|
|
|
|
|
by socialismisok
1315 days ago
|
|
If they are willing to learn, and I need a cheap, entry level lawyer, why not? Show up at office, get paperwork for a lease or a will, pay the lawyer, and move on. An entry level engineer who doesn't know Linux is fine. An entry level lawyer who doesn't know pacer is fine. You just have to train them and only give them work they can handle with their skill set. Some of the strongest engineers who walked through my teams started with no practical Linux knowledge, but they had a can do attitude. Give me the inexperienced but driven engineer over the experienced but unmoving engineer 10 out of 10 times. |
|
I am all for letting people to learn on the job. But I, personally, would rather not risk it, knowing that the difference between them "learning as they go" and already knowing it might end up making the difference between me walking free and ending up in jail.
If it was something more trivial and with much lower stakes, like a traffic violation ticket, then sure, I wouldn't be so opposed to a lawyer that is figuring things out as they go.
Also, I think you might've missed the point of my original comment. It is one thing when a lawyer might not know something due to still learning their stuff, and another one when it is clear that they arent willing/planning to do so. If someone still uses fax as their primary mode of communication and refuses to use computers altogether in 2022, I have a feeling that it isn't due to them still trying to get the hang of it.