Are Indian Lawyers Turning into Clerks?

A lot of law firms in the US have back offices in India and several insist that the work be done by Indian attorneys rather than paralegals. Most of the work is low end work. The sort of work that in India is done by clerks with a 10+2 higher secondary school certificate.

For starry eyed young lawyers fresh out of law colleges faced with the reality that court practice in India is not for them, LPOs are an attractive option. But rare is the fresher who can work on a legal research project or engage in a really complex e-discovery project. The work they are set to do is prepare case files and upload data. Their concern is therefore, "are we turning into clerks?"

In an earlier post, I had written that a degree in law is sufficient for back office work. I eat my words. While the work is often mindless no-brain work, nevertheless the product delivered by Indian attorneys is often subpar. The reason is not that they are below the average in intelligence as compared with their US or UK counterparts, but rather that the intricacies of the English language often cripple them.

Even for low end, back office work, one needs to understand the queries raised. Legal writing is archaic and very technical. Because a lawyer has to cover all aspects of a situation in order to make a document airtight, the language is also invariably very convoluted and complex. Merely having studied and answered law exams in English does not suffice.

Law in many of our local colleges, is very often taught by professors who, while they are excellent with the subject itself, are from a vernacular background, with the result that their hold on the English language, is tenuous at best. An LL.B. degree merely introduces its holder to legal vocabulary; to breed familiarity, one needs to be constantly reading and handling legal documents.

Not understanding the difference between "referring" and "referral", "consistent" and "consisting", "verily" and "verify", "at " and "on", can indeed, like Cleopatra's nose, decide fates.

I would say the question is not whether Indian lawyers turning into clerks, but whether you are even qualified to work in an LPO merely because you have an LLB?

In my opinion a law degree is far from sufficent even to engage in practice in Indian courts; but since I restrict myself to a discussion on legal outsourcing, for that, I would say, one definitely needs something more. A certificate course in legal process outsourcing if it's syllabus includes training in Legal Communications might help to at least teach the basics. But this course needs to be taught by people who have an idea of the legal processes involved in legal process outsourcing. Anyone seeking enrolment for such courses needs to consider this. See also the Global Legal Professional Certification Test .

The truth is however, that even without a law degree or any legal outsourcing diploma, one can still do most of the low end legal work done in any LPO ( and which is indeed done by paralegals abroad), provided one has a good command of English. The question therefore, is not whether back office work is turning Indian lawyers into clerks, but whether they have the competence to do it? The decisive factor is their command on the English language. And that is the whole truth.

Are you right for a startup -II

The last post generated some questions from job-seekers. A few issues are discussed here.

• · Most startups and companies employ persons with higher qualifications.

When I was debating whether to study for a higher degree in law, the judge I was working for then, said to me, "It's not the degrees, but what you can do with them that counts." That led to me not only getting my Masters but also to leaving him and going on to better things.

Education is nothing but a manual telling you what to do in order to succeed but ultimately success will depend on your ability to implement that teaching in your daily life.

Any company, large or small, would rather employ someone who has passion and ambition, who can prove that he/she can play different roles, who displays inherent skills like being canny and street-smart, leadership qualities, even aggressiveness, than someone with just a string of degrees.

Qualifications are important. As important as possessing a strong fishing line. But you eat only if you have the determination, patience and skill to use the line to catch that fish.

• · Companies employ women more readily, than men.

In the news is the Government of India’s latest decision to employ more women in government jobs. It is a fact that the fairer sex is generally believed to be more sincere, more compliant and less likely to run away with the office funds. Women also tend to put down roots and are less likely to job hop. They bond quickly and display far more loyalty than men do. That adds up to a lot of plus points. The downside is that they need more time off for child bearing, rearing, and home making.

Men on the other hand do not take as much time off, are prepared to work late, to come in at odd hours, and to take on heavier jobs. However male employees are far more likely to up and leave and not worry about the mess they might leave their employers in. Men also tend to bond less with their employing company.

However, no firm will employ exclusively on gender basis, except for organizations specifically instituted to provide jobs for women. The best employee base a company could have would be one with a slightly higher level of female to male employees and a finely mixed potpourri of all communities, religions and states, which would bring together persons with area and race-specific skills, adding to the richness of the work atmosphere and also enhancing productivity.

• · Too much emphasis is placed on communication skills.

In my opinion, not enough emphasis can be placed on communication skills. Face it guys, you have to learn to talk the talk. You need not be an expert in the language. Even people whose mother tongue is English routinely make grammatical and spelling mistakes. However, knowledge of basic grammatical English is a must.

Very often students and employees ask for “tips” to enable them to speak English well. No amount of “tips” can make you speak and write well. I have always maintained that you must think, speak, and write the language if you want to master it.

I also feel very strongly that training in Communications does not end with the training period. During training you learn the basics but in order for the training to have any effect, you must continue to think and speak in English at all times and not just when you are forced to do so. If not, all that you learned will be just so much water down the drain.

I saw a message posted the other day which read, “Say him to write to me.” If you do not know when to use “say” and “tell”, I, for one, would not employ you.