Many Firms Didn't Buy Into the Latest Round of Associate Pay Raises, Report Finds
Plenty of firms, including some that are fairly large, are still not paying $190,000 as a base first-year salary.
May 22, 2019 at 04:44 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
First-year associates at larger midsized firms—head counts between 251 and 500—saw a 6.7% increase in their salaries, while associates at 700-plus attorney firms saw hikes of 16.1%, according to a study by the National Association for Law Placement (NALP).
While the raises signal that larger firms, even some that would be considered midsized, couldn't resist the urge to try to match the round of associate pay raises put in motion by Milbank in 2018, plenty of firms did not.
Few firms, in fact, have hit the $190,000 benchmark, according to the report. Although $190,000 is the most frequently occurring salary in Big Law, accounting for 29.3% of reported first-year associate salaries, smaller shops and firms with head counts between 501 and 700 didn't budge and reported flat associate salary growth in 2018.
“As with other associate base pay hikes in the past, while the press focus is usually on how quickly law firms race to meet a market change like this one, the data reveal that there are in fact many large law firm offices that are still not paying $190,000 as a base first-year salary,” NALP executive director James Leipold said in a statement.
The 2019 Associate Salary Survey included more than 300 firms, and 70% of the respondents employed more than 251 attorneys. The median first-year associate salary for law firms in 2018 was $180,000; firms between 251 and 700 reported a median salary of $160,000; those with between 51 and 250 reported a median salary of $115,000; and firms with under 50 attorneys reported salaries of $98,750.
Additionally, there were differences among markets. Most of the $190,000 salaries came from large metropolitan areas such as Dallas, Los Angeles, New York City and Washington, D.C. Firms often cite lower billing rates and cost of living as reasons for regional pay differences.
Both Citi Private Bank and Thomson Reuters issued reports earlier this month indicating that law firms that have attempted to keep up may soon face consequences. While 2018 was the strongest year for law firms since the recession, a drop in Q1 demand may exacerbate the expenses incurred from the raises and put firms in a bind, they said.
“Associate compensation—that doesn't go away,” Citi analyst David Altuna told The American Lawyer last week. “We do think that it's going to challenge profit growth.”
|Similar Stories:
Have the 2018 Associate Salary Hikes Caught Up With Big Law?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
4 minute readFederal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
2 minute readGrabbing Market Share From Rivals, Law Firms Ramped Up Group Lateral Hires
These Law Firm Leaders Are Optimistic About 2025, Citing Deal Pipeline, International Business
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250