OttawaU v Western (Natural Resources Law)

[cptn_Canuck]

Hi All, 

I have been admitted to OttawaU and Western and am struggling to make a decision. Long term I would like to work at a corporate or boutique firm in the field of natural resources/energy/environmental law. 

I have lived in Ottawa my whole life (except during my undergrad). My family and friends all live here as well. OttawaU has an option in Environmental law which is of interest. 

Western has put a focus on mining law with a specific course which is of interest as well, however, London is far from home (although closer to TO which I don't know if that would be beneficial for the 1L/2L recruit). 

Overall, Ottawa as a city is more appealing to me to spend the next 3 years of my life at, however, I want to choose the program that is most closely aligned with my career goals.

Can anyone weigh in on which of these schools would be better given my long-term aspirations? 

Thanks in advance. 

[LMP]

I'd pick Western. The Ottawa recruit will always be open to you because that's where you're from. They won't be worrying about you being a flight risk or Ottawa being a backup option. 

Meanwhile, Western will give you better odds at landing something in Toronto. Not due to proximity, they simply place better. 

 

[Conge]

Western. 

Neither will give you a leg up in terms of "natural resources/energy/environmental law". 

I just think your employment outcomes will be better from Western. 

Note: I've been a lawyer for 10 years now and I don't really know what "natural resources" law means. (Mining? Forestry? Oil and gas?) I have a decent amount of "energy" law experience, and it doesn't really overlap with "environmental" law in any meaningful way. I'm not being critical, but rather cautioning against throwing around terms like that in interviews or with peers or making any big decisions based based on your conceptions of what these terms mean. When picking a school, I'd stick to the basics, like: what school will give you best employment outcomes, where will you have less debt, where will you be happier, etc.?

 

[cptn_Canuck]

16 hours ago, LMP said:

I'd pick Western. The Ottawa recruit will always be open to you because that's where you're from. They won't be worrying about you being a flight risk or Ottawa being a backup option. 

Meanwhile, Western will give you better odds at landing something in Toronto. Not due to proximity, they simply place better. 

 

Hey @LMP, thank you for your response! 

On other forums, I have seen similar discussions regarding Western's placement numbers in Toronto. Some attributed Western's better placement numbers to a self-selection of more students interested in corporate law in Toronto vs at OttawaU there are more students interested in public service jobs, meaning fewer OttawaU students apply for the Toronto jobs. What are your thoughts on this? Any truth to that statement? 

[cptn_Canuck]

17 hours ago, Conge said:

Western. 

Neither will give you a leg up in terms of "natural resources/energy/environmental law". 

I just think your employment outcomes will be better from Western. 

Note: I've been a lawyer for 10 years now and I don't really know what "natural resources" law means. (Mining? Forestry? Oil and gas?) I have a decent amount of "energy" law experience, and it doesn't really overlap with "environmental" law in any meaningful way. I'm not being critical, but rather cautioning against throwing around terms like that in interviews or with peers or making any big decisions based based on your conceptions of what these terms mean. When picking a school, I'd stick to the basics, like: what school will give you best employment outcomes, where will you have less debt, where will you be happier, etc.?

 

Thanks for the response @Conge! 

I appreciate the note. Coming from Ontario, mining law in particular has been what I am most interested in (although I would not be opposed to oil and gas either). I should have been more specific in my original post using "or" instead of "/" as I am interested in all of those areas rather than lumping them together in one grouping. I would be interested to hear what your experience in energy law has been. 

In terms of the basics, this is my dilemma: I would be happier staying in Ottawa and would accrue less debt too (mainly from transportation costs as tuition for the two are roughly equal) but from what I have read and what you and LMP said, Western would likely give me the best employment outcomes long term. 

[ZineZ]

20 hours ago, Conge said:

Note: I've been a lawyer for 10 years now and I don't really know what "natural resources" law means. (Mining? Forestry? Oil and gas?) I have a decent amount of "energy" law experience, and it doesn't really overlap with "environmental" law in any meaningful way. I'm not being critical, but rather cautioning against throwing around terms like that in interviews or with peers or making any big decisions based based on your conceptions of what these terms mean. When picking a school, I'd stick to the basics, like: what school will give you best employment outcomes, where will you have less debt, where will you be happier, etc.?

 

I mostly agree, but I'll note that there are some employers that have a heavy practice in this area and let you specialize (It's a lot of the work that I do on a day-to-day basis). The best bet is environmental law firms (like Wilms & Shier), firms that focus on Aboriginal law, and government offices. Government in particular - specifically MNRF and MNDM - may be right in line with OP's goals. But neither is corporate or boutique.

OP - @Conge is entirely right in saying that you should think more broadly about the school instead of picking it because of this niche. It's something you can work to get into (IE - during OCIs target firms which practice in these areas) but don't make a decision based solely on this goal. 

[LMP]

4 hours ago, cptn_Canuck said:

Hey @LMP, thank you for your response! 

On other forums, I have seen similar discussions regarding Western's placement numbers in Toronto. Some attributed Western's better placement numbers to a self-selection of more students interested in corporate law in Toronto vs at OttawaU there are more students interested in public service jobs, meaning fewer OttawaU students apply for the Toronto jobs. What are your thoughts on this? Any truth to that statement? 

Every school uses that excuse. I might believe it has a small impact on the numbers but fundamentally it isn't the case. 

[Conge]

On 3/5/2024 at 10:03 AM, cptn_Canuck said:

Thanks for the response @Conge! 

 I would be interested to hear what your experience in energy law has been. 

In terms of the basics, this is my dilemma: I would be happier staying in Ottawa and would accrue less debt too (mainly from transportation costs as tuition for the two are roughly equal) but from what I have read and what you and LMP said, Western would likely give me the best employment outcomes long term. 

My experience has been very positive. It's mostly been in energy commodity trading, but has also included working for utilities and renewable development like wind, hydro, and biomass (on the owner/developer side of things). I've found the work very interesting and satisfying. 

Where do you think you would be happier? 

[reaperlaw]

On 3/5/2024 at 1:17 PM, LMP said:

Every school uses that excuse. I might believe it has a small impact on the numbers but fundamentally it isn't the case. 

And how does a student at a law school have any basis to say this? Your belief is incorrect.

Recruit numbers for schools are absolutely impacted by self-selection. Do you seriously think that self-selection only has a "small impact" on why McGill places less students than Windsor (and in recent years, less than LASL)? No, self-selection is an important part of the equation for why schools outside of Southern Ontario will place lower numbers in Toronto. A smaller % of the class at schools like Ottawa and McGill apply to the Toronto recruit than a school like Western or Queens (which has a very small local legal market). You can see that in Ottawa's numbers on Ultra Vires, which fluctuate significantly depending on the year and were highest in 2021 when Toronto recruit took place at the same time as Ottawa recruit. Ottawa's numbers are also understated as Ottawa tends to place well in public interest employers like DOJ and PPSC, which usually do not respond to Ultra Vires. 

UoT is really the only school in Canada where you have a meaningfully improved chance at the Toronto recruit if you attend. Even Osgoode places so well mostly because it is the largest law faculty in Ontario and it is overwhelmingly oriented towards the Toronto recruit. If Osgoode had less than 200 students per class, it would be placing more similarly to Queens and Western than it would UoT.

 

Edited March 8 by reaperlaw

[LMP]

20 minutes ago, reaperlaw said:

And how does a student at a law school have any basis to say this? Your belief is incorrect.

Recruit numbers for schools are absolutely impacted by self-selection. Do you seriously think that self-selection only has a "small impact" on why McGill places less students than Windsor (and in recent years, less than LASL)? No, self-selection is an important part of the equation for why schools outside of Southern Ontario will place lower numbers in Toronto. A smaller % of the class at schools like Ottawa and McGill apply to the Toronto recruit than a school like Western or Queens (which has a very small local legal market). You can see that in Ottawa's numbers on Ultra Vires, which fluctuate significantly depending on the year and were highest in 2021 when Toronto recruit took place at the same time as Ottawa recruit. Ottawa's numbers are also understated as Ottawa tends to place well in public interest employers like DOJ and PPSC, which usually do not respond to Ultra Vires. 

UoT is really the only school in Canada where you have a meaningfully improved chance at the Toronto recruit if you attend. Even Osgoode places so well mostly because it is the largest law faculty in Ontario and it is overwhelmingly oriented towards the Toronto recruit. If Osgoode had less than 200 students per class, it would be placing more similarly to Queens and Western than it would UoT.

 

That's a lot of anger and not a lot of data. Try switching it around. 

[reaperlaw]

20 hours ago, LMP said:

That's a lot of anger and not a lot of data. Try switching it around. 

That's some pretty good projection right there. Perhaps you've confused your being upset with me being angry. I can only speak for myself, but I'm just telling you how it is and if you don't like being wrong, that's a you problem.

Let's make things simple. You made a claim with no evidence. You made such a claim despite being a law student, meaning you have zero credibility to make the claim you did. The irony might be lost on you, but I don't recall you providing data, much less any substantive reason we should take your word that self-selection doesn't explain why schools place lower in the Toronto recruit than other schools. As someone who actually went to the school you said doesn't self-select, has been part of the hiring process at my firm for several years, and actually did cite to Ultra Vires data in my post, I am telling you that what you said is inaccurate and that you should consider not repeating it in the future.

I understand that you're not quite in the providing substance-phase of your career just yet, but a good piece of advice would be not to assert as fact on topics you have no knowledge on. 

Edited March 9 by reaperlaw

[ZineZ]

Alright. Let's take a pause before this devolves further. Please chill for Friday night and we'll sort this out in the AM. 

EDIT - FYI I've hidden some posts. 

[ZineZ]

Alright. So I'm going to say a few things because frankly I think this wasn't a necessary tiff on the forum. 

There's parts of what @reaperlawhas said that I think are valid and accurate. Self-selection is a messy topic - I agree that most many schools will be treated similarly in recruits and there isn't a huge difference. However, I'm not convinced that it's uniform. There are some firms where you'll see certain schools clean up and place better. My view is that both play a part and neither can be discounted. 

That being said, I'd also encourage us to make sure we're being respectful when possible. Pulling rank on a student isn't my favorite and we aren't hierarchical. If there's somewhere you think you have more experience - absolutely point it out and explain what may be missing. But there are ways to go this which don't cause a snippy response - which then leads to further issues down the line in a conversation. 

Lawyers on this forum are also wrong ALL.THE.TIME. Yes we have experience - but it'll be in one part of a larger profession and there's always a chance a student may know more on something because they have gone through recruits etc more recently. I can tell you about my experiences at Oz or from the recruit - but at this point they're fundamentally outdated. And I don't help with interviews, but if I did - it would be for a singular employer. 

And I recognize why all parties got frustrated here. I'm not really putting blame on anyone - just asking that we try to be respectful of each other's perspectives and respond in ways which may not antagonize the other party. I'm saying it here, but it's something we can do better across the forum

 

 

 

[CleanHands]

2 hours ago, ZineZ said:

Alright. So I'm going to say a few things because frankly I think this wasn't a necessary tiff on the forum. 

There's parts of what @reaperlawhas said that I think are valid and accurate. Self-selection is a messy topic - I agree that most many schools will be treated similarly in recruits and there isn't a huge difference. However, I'm not convinced that it's uniform. There are some firms where you'll see certain schools clean up and place better. My view is that both play a part and neither can be discounted. 

That being said, I'd also encourage us to make sure we're being respectful when possible. Pulling rank on a student isn't my favorite and we aren't hierarchical. If there's somewhere you think you have more experience - absolutely point it out and explain what may be missing. But there are ways to go this which don't cause a snippy response - which then leads to further issues down the line in a conversation. 

Lawyers on this forum are also wrong ALL.THE.TIME. Yes we have experience - but it'll be in one part of a larger profession and there's always a chance a student may know more on something because they have gone through recruits etc more recently. I can tell you about my experiences at Oz or from the recruit - but at this point they're fundamentally outdated. And I don't help with interviews, but if I did - it would be for a singular employer. 

And I recognize why all parties got frustrated here. I'm not really putting blame on anyone - just asking that we try to be respectful of each other's perspectives and respond in ways which may not antagonize the other party. I'm saying it here, but it's something we can do better across the forum

The "I'm a lawyer and you're a student (or less experienced lawyer)" card is usually stupid (this not the first time @reaperlaw has pulled it either). Not that this was exactly the case here, but particularly in the context of discussions about admissions, the law school experience, etc., people farther out from law school are actually less well placed to speak from any position of experience, knowledge or authority than people with recent and relevant experience (but that doesn't stop them from trying often enough).

But then, this profession treats appeals to authority as a foundational principle, which probably contributes to this brand of brainrot.

[BlockedQuebecois]

The vast majority of Osgoode students actually self select out of the 2L recruit. If you accounted for self selection, they’d probably have a 90% big law placement rate.

Of course, those students self select after they’ve got PFOs, but still 🙂  

[reaperlaw]

On 3/9/2024 at 6:45 PM, ZineZ said:

Alright. So I'm going to say a few things because frankly I think this wasn't a necessary tiff on the forum. 

There's parts of what @reaperlawhas said that I think are valid and accurate. Self-selection is a messy topic - I agree that most many schools will be treated similarly in recruits and there isn't a huge difference. However, I'm not convinced that it's uniform. There are some firms where you'll see certain schools clean up and place better. My view is that both play a part and neither can be discounted. 

That being said, I'd also encourage us to make sure we're being respectful when possible. Pulling rank on a student isn't my favorite and we aren't hierarchical. If there's somewhere you think you have more experience - absolutely point it out and explain what may be missing. But there are ways to go this which don't cause a snippy response - which then leads to further issues down the line in a conversation. 

Lawyers on this forum are also wrong ALL.THE.TIME. Yes we have experience - but it'll be in one part of a larger profession and there's always a chance a student may know more on something because they have gone through recruits etc more recently. I can tell you about my experiences at Oz or from the recruit - but at this point they're fundamentally outdated. And I don't help with interviews, but if I did - it would be for a singular employer. 

And I recognize why all parties got frustrated here. I'm not really putting blame on anyone - just asking that we try to be respectful of each other's perspectives and respond in ways which may not antagonize the other party. I'm saying it here, but it's something we can do better across the forum

For sure lawyers are wrong all the time. In practice you see that on a regular basis. And of course, lawyers are often wrong about law student-specific topics.

Students are also wrong all the time. Especially in cases where there is no way for a student to have the knowledge required to make the statement they made. Law students have been saying wrong things about the profession they are about to enter ever since there was a law student. But on a forum like this that really should be about giving accurate advice, there should be self-awareness to what is in your wheelhouse to answer. If you are a student at Osgoode, you should not be telling someone who is trying to pick what law school they should attend how students at another school think.

Self-selection is of course just one part of the puzzle for explaining why placement rates differ depending on school. There are lots of factors at play. But it's not controversial for anyone who has an active role in the recruitment process to say self-selection plays a bigger role in that explanation for certain schools, like the ones farther away from Toronto and the ones with a significant local legal market.

[BlockedQuebecois]

@reaperlaw for what it is worth, I would encourage you to learn to put forward your positions without defaulting to saying "I am a lawyer and so I know better than you" or some variant. That is very much your modus operandi when faced with disagreement on this forum, and it is exceptionally unpersuasive.

 

[ZineZ]

14 hours ago, reaperlaw said:

Students are also wrong all the time. Especially in cases where there is no way for a student to have the knowledge required to make the statement they made. Law students have been saying wrong things about the profession they are about to enter ever since there was a law student. But on a forum like this that really should be about giving accurate advice, there should be self-awareness to what is in your wheelhouse to answer. If you are a student at Osgoode, you should not be telling someone who is trying to pick what law school they should attend how students at another school think

Yeah we're not going to agree on this. Once again, students will often be much more plugged into certain issues that we haven't dealt with since practice. Fundamentally, outside the few weeks associated with the recruit - we're not exactly sitting here and figuring out what schools are beneficial and what the current state of their programs is. 

On the other hand, students live with these realities every day. They've done research before choosing schools, some will do tours and then the day-to-day realities of figuring out how that choice may work for them (particularly in relation to other places) is a live issue. And some will absolutely have friends/colleagues (particularly at other places) which informs this. 

These aren't conversations where their voices should be discounted. Again, it's fine to help clarify misconceptions - but there's zero need to encourage less participation. Particularly where *they may know more*

[reaperlaw]

On 3/11/2024 at 12:26 PM, ZineZ said:

Yeah we're not going to agree on this. Once again, students will often be much more plugged into certain issues that we haven't dealt with since practice. Fundamentally, outside the few weeks associated with the recruit - we're not exactly sitting here and figuring out what schools are beneficial and what the current state of their programs is. 

On the other hand, students live with these realities every day. They've done research before choosing schools, some will do tours and then the day-to-day realities of figuring out how that choice may work for them (particularly in relation to other places) is a live issue. And some will absolutely have friends/colleagues (particularly at other places) which informs this. 

These aren't conversations where their voices should be discounted. Again, it's fine to help clarify misconceptions - but there's zero need to encourage less participation. Particularly where *they may know more*

We're not going to agree because I'm not sure what argument you're making. Are you trying to defend the initial claim about self-selection? Or are you making the argument that student voices shouldn't be discounted? I don't disagree with the latter, and I have no interest in getting into a discussion about the latter. However, I do think any one reading this should seriously doubt the veracity of the student's voice in this particular issue—a student who raised none of the reasoning that you suggested.

What you're speaking to is student knowledge in general terms and perhaps some anecdotal evidence from a peer at another school. That knowledge is all well and good if you're talking about general information about another school. But that's not what is going on in this thread. This is not a student issue. It is misinformation for a student to tell a prospective law student trying to chose what school they attend that self-selection is not a thing. It absolutely is a thing. It is not discounting student voices to raise that.

This is really like saying we shouldn't discount a student's perspective about how to make partner or what law firm is the best to work at. There are just some things you do not have the knowledge to confidently make claims about. 

Edited March 14 by reaperlaw

[BlockedQuebecois]

The overall point people are making to you is that if the student is wrong, you should be able to explain why they are wrong without immediately resorting to saying "I am a lawyer and so I know better than you". 

If you can't do that... 

Edited March 14 by BlockedQuebecois

[Ryn]

4 hours ago, reaperlaw said:

It is misinformation for a student to tell a prospective law student trying to chose what school they attend that self-selection is not a thing. It absolutely is a thing. It is not discounting student voices to raise that.

I imagine that self-selection exists to some degree at all schools. But your submission (without evidence) is that it is a major impact. Where? I suppose Ottawa and McGill, since those were two you named specifically. Maybe elsewhere, too, I suppose, based on how you phrased your argument.

But other than make a few assumptions from the numbers, you don't really have any evidence to support your position. And to be fair, neither does the other side of the coin. We're all just speculating and trying to apply our own interpretation of the data. Arguing that you're a lawyer and thus your position should be held in greater deference in this case is silly. Do the numbers reveal some sort of truth to you that it does not to everyone else? I doubt it, since no one has data.

I'm a lawyer too, and I don't think self selection is really a material thing. I agree it happens but probably not to the point it matters. So now that both of us as lawyers are making opposing claims, can we agree that neither of us can be sure and we can let students speculate all they want?