THE Young Lawyers Movement (YLM) has expressed disappointment with Bar Council president Karen Cheah who recently said it was counter productive to set a minimum wage for pupils in chambers.

Cheah had said so in respect of smaller law firms and those outside the Klang Valley.

YLM representatives today, however, said her comments seemed to suggest that small firms stand to lose the benefit of having cheap labour if a minimum remuneration for pupils was implemented.

“We respectfully disagree with the statements of the President. While small law firms form an important ecosystem in the profession, we hope that priority will not be given to a business entity over a living wage,” a YLM representative Vince Tan told the media today.

“The importance of ensuring the welfare of a human being over that of a business should be self-explanatory and we highly doubt that an increase of RM 1,000 or less in monthly pay to a pupil will make a difference between the life and death of a business.

“But it would certainly make a world of difference for a pupil with a retired single mother and younger siblings with mouths to feed as well as rent to pay,” Tan said at Wisma MCA, where the Bar held an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) today.

Cheah who spoke to The Malaysian Insight last week, said that the Bar had to be “circumspect” on the issue of a minimum wage for pupils in chambers.

“I believe that setting a minimum allowance for pupils may be counter-productive, in so far as the smaller firms are concerned.

“The other problem we will see is that the minimum allowance in Kuala Lumpur will be very different from Kelantan or Terengganu,” she said.

In March, a motion seeking to compel legal firms to pay pupils a minimum allowance of RM1,200 was shot down at the Bar’s annual general meeting (AGM).

Young lawyers had wanted the Bar to compel masters to pay lawyers in training in accordance with the current minimum wage. However, pupils are not classified as employees under the Employment Act.

YLM’s Tan today stressed there should be more focus on lifting all members within the profession rather than engaging in a “scarcity mindset” at the expense of pupils. 

“The Bar must also state if the minimum remuneration will be in the form of of a guideline or a ruling.”

“We believe that the former is insufficient to ensure the protection of pupils from the exploitation of masters and will prove to be redundant due to its lack of binding effect upon the members of the profession.”

Cheah said that medium-to-large firms, which make up 20% to 25% of law firms in the country, would have most likely fulfilled the minimum allowance, and it is the smaller firms that would be unable to afford such a high allowance.

She also aid that the Bar should find other solutions to assist small firms to raise their economic scale to be able to afford the minimum wage. – May 27, 2022.