Survey: Those in Compliance Roles With a Law Degree Earn More
Chief compliance officers with a law degree have a total median compensation of $407,832 while their counterparts without a law degree, who have an advanced degree, have a median compensation of $275,000, according to the report.
July 16, 2019 at 05:11 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Corporate Counsel
Responses to a survey from BarkerGilmore published Tuesday show that compliance function employees with a Juris Doctor have a higher median total compensation than those who do not have the degree.
The higher total compensation for compliance professionals with a law degree spreads from the chief compliance officer and managing compliance officer, to those in the compliance function with no direct reports. The survey garnered responses from compliance professionals from public and private companies with 2018 revenues of less than $5 million to those with more than $5 billion.
Chief compliance officers with a law degree have a total median compensation of $407,832 while their counterparts without a law degree, who have an advanced degree, have a median compensation of $275,000, according to the report. Managing compliance officers with a law degree have a total median compensation of $296,033 while their counterparts with an advanced degree make $205,000 in total compensation. Lower employees in a compliance function with a law degree make approximately $172,000 a year while those with an advanced degree make $137,000 in total compensation. The results of the survey shows that those with a graduate degree or only a high school diploma make less than those with an advanced degree.
Dimitri Mastrocola, a partner at Major, Lindsey & Africa in New York, said one of the reasons he believes pay for chief compliance officers with a legal background is because of the high market for attorneys.
“In order to attract and retain JD talent into compliance positions you have to compete on compensation,” Mastrocola said.
Mike Evers, the founder of Evers Legal Search, said in an email that part of the reason for the higher pay may be because the chief compliance officer may also hold different roles such as associate general counsel or general counsel, which would account for a higher overall compensation package.
Those with a legal background are more likely to be hired for roles as a chief compliance officer, BarkerGilmore co-founder and managing partner John Gilmore, said Tuesday. He said the perception among companies is that someone with a legal background is better suited to navigate through regulations and guide a company on how to comply with those regulations.
“It's never a hard requirement [for the job] but is always preferred,” Gilmore said.
However, despite the pay gap, Mastrocola said a good CCO does not need to have any legal training.
“The lawyers in the company are the ones who define the boundaries of the highway,” Mastrocola explained. “The CCOs are the ones who make sure the company stays within those defined lanes. Good CCOs know the law well, but they do not need to be trained lawyers.”
The report also showed there is a gender pay gap in all compliance roles. Amy Feldman, managing director at BarkerGilmore, said women in any role in a compliance function make, on average, 76% of what their male counterparts make.
Gilmore, however, said they are seeing the gap closing as states begin to pass laws that bar employers from asking for a salary history.
“We like it better when we know what [the job] pays and ask if this will work for you,” Gilmore said.
He explained that when companies give a salary up-front without asking for a history there is no gender bias. If the salary is not satisfactory to a candidate, Gilmore said, then it has nothing to do with the candidate's gender or ethnicity.
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 AllUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
The Week in Data Dec. 19: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
Davis Polk Moves to New, Expanded Redwood City Office
Judicial Appointments After Casey: Observers Wary but Hopeful Bipartisan Spirit Will Continue
Trending 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