Canadian Lawyer InHouse

3 CANADIANLAWYERMAG.COM/INHOUSE NOVEMBER 2016 www.canadianlawyermag.com/inhouse Director/Group Publisher: Karen Lorimer karen.lorimer@thomsonreuters.com Managing Editor: Jennifer Brown jen.brown@thomsonreuters.com Associate Editor: Yamri Taddese yamri.taddese@thomsonreuters.com Copy Editor: Patricia Cancilla Art Director: Steve Maver Account Co-ordinator: Catherine Giles Sales and Business Development Business Development Consultant: Ivan Ivanovitch ivan.ivanovitch@tr.com 416-887-4300 Canadian Sales Director, Legal Canada: Brett Thomson brett.thomson@tr.com 416-881-4013 Client Development Manager: Grace So grace.so@tr.com 416-903-4473 Account Manager: Kimberlee Pascoe kimberlee.pascoe@tr.com 416-996-1739 Account Executive: Steffanie Munroe steffanie.munroe@tr.com 416-315-5879 Canadian Lawyer InHouse is published 6 times a year by Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd., One Corporate Plaza 2075 Kennedy Rd., Toronto ON. M1T 3V4 (416) 298-5141. Fax : 416-649-7870 Web: www.canadianlawyermag.com/inhouse LinkedIn: www.goo.gl/9tytr Twitter: @CLInHouse Editorial advisory board: Sanjeev Dhawan, Hydro One Networks Inc.; Jonathan Lau, Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario; Fernando Garcia, Nissan Canada; Joe Bradford, Bradford Professional Corp; Dorothy Quann, Xerox Canada. All rights reserved. Contents may not be reprinted without written permission. The opinions expressed in articles are not necessarily those of the publisher. Information presented is compiled from sources believed to be accurate, however, the publisher assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions. Canadian Lawyer InHouse disclaims any warranty as to the accuracy, completeness or currency of the contents of this publication and disclaims all liability in respect of the results of any action taken or not taken in reliance upon information in this publication. Publications Mail Agreement #40766500 ISSN 1921-9563 Copyright © 2016 H.S.T. Registration #R121349799 To subscribe or change addresses Call (416) 649-9585 Fax (416) 649-7870 or e-mail Keith Fulford at keith.fulford@thomsonreuters.com RETURN UNDELIVERABLE CANADIAN ADDRESS TO: CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT One Corporate Plaza 2075 Kennedy Rd., Toronto ON. M1T 3V4 By Jennifer Brown Editor's Box SEND YOUR news AND story ideas TO jen.brown@thomsonreuters.com Indexed in the Canadian Periodical Index The in-house argument for Ontario's Law Practice Program I s it baffl ing to anyone else that at a time when so many aspects of the legal profession are being reconsidered in terms of how work gets done and what lawyers learn in law school that the Law Society of Upper Canada is suggesting it wants to cut short an innovative new model to train lawyers for the future? In Ontario, Ryerson University and the University of Ottawa are in year three of providing the Law Practice Program, the alternative to traditional articling, which includes a four-month practical training component and four-month work placement program designed with support from both law fi rms and in-house legal departments. It has an alliance with the Ontario Bar Association to deliver a program that prepares law school grads for a career. The LPP was launched as a three-year pilot with the possibility of a two-year extension to make sure enough data was gathered. In September, an LSUC subcommittee report suggested the LPP should end this year. Benchers will vote on that recommendation in November. It has prompted several in the in- house community to speak out in support of the LPP including Marni Dicker, EVP, general counsel at Infrastructure Ontario, who has served as both a mentor and employer to the program, as well as Fernando Garcia, general counsel at Nissan Canada, who has provided placements for LPP candidates. That the law society would want to end the program is particularly perplexing to Yonni Fushman, vice president and deputy general counsel at Aecon Group Inc. Aecon took an LPP candidate placement two years ago and in January 2017 will hire the individual full-time. Fushman says the individual is "a rock star." Fushman says he's bothered by how "patronizing" the LSUC is being by "depriving a lot of people of the opportunity to get called, and telling them it's for their own good." He acknowledges he has a different perspective than some Canadian lawyers. Having gone to law school in the United States where there is no articling program he thinks clinging to the articling model is "preposterous." The LPP is seen by many as providing a more consistent process. "From my perspective, just because someone has articled by no means does that put them in a higher tier or make them more qualifi ed than someone who has done this more rigorous process." Even though Fushman says the LPP curriculum wasn't directly transferable to what Aecon does, it didn't seem to him that the candidates were going to be any less qualifi ed than an articling student from a Bay Street fi rm who has done document review or other repetitive tasks for articling. "This guy was ready to hit the ground running. Not like a fi fth-year associate but certainly more than someone who had done random articles in a law offi ce," he says. "I think the program is clever — it's circumventing the market limitations on articling." Perhaps it's the business-focused nature of in-house counsel that has prompted them to be so vocal about the value of the LPP. Many of these same lawyers have come from big Bay Street fi rms so they know the differences between the programs. Perhaps it's time the LSUC also sees that difference.

• Cover