UK top 30: revenues shrink by half a billion as PEP rebounds

  • Print
  • Comments (21)

Readers' comments (21)

  • Here is a simple if rhetorical question. How many partners in the one of the bigger firms would truly say that they enjoy their jobs and would recommend the law as a career , to the next generation . It might be very different if there was not the same " peer" pressure , amongst the top firms , to constantly increase profitability at the expense of a fullfilling life at and away from work. And as the gap between London and the provinces grows wider the profession becomes more divided. I guess the cardiologists and ex wives ( with apologies to the many successful women partners but you know what i mean ) will be happy.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The City model works very well for the few, but what about the salaried partner who sees the prospect of equity receding into the distance, or how about the senior associate in the same position? All too often these guys are not being fairly rewarded, on the contrary they are working increasingly hard and under growing pressure.
    For these guys therefore the City model is broken, they'd be much better speaking to firms that offer performance related pay, such as Keystone Law or Cramer Pelmont. Not only would they increase their revenues and job security, but they would also get their lives back!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Perhaps the reason that Slaughters' PEP is down so much is that they behaved like gentlemen and retained staff even though they weren't fully employed, unlike the money-grubbing partners in many of the other firms mentioned, who chose to sacrifice loyal staff to line their own greasy pockets.

    These are not professional people in any real sense of the word. They are just hucksters who happen to practise law as a lucrative trade, and they would be just as happy managing a brothel if the money was right.

    "What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world but suffer the loss of his own soul?"

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • so called gentlemen rarely are, City Gent. Even the most cursory knowledge of the interior workings of "Slaughters" would rebut your assertions.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • As some have pointed out already here, PEP isn't the be all and end all when it comes to judging a firm's performance, especially when it can go up and down as much as we've seen over the last few years.
    Some of the firms that I would say have been most stable and best run are down this year in pure profit terms. But it doesn't suddenly make them bad firms. Nor does a 28pc rise make Eversheds THE place to work.
    You'd think people so well versed in the ways of the City would be able to see through these numbers. But then, maybe the last few years has taught us that they may not be the Masters of the Universe after all...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Everyone knows PEP is an artificial concept, but no more artificial than any other yardstick businesses use. You only have to talk to MC lawyers for half an hour to see that PEP is in their DNA, and they're hardly gonna change when it's all about money in their own pockets

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • A column should be added to the main table showing how many redundancies have been made in the last two years. Then we can clearly see the firms whose PEP rises are due to redundancies rather than revenue increases or cost-cutting.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Problem is Anonymous 4.30pm there is a big difference between announced redundancies and the hundreds who have been 'managed out' on the quiet.
    Maybe when the LLP accounts are actually published The Lawyer should make a comparison between the number of fee earners at these firms in 2008, 2009 and 2010 and try and find out the true scale of departures, I suspect many of the so-called announced redundancy numbers will bear no comparisons to the numbers pushed out.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Here we go again. Revenue/fees down (in response to client demand) and cost cutting results. When that process is complete what then? Leaner, meaner law firms - probably not; more likely fewer partners, a longer run to partnership (if ever for many) squeezed margins, outsourcing, insourcing, whilst stuck with ever rising property and wage costs. In similar circumstances new business models would start to emerge. What is the likelihood in legal services? To date the only change has seen the advent of the virtual firm which is only a stripped down 'old' law firm. Surely there are some new ideas out there.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "@ Scep Tick Tough times to deal with personally for many - but since when has it been an unacceptable objective for any business to seek to improve profits & shareholder return? And, no, I'm not a partner."
    Any idiot can make a short-term gain by cutting costs. Doubtless any law firm could make a whopping great PEP by selling city centre offices and moving to Benbecula. It does not make it good management; it does not mean that it is in the owners' long-term interests. Unfortunately law firm owners do not HAVE long-term interests, it seems...

    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 (21)