A. Nony Mouse wrote:Lasers wrote:bizzybone1313 wrote:I am strongly considering practicing employment law, but I will only do it if it is plaintiff side.
hm, that's pretty specific. why?
Some people want to work on behalf of workers, not against them. Employment law is one of those areas (labor is like this too) where, as I understand it, people don't switch sides very much. Plaintiff-side lawyers often see it as a kind of akin to social justice/civil rights lawyering, while helping large corporations write employee handbooks and fire people in compliance with the law is not. (Not sure if those are bizzy's reasons, but it's not surprising to see someone with that attitude.)
As an aside, I'm really not sure what trade law means in this context or how it connects to consumer protection. I thought trade law = international trade?
Exactly. I grew up working class. I am not going to defend corporations. I woulld essentially being trying to screw over people like my parents. I have a big problem with that. I have always wanted to practice civil rights, immigration or plaintiff side employment law. In the order from most to least realistic, I would say it goes like this: (1) Immigration, (2) plaintiff side employment and (3) civil rights law. If I do not get to practice one of these areas, I am going to be real upset. I am completely fluent in Spanish. I think this would give me a real good chance of getting a job with an immigration firm.