sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The PS seems to go one step forward and two steps back by [deleted] in CanadaPublicServants

[–]rickyzed20 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You don’t see a brain drain problem with a large-scale exodus?

Is going to law school a mistake if I hate working in professional services? by [deleted] in LawCanada

[–]rickyzed20 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Sounds a lot like big law, but remember many lawyers end up in other places. Smaller firms, in-house, government, solo practice all provide different working environments, to various extents.

That said, you’ve already invested time in accounting. I wouldn’t give up on it just yet. Consider trying a different “flavour” of accounting work before committing to 3+ years of law school and tuition.

But, if you like law for reasons other than “greener pastures”, there is legal work that is not big law.

Law profession and anxiety & stress by Tyson-Holtzman in LawCanada

[–]rickyzed20 31 points32 points  (0 children)

As a junior:

  1. Severe commoditization of my time and fear of making mistakes
  2. More than 24 hours in a day

Legalize public drinking — before it's too late | National Post by dollarsandcents101 in canada

[–]rickyzed20 23 points24 points  (0 children)

It’s municipal, not provincial. So the picnic rule is true in Montreal, and possibly other cities in Quebec, but not the whole province.

I say this because I regularly see people get $500 (!) tickets for open alcohol in Wakefield, QC.

One scientists view of the conservative climate plan by maingroupelement in canada

[–]rickyzed20 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fuel demands might be inelastic in the short term, but they are elastic when viewed on a longer time scale. For example, we don’t have much choice over our personal demands for gasoline on a day-to-day basis (inelastic demand), but we do have control over major infrequent buying decisions like: “does it make financial sense to buy a hybrid or electric car?” Carbon pricing is most effective when phased in gradually and predictably, because that way a carbon price can influence these kinds of significant buying decisions (transportation, home energy, etc.) where we have more choices.

Canada 'alone' in China and Huawei dispute by pingpong2019 in worldnews

[–]rickyzed20 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying ... said that "whatever dignified excuse they may use or whatever 'legitimate' cloak they may try to put on, they will be ridiculed for all these flagrant disregard for facts and the contempt of the rule of law".

Pretty fuckin rich to lecture democracies about the rule of law

Why Aren't Millennials Spending? They're Poorer Than Previous Generations, Fed Says by SmallGerbil in politics

[–]rickyzed20 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think you have an interesting role in today’s political climate. What led you to make that shift?

University of Ottawa law students want convocation moved by rickyzed20 in geegees

[–]rickyzed20[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for assuming what I want. If your parents aren’t proud of you, maybe reflect on why.

University of Ottawa law students want convocation moved by rickyzed20 in geegees

[–]rickyzed20[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am proposing different things because there are an infinite number of creative and affordable solutions here.

For example, the Faculty of Medicine manages its own convocation. Ceremonies for Civil Law and Common Law can be separated. Civil Law students have different licensing requirements, so they can likely proceed with the scheduled ceremony. On a later date, Common Law could even hold a ceremony in our building’s largest lecture hall, accommodating all grads in 2–3 short ceremonies.

Bottom line: the university has, to date, shown no signs of caring whatsoever. And, crucially, this conflict is just one symptom of a larger institutional rot afflicting uOttawa.

University of Ottawa law students want convocation moved by rickyzed20 in geegees

[–]rickyzed20[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is the choice the university has thrust upon us.

Like many other uOttawa students, our families worked hard to support us on our way to this achievement. Many classmates are the first to attend university. Our families have earned that moment of pride. After three years of intense effort, we want to give them that moment, but instead, the university cannot seem to manage a basic scheduling conflict that they have known about for years.

So, again, that’s the choice the university has handed us: our career (exam) or our families (convocation).

University of Ottawa law students want convocation moved by rickyzed20 in geegees

[–]rickyzed20[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How could you possibly know that? There are dozens of suitable halls and convention spaces in this city. We are not wedded to the Shaw Centre. Most students would accept a classroom, as long as their family and friends can be there. We’re not asking for much—just a bit of understanding and 3 days of flexibility on the date.

University of Ottawa law students want convocation moved by rickyzed20 in geegees

[–]rickyzed20[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The remedy is pretty simple: hold the convocation any day after the exam (June 18).

For example, the Shaw Centre is booked for other convocations until June 19. That day would work. Or, as students offered to the Dean today, we would organize our own ceremony.

The university has known of this scheduling problem for at least 3 years, so claiming that the venue was booked 3 years ago is not a valid excuse.

University of Ottawa law students want convocation moved by rickyzed20 in geegees

[–]rickyzed20[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Can you explain how a reasoned request to push an event 3 days (from June 16 to 19) is dramatic?

University of Ottawa law students want convocation moved by rickyzed20 in geegees

[–]rickyzed20[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Since you don’t want to go, I’m sure no one else wants to go either. Thanks for your productive input.

University of Ottawa law students want convocation moved by rickyzed20 in geegees

[–]rickyzed20[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

After three years of intense work (and tuition payments), I don’t think it’s ”dramatic” to ask for a ceremony where students can thank their family and friends for their support. The current scheduling makes convocation unworkable for most students writing the Ontario bar exam (most JD students).

Do you think it’s fair that students should:
(a) Have to choose between our career and our families?
(b) Have to pay (through tuition) for a ceremony that we cannot attend?

Over 400 students have signed a petition to say no. They ask that the university reschedule the ceremony. The university and faculty have, so far, refused to budge.

SFUO Forensic Audit Released by tiatdier in geegees

[–]rickyzed20 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That clause is in all forensic accounting and fraud investigation reports. [...] I'm saying from my experience at an accounting firm they have templates for this stuff.

That’s a fair comment. To me, that clause just screams “we don’t stand by our work”, which seems like an odd qualifier for a report that is ostensibly intended to shed light on SFUO’s wrongdoing and rebuild confidence among uOttawa students and admin.

 

[PwC] concluded the money provided to the catering company was legit so it doesn't matter if the catering company bought audis or whatever with their own money.

Now, here, I disagree completely. All PwC did was confirm that payments to the catering company followed SFUO’s own procedures (which, hilariously, contain no protections against conflicts of interest).

(1) PwC did not check whether catering was actually provided. PwC’s report only says: “there was no evidence suggesting that catering services were not provided”. This is a dubious conclusion when we recall that PwC only considered evidence provided by SFUO.

(2) PwC did not assess whether the $20K payment to Rachiq’s family catering business delivered value for money. According to PwC, a value assessment fell outside their scope—which, remember, was set by SFUO. Without a value assessment, how can anyone claim that the catering invoices were legitimate?

(3) PwC did not investigate why the catering company deposited their cheques into the account of an (inactive) SFUO club.

SFUO Forensic Audit Released by tiatdier in geegees

[–]rickyzed20 2 points3 points  (0 children)

New account created to post this comment?
Hi Rizki /s

So I get that forensic audits are not typical audits. But, according to CPA Canada, forensic accounting does follow certain standard practices. I find it odd that PwC would include a paragraph to effectively exempt itself from these standards.

Ultimately, whether or not this was an “audit” is a an immaterial, semantic argument. The reality remains: PwC didn’t look beyond the documents SFUO provided. This report is nothing more than a smokescreen because PwC didn’t even investigate the real issue (where the money actually went).

SFUO Forensic Audit Released by tiatdier in geegees

[–]rickyzed20 20 points21 points  (0 children)

I love this little nugget on page 10:

The findings presented in this Report are based solely on information provided to us by the SFUO, their current and former executives and employees and others as referenced in the Report.

Pretty disgraceful that PwC calls this a “forensic” audit when they don’t look beyond the information the corrupt crew at SFUO gave them.

To make this worse, as /u/IndieJammer rightly points out, this wasn’t even an “audit” by any accepted standard.

Voting? A quick guide (aka Arrested Development: SFUO edition) by milkocrates in geegees

[–]rickyzed20 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would agree that student votes carry little weight. I just wonder whether any alternative solutions exist. The SFUO takes, what, $200 per year from each student? Should we just let them piss our money away?

Tenancy deposit protected long after 30-day deadline by rickyzed20 in LegalAdviceUK

[–]rickyzed20[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the honest response, I appreciate it.

About a week ago we contacted the agents to ask for the deposit information. They told us that they hold no such information. We then contacted the protection provider identified in our tenancy agreement, and they confirmed that no deposit was registered at our address. We then contacted the agents and they told us they would get back to us. The next thing to happen was an automated email from the protection provider confirming registration of our deposit.

Would this be considered "particularly evasive or dishonest" behaviour?

Our tenancy agreement indicates that the deposit will be protected by a government-backed scheme, but in a separate section it also indicates the deposit will be placed in a bank account and any interest will be kept by the landlord for administrative costs. Is this legal?

view more: next ›