decision within a matter of hours.” “Make the in firm week longer to allow students to see more than 5-6 firms.” And of course “Kill all the lawyers. - Bill Shakespeare.”

Other: 10/262 = 4% “Prestige” “Debt” “I really need money to help pay off school” “I want to pay off my interestaccumulating student debts” “Wanted to have a job lined up for articling” “I wanted the prestige and income that comes with a Toronto firm job.” “Make money”

SPECIAL FEATURE

ultravires.ca

WHAT ELSE WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL US (Q4) Big change needed A lot would need to happen to make this process more inclusive and accessible, from both employers and the law school. A big task, yes— but the conversation needs to happen. Feelings I'm happy I did it. I'm happy with the outcome. I'm happy it's over. But I have never had so many people mindfuck me before in my life.

It was an overwhelming process. I never did cry, but at 1:30pm when I was done with interviews (I cancelled my last one) I had this weird feeling where I was completely overwhelmed and suddenly felt the need to curl up into the fetal position and cry. I'm tired. And rather frustrated. But mostly tired. I don't know whether to look forward to or dread the mountain of schoolwork I have to do in the next 6 weeks. On the plus side, it is schoolwork, and I know how to do schoolwork, unlike interviews. On the other hand, it is very mountainous.

World-Class, Worldwide

NOVEMBER 26, 2014 | 17

Look out for #1

Overall advice

The process is full of surprises—firms that you thought would never be interested in you could turn out to love you and firms that give you lots of signs that they will make an offer may not call on call day. In the end, put your interests above all else and do whatever you think is necessary to make sure that you have an offer (any offer) when Wednesday 5pm arrives.

I remember reading the Ultra Vires special edition on OCIs last year and feeling confused, outof-the-loop, and a bit dismissive about the whole thing. Who are these seven sisters? What’s OCI stand for–wait, did you say on- or off-campus? And why are the 2Ls so stressed about a summer job? Surely there’s tons of time left in their program to get a career-path. It’s not do-or-die, ferchrissakes. Well, young me, now you get it. It’s an atmosphere of anxiety and pressure, and you bought into it in the end despite your poohpoohs. The competition is tough, and having a 2L summer job (if it’s BigLaw you want) is certainly a leg-up. But know this, dear readers: it’s not the only way of securing a position. And the position you actually want may not even be available through OCIs. So put a lot of thought into what you want to get out of this process, and be sure not to treat it as a big safety net because you haven’t been introspective enough. Figure yourself out. Go from there.

Aside from being part of a truly international legal firm, you’ll benefit from practical, hands-on experience and exposure to various areas of practice. Law around the world thenortonrosefulbrightdifference.com

OPINIONS

18 | NOVEMBER 26, 2014

ultravires.ca

Impressions of U of T Law School From the Eyes of an Exchange Student GAL SHEMER (4L) AFTER BEING HERE FOR ALMOST 3 months on exchange from Tel-Aviv, I can share some interesting observations about U of T law school. You can view this as comparative law for law schools.

The professors at U of T are very nice and accessible. Our professors usually send us to TA's. Here, the professors extend visiting hours, share their Skype name and cell phone number, learn all their students' names and try to improve on this throughout the year. (Maybe I just had good luck with course selections).

Professors do not attack random students with questions, yet most of the students do their readings.

Students are serious, the attendance is high, everybody reads and takes notes. What's the deal with the notes? Everybody puts so

much effort into them! In Tel Aviv, there are only 2-3 students who take notes and everybody uses the same ones.

How come so many students do not have jobs? How can you live without a steady flow of cash with the high tuition and renting an apartment in downtown Toronto?

You only study for 3 years at law school and have to do few credits. We have 3.5-4 years of law school and have to fulfill 126-141 credits.

The grading system is nice. I’m surprised it doesn’t produce negative incentives for learning because students are clumped into one of four grades. We have a percent scale, which results in a grade contest, even between two students who would both get above 90%. The pressure on the students in Tel Aviv will cause you to go mad.

U of T has a large diversity of courses and relatively small class sizes. Our courses are usually 6 hours a week and contain more material. Exam notes may exceed 250 pages.

radius from the faculty. On the other hand, you serve food at every event (clubs, workshops, beginning of the year barbeque, outside lectures)— we definitely should adopt that.

The exam period is so short, and you only have one opportunity to do well. In Tel Aviv, we have a month for the first leg, and then another 4 weeks to study for another test for a second chance to do well.

The ability to get a summer job is amazing. It helps create connections, learn some things on the practical side and earn some money. Tel Aviv law firms do not take students for summer jobs at all.

You have relatively poor food options and you have to travel so far to find a decent lunch—I hope this will be fixed in the new building. We have 6 different food options in a 50m

SLS social activities are really nice and help the students connect. U of T has music events, coffee with the dean, pumpkin contests, and pub nights every week. In Tel Aviv, we usually have events about twice a semester. It is SO cold in Toronto. I cannot believe my friends at home complain about 1520 degree weather in Tel Aviv. I would not exchange Tel Aviv for anything, but you have an amazing law school. Enjoy and appreciate it!

Diversity on Bay Street Knocking on the diversity wall NABILA PIRANI (2L) ON NOVEMBER 13TH, THE SOUTH Asian Law Students’ Association (SALSA) hosted its first of two panels on diversity in the legal profession. Diversity on Bay Street brought together current and former lawyers to discuss issues relating to gender, sexual orientation, race, and ethnicity. While student turnout at the event was high for a Thursday evening (with over forty students from a variety of backgrounds and years of study in attendance), members of the administration were noticeably absent despite having provided half of the event’s funding. From the first question—on challenges faced by people from diverse backgrounds entering and advancing on Bay Street—it was evident there would be significant differences in opinion amongst those in attendance. One panellist took issue with the assumption that diverse peoples face barriers at all, calling on attendees to look at their diverse backgrounds and experiences as advantages that set them apart in a positive way. Another detailed various systemic and selfimposed barriers to entry and advancement faced by women and diverse peoples. These included unconscious and conscious biases during the hiring process on the part of both interviewers and students. Later in the evening, one panellist’s suggestion that the profession is already diverse— “We [panellists from diverse backgrounds] are Bay Street”—was met with general uproar. One student pointed out that statistics on diversity in the legal profession strongly indicate otherwise, notwithstanding progress that has been made. What perhaps best characterized the event

was the panellists’ emphasis on self-empowerment and the “Lean In” philosophy. Whether it was self-advocating to ensure support for one’s scheduling choices post-maternity leave, coming out as LGBTQ+ in the workplace, or speaking up against senior lawyers in the face of discrimination, a majority of the panellists (particularly those still on Bay Street) seemed to agree that a significant portion of the onus to alleviate diversity-related challenges is on the diverse peoples themselves. While self-empowerment is a key piece of the diversity puzzle, placing the onus for change on diverse peoples in or seeking to enter the legal profession is problematic. While the general capacity for self-empowerment exists in everyone, the opportunities to exercise it are still dependent on environmental factors and constraints. To draw from situations presented by some of the panellists, take the example of two young racialized female lawyers in the following circumstances. One has just returned to work after maternity leave and wants to rearrange her schedule to allow for time with her child. The other believes she was left out from lunch plans with colleagues working on an important file because of a senior partner’s implicit race bias. For the lawyer returning from maternity leave, any discrimination faced by her in rearranging her schedule would largely be based on institutionalized policies regarding billable and general work hours, and thus would be objective and structural in nature. Self-empowerment in this context would involve navigating pre-existing, institutionalized boundaries and inserting the lawyer’s subjective self into a

largely objective system. By contrast, the lawyer excluded from lunch plans would face a form of discrimination that is inherently subjective, and thus less tangible. As one panellist commented, it is possible that the senior partner invited the first people that he saw and they just happened to be white males. Self-empowerment in this context would require challenging the senior partner’s subjective and discretionary decision-making, which (because of its subjectivity) would allow him to claim that the exclusion was not based on race, but on more mundane factors. Accordingly, in inserting objectivity-based human rights principles into subjective and discretionary thought, the lawyer would face the incredibly difficult task of introducing boundaries to a nebulous space. One can imagine how being self-empowered in the second situation would be more difficult than in the first. The lawyer would not only risk damaging relationships with her colleagues and other attitudinal consequences. Should she choose to address the issue of race bias head on, rather than asking to be included during the next lunch event, she would risk being known as the person who cried “wolf ”–or “racism,” in this case. In the face of crippling student debt, a highly competitive legal market, and other factors, addressing the partner’s implicit race bias is a risk many would be loathe to take. As one student said, in circumstances such as this, the onus to address conscious and unconscious biases should not rest solely on the diverse person. It is also on the profession. Any discourse on barriers facing diverse peoples in the profession requires an inclusive

and safe space for the discussion of often disparate ideas. As Professor Anita Anand said about the event, “The issue of diversity on Bay Street [and in the legal profession in general] is extremely important...This is the beginning of many discussions about diversity in our profession and I am so pleased to be a part of them.” While the process may sometimes feel like knocking on a wall that does not yet know it is a door, SALSA is committed to advancing discourse at U of T Law on the issue of diversity in the private and public legal sectors.

Nabila is Co-Chair of the South Asian Law Students’ Association. SALSA welcomes suggestions and comments at salsautoronto@gmail.com. Moderator: Hadiya Roderique (Rotman PhD student; former Associate, Fasken Martineau DuMoulin). Panellists: John Clifford (Partner, McMillan); Zehra Sheerazi (Associate, Torys); Awanish Sinha (Partner, McCarthy Tétrault); Troy Ungerman (Partner, Norton Rose Fulbright); and Ritu Bhasin (Principal and Founder of Bhasin Consulting; former Bay Street lawyer).

ultravires.ca

OPINIONS

NOVEMBER 26, 2014 | 19

In Defense of 3L MARITA ZOURAVLIOFF (3L) PRESIDENT OBAMA FAMOUSLY suggested last year that law school should be two years, not three. He offered this as but one simple tactic to relieve mounting student debt. It doesn’t sound like such a bad idea at first – 33% off your law degree? Hello, bargain! But is this bargain worth the price? Now, as a bleeding heart liberal, I’m going to say something that’s going to hurt me, both intellectually and emotionally. But it must be said. Mr. President, I think you’re wrong*. We simply need three years of law school. Let me explain to you why. Firstly, finding a job stinks. It’s easily the worst part of law school. Going through OCIs is an abhorrent process. But eliminating 3L would likely crush large scale recruitment into first year, which would be even more dreadful. Searching for a job and knowing that you are competing with your classmates is awkward and unpleasant as it is. But now imagine you have just met these people. A solid support system of friends is clutch during a job search, Mr. President! You can test your interviewing skills. You can commiserate throughout. And you’ll have comrades at the end of it, whether they be helping you celebrate or cursing those deceitful in-firm bastards with you. The same goes for upper years. A 3L’s insights and pointers can’t be harvested when 3Ls are fabled creatures of the past. And talk about getting off on the wrong foot. There will invariably be some bitterness and disappointment during the job search game. This is not the way to start your beautiful law school friendships off. Save the rivalry for 2L when you’ve already got some mutual love and respect to stand on. Secondly, I think we can all agree 1L is stressful enough. There’s an enormous learning curve that cannot be circumvented. If the frenetic push to find a job was added to the first year grind, it would be catastrophic. I’ve broken into a sweat just typing about it. Who has that kind of fortitude? Like, maybe the President. But we can’t all

President Obama in law school, possibly in his third year

be like you, Obama! Some of us are weak! Thirdly, 3L also gives us all an opportunity to rid ourselves of those obnoxious wanderlust enthusiasts for a semester of educational bliss. Exchange programs are such a necessary and delightful reprieve from those unbearable globe trotters. We serious students deserve it. Fourthly, we are a part of a profession. This isn’t your typical graduate program. Law students become members of a club that necessitates collaboration and camaraderie. The general public identifies us as a group and we have

to join forces to uphold our reputation. It’s on all of us to negate all those bad lawyer jokes out there. It is important, then, that we have the opportunity to foster a positive sense of community at the outset of our careers and not be rushed through the process like some common MBAers. Plus, third year grants you the opportunity take bonus classes that help you answer useful questions in real life, as opposed to just helping you climb the old career ladder. Tuition debt is a huge problem—I’m not trying to downplay that. But this argument ignores

the fact that costs are just too high. This is like saying, “Your pants are too short? Well, why don’t you cut off the bottom portion of your legs!” No, Mr. President. I will not do that. To conclude, let me have my third year. It’s a crucial step in becoming a contributing member of the legal profession. But I’ll still take the 33% off my tuition, thanks. *Note: Bush family, this is not UV’s endorsement for Jeb. Stop asking.

Darlene Necan and Her Fight for a Home of Her Own RIAZ SAYANI-MULJI (1L) WHEN I REFLECT ON SETTLER colonialism in Canada, its different aspects come to mind, like land dispossession, destruction of the Earth and animals, broken treaties, eugenics, slavery, residential schools, medical experiments, over-policing and incarceration, disproportionate apprehension of First Nations’ youth by CAS/CCAS, missing and murdered indigenous women….the list goes on. But in opposition to the genocide inflicted by successive Canadian governments, has been the resistance of this land’s original peoples. Within this continuing resistance to the Canadian state are the actions of one Ojibway woman, Darlene Decan. Darlene is a member of the Ojibway Nation of Saugeen, whose reserve is located in northern Ontario. A community plagued by homelessness, and experiencing homelessness herself, Darlene took matters into her own hands and built a log cabin on her family’s trapline (a trapline is a "mapped" line in the bush that families would place snares and traps around to sustain themselves through the

winter), 20 km south and outside the boundaries of the reserve. It’s not the first time she’s engaged in direct action to combat homelessness in her nation—two years ago, she led a group in building a cabin for a 74 year-old elder who was living in a chicken barn. After finishing the cabin, Darlene and six others experiencing homelessness walked to Ottawa to show they were upset with the government’s indifference and wanted change.As Darlene put it, “We can’t just sit and wait for Indian Affairs to do this by their rules. We cannot do that anymore. We have to stand up on our own feet." However, the Ontario government wasn’t appreciative of Darlene building a home for herself, as the Ministry of Natural Resources charged her with breaches of the Public Lands Act, with potential fines of $10 000 and $1000 for each successive time she is caught building on the land her family once lived on. A similar case arose in 2003 involving a couple of the Aroland First Nation attempting to build a hunting cabin on Ogoki Lake’s Comb Island, part

of their traditional territory. The Ontario Court of Justice ruled that this right was protected under Treaty 9, and the province gave up the fight. On November 8th, a legal fundraiser for Darlene was held at the Native Canadian Centre of Toronto, organized by No More Silence, Muskrat Magazine, Idle No More Toronto, the AntiColonial Committee of the Law Union of Ontario and CUPE 3903 First Nations Solidarity Working Group. The event also sought donations of clothing and blankets for the Mishkeegogamang First Nation, and the U of T Law Union donated items we collected in the law lounge in the weeks prior to the event. Darlene spoke powerfully to the crowd of over 200 people in attendance, sharing her story and the struggles she’s faced that culminated in building her log cabin. Darlene also touched upon the connections between violence against indigenous women and poverty, as housing is an essential feature to safety. There have been roughly 1200 police-recorded instances of missing and mur-

dered indigenous women from 1980-2012, and these cases are increasing in rate. Listening to Darlene’s story, I was in awe of her strength and courage in continuing to fight for her community, despite everything the Canadian state has thrown at her. Regardless of whether the courts will hold that Darlene family’s traditional land is now property of the Crown and that any right to build a cabin is extinguished— which of course is a whole issue in and of itself— it’s hard to reconcile on one hand a government and Premier claiming to be committed to “social justice” and caring about things like housing and violence against women, and on the other hand taking legal action against an Ojibway woman experiencing homelessness and resultantly trying to build herself a home. Darlene will be back in court on January 22nd to set a trial date. For folks interested in supporting the cause, you can donate online here https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/forone-strong-lady-darlene-necan.

Move from the classroom to the courtroom. If you’ve set your sights on a career in litigation, you want to apply all that you’ve learned so far where it really counts – in court. At Lenczner Slaght, you’ll spend more time preparing and presenting cases, guided by highly respected lawyers who can help you develop and polish your advocacy skills. As Canada’s leading litigation practice, we don’t just offer you more firsthand courtroom experience – we insist on it.

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

NOVEMBER 26, 2014 | 21

Point | Counterpoint Law school friends vs. normals

JEN AZIZ (2L) POINT Hanging out with law school friends beats hanging out with non-law school friends (“Normals”) Law school feels a surprising amount like high school. Every day, you see the same people, in the same classrooms, the same library, the same overpriced coffee shop… It’s inevitable that you become close friends with your classmates, which might be one of the best parts of this earning this degree. They’re wonderful, brilliant, hilarious people, and impressive drinking buddies. Your law school friends are always there to encourage you to take a break come Thursday night. Making it through the work week together feels like fighting in the trenches, and Thursday night is our brief respite from reality. Your law school friends would never say that you shouldn’t have that last tequila shot at 1:30 am. In fact, if you’re home and tucked into bed before last call you’re probably missing out on some pretty great times. The law school friends you’ll hang out with will come from a variety of backgrounds and experiences. You will meet SO many people who hail from all over the GTA from the exotic Oakville to the oasis known as Richmond Hill! However, although we all come from different places there are certain characteristics found in every law student which make them awesome to hang out with. Law students love puns. Puns are our lifeblood and you don’t want to see what happens when supplies run low. Your sense of humour has probably tweaked already even if you just started school this year. Jokes about ginger-

ALEX WONG (2L) beer, negligence and Lord Denning just don’t land with non-law school friends. As well, all of our peers seem to have amazing hidden talents (not fair) from their lives before law school (remember that time?) and they can introduce you to exciting new opportunities that you didn’t even know you were missing out on with your non-law school friends. It’s also great that everyone’s nerdiness is fully exposed and a source of pride if anything (case in point—trivia competition). And who else but fellow law students can commiserate with you about the cruel and unusual circumstances of 5 exams and a paper in the span of a few weeks? (Does not apply to current 1Ls, but there are no inter-year friendships anyways so it’s not a problem). Sometimes you just want to vent about how weird the reading room smells or why we’re spending so much time reading dissents, and when you hang out with law students you have your audience. Chances are, most of your law school friends also rely on that (life)line of credit. That’s another plus of hanging out with them. When you’re already thousands of dollars in debt, that extra $5 (or $8….) pint is a really just a drop in the ocean and all of your friends probably feel the same way. They will never make you feel bad for giving in to your FOMO and trying to live a little before exams and papers start to crush your soul. The last reason why hanging out with law school friends is awesome is because pretty soon you’ll drop the “law school” and consider them your real, plain old friends. There are a lot of amazing people in this school so don’t miss your chance to sink your claws in and secure some sweet lifelong friendships.

COUNTERPOINT Disclaimer: This position is contingent on still having friends outside of law school. HH in social life and friendship if you have managed to keep this up! P if more than half of them are furry and have tails. Hanging out with non-law student friends (“normals” or “normies”) is great. It’s important to keep in touch with them and to take a step out of the bubble of all-things-law once in a while. One of the obvious pros of being with them is that, because you see them way less often, it’s just inherently qualitatively more special. It’s so exciting. All the things to catch up on. You’re not going to take them for granted. Not that I take my law school friends for granted, but you’re going to treat the friends you see less often really nice when you do see them. Not that I treat my law school friends poorly, if that’s what you’ve heard. Sometimes we just need to be reminded that there is Life Outside of Law (or LOL for short). “Huh? What’s a Seven Sister?”, “Where’s Bay Street?”, “What’s that law that sounds like cake?” These questions are so much more refreshing than, “How many OCIs did you get?”, “Wow, you haven’t started your map yet?” Speaking of, no one really cares about the ‘failures’ of your law school life, of which I have many. Or at least, it’s easier to gloss over the low points when you talk to non-law friends because they just don’t ever have to know about them. In fact, you’re pretty much a success by default for being in law school.

With non-law friends, every trivial thing does not have to become the subject of heated (some might argue “spirited”) debate. Case in point, point/counterpoint is a perma-feature of UV for a reason: law students love arguing / debating / being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. Jen even admits that a lot of the arguments make her feel like George Costanza far more often than is normal. On the other hand, with non-law friends, you can pretend you’re an expert on the law. I don’t do this, but I’m pretty sure I could get away with it. All you have to say is “well, if it’s what a reasonable [person] would do… [random legalese] … [not-legal-advice disclaimer]” … right? Also, everyone will ask you to be their future lawyer because they don’t know any better. One more thing, how do I put this gently? Maybe I won’t. Seeing my friends outside of law school reminds me that TO is really multicultural. Visible minorities make up over two-thirds of the suburb where I’m from, nearly half of Toronto’s population, but less than one-third at Uof T Law. Part of what I’m saying is, there’s a reason for the lack of good AYCE sushi in downtown Toronto and for the state of the “sushi” at Ned’s, and this is a huge disaster for me. There is one great thing about law school friends, though, which maybe you can guess from my points. They remind you that your other friends are so amazing to hang out with by virtue of them not being law students. The corollary of this is that law school friends are actually awesome friends, but for their relation to law school. Love you guys.

DIVERSIONS

22 | NOVEMBER 26, 2014

ultravires.ca

Stolen Texts Professor Edition ALANNA TEVEL (3L)

Dad Iacobucci

Dad Iacobucci DADDDD!!! Yes, son. guess what!!! What Edward? I…

AM…

THE NEW DEAN OF U OF T LAW SCHOOL!!! I was chosen out of a ton of candidates, and selected by a committee made up of faculty members and students.

That’s great son. That reminds me of the day that, after presiding as the dean of U of T law school, I was appointed as a justice for the Supreme Court of Canada.

AND, I will be making a lot of important decisions!!! For example, when Mayo Moran was dean, she held the monthly “Muffin Madness” for students, but now I, of course, will have to change the name to something more appropriate. Perhaps “Eddie’s Egg-cellent English Muffin Event” or “Eddie’s Enticing Eggs Benny Extravaganza”.

Congrats Edward. Really, that’s great. That puts me back to the time that I sat on the bench for Baker v. Canada, one of the leading decisions in Canadian Administrative Law to date. Did you know that the ruling provided guidance for what the standard of review should be for administrative decisions going forward? And established that some administrative decisions are required to include reasons?

I guess that’s cool too, Dad! Anyways, I should probably get back to the job. TTYL!

Jackson Law Building Planning Board Finds Resolution to Major Issue RONA OCEAN (1L) & AMIR EFTEKARPOUR (1L)

THE JACKSON LAW BUILDING PLANNING BOARD MADE LEAPS AND BOUNDS last Thursday, resolving a budget issue that had the committee at a standstill for months. The Board had been working on the design and installation of a new fountain at the building’s entrance, but had been unable to articulate a plan to pay for the $700 000 gold-encased structure. “We’re building this fountain in an effort to make the law school more competitive with its Ivy League counterparts

in the U.S., and so the budget issue is frustrating in a major way" said Interim Dean Brunnée. "Fountains are one of the primary indicators of international competitiveness," she continued. Last week, however, the Board announced that in order to foot the entire bill for the Fountain, the Faculty of Law will be admitting one extra student next year.

DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

NOVEMBER 26, 2014 | 23

Monumental News YONA GAL (1L) FORMER SCC CHIEF JUSTICE BEHEADED

NORTHROP FRYE ALMOST ARRESTED

Bora Laskin (as he then was) graduated from the University of Toronto long ago. Now, his decapitated head sits outside the Reading Room. His partial presence urges students to enter and study. “Avoid my path, avoid my fate,” Bora’s head (as he now is) seems to scream at passing students. The Faculty of Law beheaded Bora in 1984. The school was disappointed in his shabby career. As a student, Bora’s future appeared promising. Professors and classmates predicted great things for him. “Oh, that Bora,” they were wont to say, “he’s going places”. Alas, it was not to be. Bora never reached the Supreme Court of the United States of America. Recently, Justice John Laskin lectured at the Faculty of Law. Wisely, the lecture organizers steered Justice Laskin away from Birge Carnegie, thus avoiding an epically awkward moment.

Northrop Frye was nearly arrested on Vic Campus last Tuesday. Frye was sought for overdue book fines owed to the Toronto Public Library. Lt. Joe Bookman, a library cop, attempted to make the arrest. Frye was sitting on a bench near Emmanuel College when Bookman approached him. “He was sitting with seven library books,” recounted Bookman. “One was open, but he wasn’t even reading it. He was staring at what appeared to be nothing, pretending like he didn’t see me”. Bookman ordered Frye to rise and raise his hands. Frye ignored Bookman’s command. “I tried seizing the books,” said Bookman, “but they were heavy—really heavy”. Ultimately, Bookman abandoned the arrest, saying he “had other fish to frye,” though he went directly to Birge Carnegie to eat free donuts and read a magazine about Bay Street recruitment stats.

(Note: Justice Laskin’s lecture was well received despite the tragic absence of refreshments).

Above: Frye sits with library books moments before attempted arrest.

Important Health Tense Stand-off Develops and Safety Announcement Between 2Ls and —Do Not Ignore Free Pizza in Student Lounge RONA OCEAN (1L)

WITH OCIS, PAPERS, AND THE impending doom of exams, November is one of the worst months to fall ill. All students should exercise care with respect to their health and ensure they are keeping up with regular hygiene and sleep routines (which, let’s face it, are always the first things to go out the window). A main concern of many students at this time of year is cold and flu prevention. But while many people rush to their local pharmacy to stock up on Cold Fx, Orange Juice, or some oil from some plant, most students forget the more concerning epidemic that sweeps the city at this time of year: Second-Hand Stress. Scientific-ish studies have demonstrated that Second Hand Stress (or SHS for short) is particularly contagious here at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law. Common symptoms of the infection include, but are not restricted to: • Increased self-commiseration, commonly known as “feeling sorry for yourself.” • A strong and compelling urge to start and finish a new television series on Netflix. • Ingestion of an entire extra-large pizza after convincing yourself and delivery personnel you’re sharing it with friends. • Self-loathing; resultant from realization of pizza quantity consumed. • Increased contemplation and prioritization of, without actualization or completion of, graded endeavors of academia, commonly known as

“thinking a lot about all the work you have to do but not actually doing any of it.” • Irregular and fitful alternation between polarized states of self-perception; “over-confidence,” and “quit law school” as common examples. One of the most sinister attributes of this epidemic is that infected individuals are not safe from worsening of symptoms. SHS is a COMPOUNDING infection, meaning that two people infected with stress absorb SHS radiation from each other, which forms a devastating strain of the infection called SUPER-STRESS. Once infected with SUPER-STRESS, there is little to no hope for the individual until after exams have terminated. The most effective method of preventing infection with SHS is avoiding contact with other infected individuals. Since mostly everyone is stressed, the likelihood of this is slim to none. It’s cute that you’re trying though. If reading this article has made you realize that you are suffering from second-hand stress, the following resources may help in coping with the symptoms: • (416)-967-1010 (Pizza Pizza’s phone number) • (647) 748-2333 (A more hipster-friendly pizza place’s phone number) • h t t p s : //w w w.y o u t u b e . c o m /w a t c h ? v = ZSS5dEeMX64 (link to the video, “I’ll make a Man out of You” from Disney’s Mulan)

AMIR EFTEKHARPOUR (1L) TORONTO, ON—SOURCES REPORTED last month that an uneasy stalemate had developed between student Gabe Edelson and the free pizza on the table in front of him in the lounge. The tension reportedly began midway through the lunch break, after an executive from the Students’ Law Society brought leftover pizza into the lounge, thus fulfilling the organization’s primary mandate. Onlookers in the couch area confirmed that Edelson noticed the pizza immediately, but hesitated before reaching for a slice. A close confidant of the 2L confirmed that Edelson was trying to watch what he ate, as OCIs were coming up and “Uncle Scotia can only foot the bill on so many suit alterations”. The 2L orally confirmed his intention to abstain from the pizza even after his colleagues began to indulge. Edelson repeatedly refused offers for a slice of Hawaiian, claiming that he was totally full as he had just “crushed a kale salad”. Furthermore, he signaled his intention to adhere to the strict ideals of Paleo and Crossfit, two regimes that he was “totally going to start after OCIs.” However, experts with knowledge of the historic relations between all law students and free food expressed doubts that the standstill would last, and predicted a resolution before the end of

the lunch break. Citing two previous incidents, interested third-parties noted that relations between Edelson and pizza, donuts, Samosas, and candy bars have always featured an intriguing will-they-won’t-they characteristic. “There was that one time he and a box of donuts were basically eye-fucking each other in the Reading Room,” said Stephen Franchetto, a classmate of Edelson’s. “Or last Friday when he flirted with that box of Samosas outside the Legal Theory workshop in Falconer, for like, an hour.” In both cases, bystanders reported that the nervous détente between Man and Food gave way to a period of frenzy and provocation, with only a few crumbs and maybe some sweet and sour sauce left as evidence that anything had been there before. At press time, bystanders reported that Edelson had signaled his intention to end the standoff by withdrawing from the contested territory. The 2L left the lounge for the refuge of the Reading Room. Experts questioned the longterm success of the maneuver, but Edelson expressed relief in the short term. “The tension was so thick you could cut it with a knife,” said the 2L. “And then dip it into some marinara sauce. Or shit, maybe some ranch dip,” he continued, gazing longingly through the doors leading back to the lounge.

DIVERSIONS

24 | NOVEMBER 26, 2014

Lawtocorrect RONA OCEAN (1L) When your brother pranks you with the unoriginal joke of changing the word “law” in your phone to autocorrect to “Nugget.”

That moment when your phone knows exactly what’s up.

ultravires.ca

Professor Celebrity Look-A-Like of the Month ANONYMOUS

vs. PROFESSOR ANVER EMON

DAVID CROSS

(image from utapss.ca)

(image from marvel-movies. wikia.com/wiki/David_Cross)