In-house pay gap closes as firms shift away from old PQE model

  • Print
  • Comments (8)

Readers' comments (8)

  • Firms are in danger of seeing their top people go in-house if there's no huge difference in pay - in-house is already offering better work/life balance and job satisfaction

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Which "mid-sized" firms have they been talking to? I have worked at one large regional firm and one large national firm and at 8PQE my salary even with a maximum bonus doesn't come anywhere near £88,000 and from speaking with some colleagues that seems to be the theme across the board. I can only assume that the report refers to the hand full of "mid-sized" London firms which skews the figures.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • better work/life balance in-house can be a myth. I've been inhouse for the past 5 years and eaily work longer than in private practice.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The other benefit of becoming a senior inhouse lawyer is that you can enjoy making City lawyers jump through hoops at your command, rather than having to be the person who is doing the jumping. Surely a nice change in the power dynamic for those lawyers that do not make equity partner at a City firm?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Would be keen to see the extent of this apparent survey. I presume mid-size law firms refers to mid-size City firms in which case the pay seems average. However, it is misleading to compare this rate only with financial service companies; these probably make up just a few percent of all in-house roles. Look at other inhouse industries (retail, pharma, property, engineering, IT etc) and I think the picture will look a little different. When all things are considered (pay, bonus, car, pension etc) in-house packages can be better, but still only in the minority of cases.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @GC "You can enjoy making City lawyers jump through hoops at your command."
    That is a reasonably small-minded / petty / nasty mentality. I work at a top-20 firm. I have been seconded twice, once to a FTSE100 entity and once again to a PE business (as interim GC). On each occasion I worked almost exclusively with external support from the magic and silver circle and 90% of the time the people were excellent and proactive. We all wanted to work together and get projects over the line. I tried my best to set sensible deadlines and was strong enough to tell internal stakeholders when they were making unreasonable demands of me or the external resources and I was respected.
    The quality of the inhouse teams were mixed, but by-and-large I worked with high quality and committed individuals whom I respected.
    If making lawyers "jump through hoops" is how you get a kick then you really ought to move out of the profession and do something else.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • At the risk of cliche, this report is a serious case of apples and pears and perhaps not terribly thorough research ... would love to see the data. The conclusions aren't all wrong, but this is certainly not news. In house is not usually a work life balance choice (unless you're comparing apples and pears again). In house packages have always been healthier in overview than they seem - basic salary isn't the whole story. How easy is it to get a headline around here...?!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "...enjoy making city lawyers jump through hoops....."
    What planet are you on? I am GC and have been in house for 10 years. The first thing you learn when you get into industry about getting on and getting the best out of the teams around you is to get out of your ivory tower and treat those around you with respect. Why try to replicate the way you may have been treated as a junior cog in a wheel?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

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 (8)