RPC to scrap NQ flat rate salary for performance-based pay

  • Print
  • Comments (40)

Readers' comments (40)

  • Ah, I see that RPC's PR cavalry have finally arrived. I was wondering how much more of a bashing this PR stunt could take before they showed up.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Obviously, RPC can't go charging top whack for its duffer trainees.

    So will RPC be transparent with their clients about whether they are supplying a hero swot or a cheapo duffer? Clients might want to economise and hire cheapo duffers for some tasks, but be happy to pay top dollar to have hero swots perform other tasks.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Arn't they all being sent to Bristol anyway?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Probably thankful they haven't got a Manchester office - it's grim up north.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I got passed the link to this for a laugh. The one "In my experience, generally speaking, a trainee is as good and as useful as their supervisor and/or department allows them to be" was a guffaw out loud moment. Perhaps the Dr Who effect is rubbing off and we've all been transported back to the 1930s.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If you dig around you'll see that they're top of the independent employee satisfaction surveys and top of the independent client service surveys. And the two can't be unconnected, surely? As a recruiter in both the partner and associate markets, all I can say is that they are very easy to recruit for and have been picking and choosing for several years. It's funny to watch the banal and naiive sniping comments come from those who wish they could follow suit, but the harsh reality in the business of law is this is a smart move from them as it makes them stand out to recruits and clients for all the right reasons.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • To Anonymous at 1.38pm - I don't want to sound critical but can't you see the irony in what you've said? If I was in RPC's PR team I'd be putting in the negative not positive comments because it's that stuff which will play out for them so well amongst GC readers. They have positioned themselves on the side of the clients and the best trainees, and you are just underscoring that for them!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Sadly most of the above comments underscore the old school mentality that the legal sector still clings on to. Surely a trainee is only ever as good as their mentor/supervisor allows them to be. If a trainee is made to photocopy witness statements, then of course they'll be an expert in hitting the big green button on the copier. If all they're doing is fetching coffee for people more senior than them, then it's likely they'll be well versed in working the coffee machine. But if their supervisors are giving them the experience of actually being a lawyer then that's the best way forward. And why not pay them according to the skills they possess rather than some insane and uneconomical figure that merely comes from the pressure of feeling like you always have to outdo your competitors?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Overworked HR?
    Who do these people think they are? I have worked at 4 firms in my career and I have yet to meet an HR department that adds any value at all. Generally staffed by the thickest of the thick they genuinely think they are key to the business.
    The comment above demonstrates this perfectly.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Can't see why this is causing such a debate. Seems clear: if you're very good and providing very good value to clients then surely it makes sense to be rewarded accordingly - if I were still a trainee and being given a chance to bring home top whack at a medium size firm I'd think "bring it on". Not so much a smart move, Norman, as an obvious one.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (40)