Natali Curukovski spent seven years studying law, only to lose her first job as a solicitor three weeks in—after a two-minute TikTok video.
The Melbourne-based junior lawyer posted the clip on August 3, describing the pressures of early legal practice. She spoke about constant deadlines, unpaid overtime, and the lack of work-life balance. “It’s like I did seven years of all this to just go back and do the same thing; there’s no freedom,” she said. The video quickly gained traction, amassing 600,000 views.
Termination follows viral post
Four days later, Curukovski announced on TikTok that she had been fired. Her employer, unnamed in the video, terminated her employment immediately after discovering the post. In a follow-up clip, she insisted she never intended to harm the firm’s reputation. “I didn’t mention names, I didn’t mention client files, I didn’t mention the firm,” she said. Despite pressure to remove the video, she refused, and it later surpassed 700,000 views.
Related: NSW solicitors urged to engage in insurance inquiry
The incident has sparked debate within the legal profession. Some sympathize with Curukovski’s frustration over working conditions, while others question the wisdom of publicly criticizing an employer so early in her career. Michael Byrnes, an employment law partner at Swaab, called the TikTok a “bad career decision.”
“While issues of burnout and dissatisfaction in the legal profession are important and should be openly canvassed, this post raised specific grievances about her employer on a public platform after she had been in her first legal job for a very short period,” Byrnes said. He argued that some of her complaints—like the lack of lunch breaks—detracted from the broader message about junior lawyer struggles.
Where free speech meets professional boundaries
The controversy has reignited discussions about lawyers’ rights to speak freely about their work. Byrnes acknowledged that lawyers should be able to discuss industry challenges but cautioned against targeting current employers. “Lawyers should be free to openly discuss the realities and challenges of working in the legal profession on social media, but they need to be careful not to disparage their current employer,” he said.
Even without naming a firm, he warned, lawyers risk identification through platforms like LinkedIn, where employment details are often public. The incident has left some junior lawyers wondering whether they can share their experiences without jeopardizing their careers. Byrnes urged firms to provide clearer guidance on social media use, noting that policies and training could help prevent similar conflicts.
Related: New ALA president outlines key priorities
For Curukovski, the fallout has been swift. The video that cost her the job remains online, a reminder of how quickly a moment of frustration can reshape a career. The legal community is now left to grapple with a question that extends beyond one viral post: How much freedom do junior lawyers really have to speak their minds?
Byrnes emphasized that the profession can address working conditions without forcing lawyers to choose between silence and risk. “The fact there may be negative repercussions from actively disparaging a current employer on social media does not mean the profession is not open to a serious consideration of issues relating to the working conditions of junior lawyers,” he said.
The case may not change industry norms overnight, but it has already forced firms to reconsider how they communicate expectations around social media. For now, Curukovski’s story serves as a cautionary tale—one that highlights the fine line between advocacy and professional risk.