Despite Salary Hikes, Inflation Leaves Associate Pay Below Pre-Recession Level
How have associate salary increases kept up with inflation over time, and where does that analysis place the high point for first-year associate pay? Hint: It's not 2018, even with many firms now offering $190,000.
August 22, 2018 at 06:43 PM
4 minute read
Law firms have bumped up starting salaries for associates at top firms over the past few years, prompting Big Law clients to raise a stink about outsized salaries for junior lawyers. But it turns out that this pay—increased to $190,000 this year for lawyers fresh out of law school in big markets such as New York—falls short of past peaks when inflation is taken into account.
Adjusting for inflation with the U.S. Labor Department's consumer price index calculator, even the recent hikes leave today's first-year associates with a lower starting salary than their counterparts who entered the industry just before the global recession, according to an ALM analysis of pay data drawn from the National Association for Law Placement (NALP).
An examination of the prevailing first-year associate salaries over the past 20 years, using New York as a stand-in for the legal industry's top-paying markets, showed that the buying power of an associate's pay peaked in 2007. That year, top firms raised starting salaries for first-year associates to $160,000 from the 2006 rate of $145,000, while before that, first-year starting pay had remained at $125,000 for several years, according to NALP. The $160,000 starting figure then remained steady for nearly a decade—until a 2016 increase to $180,000.
Adjusting 2007's starting salary for inflation, the $160,000 figure becomes $199,185 in June 2018 dollars. That means, in effect, first-year associates earned the equivalent of $9,185 more in 2007 than those who followed the same path in 2018.
Salaries adjusted to June 2018 dollars remained above that $190,000 mark into 2008 and 2009, even as the global recession set in. As the starting associate pay remained at $160,000 for several years starting in 2007, the CPI-adjusted figures steadily dropped until 2015, when they were equivalent to a little more than $172,500 in June 2018 dollars.
Then came an increase to $180,000 in 2016—the equivalent of roughly $191,450 in June 2018—and, eventually, the 2018 hike to $190,000.
Looking at the past 20 years overall, the inflation-adjusted salaries spiked upwards in 2000, 2007 and 2016. The most recent hikes in 2016 and 2018 suggest that associate pay may now be approaching pre-recession levels, even as clients have expressed concern over their law firms jacking up their associate pay scales.
While associate salaries are now rebounding toward pre-recession buying power, that doesn't mean junior lawyers at top firms were suffering during the years without raises. When not adjusted for inflation, the top market salaries for first-year associates increased at a rate that far outstrips gains in median household income across the entire United States.
From 1998 to 2016, median annual household income rose from $38,885 to $59,039, a roughly 52 percent increase, according to the latest available nationwide data from the U.S. Census Bureau.
Over the same span, first-year associates went from earning $87,500 in 1998 to $180,000 in 2016, an increase of nearly 106 percent. Since 2016, starting pay has risen another 5.6 percent in light of the $10,000 raise in 2018.
Setting salary aside, other recent indicators have also pointed to good times for junior lawyers entering the field and for the firms that might hire them. Late last week, for instance, Citi Private Bank's Law Firm Group reported that the legal sector had its best half-year since before the recession, with revenue increasing 5.5 percent in the first half of 2018.
On the employment front, placement results for new law school graduates have also moved toward pre-recession levels—for the class of 2017, more than 88 percent of new law graduates found employment, according to a NALP report in early August.
“Barring another economic slowdown or interruption and barring a significant jump in law school enrollment as a result of rising applications, the employment outlook for recent law graduates looks brighter (if not exactly rosy) than it has at any time since 2008,” NALP executive director James Leipold said in a statement earlier this month. “That is good news.”
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 AllLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute readAs Profits Rise, Law Firms Likely to Make More AI Investments in 2025
'So Many Firms' Have Yet to Announce Associate Bonuses, Underlining Big Law's Uneven Approach
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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