CLOC Survey Shows In-House Legal May Rethink Staffing After Associate Raises—Or Maybe Not
A recent survey from the Corporate Legal Operations Consortium took its members' temperature on associate pay. There was frustration expressed about the Milbank raises, but some indicated they'd be understanding—as long as the costs didn't land on the corporate legal balance sheet.
June 15, 2018 at 04:27 PM
3 minute read
Since an associate raise announcement from Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy set off a chain reaction of further pay increases across other law firms, some on the client side have expressed frustration with what one in-house ops director called the “tone deafness” of such moves.
According to a new Corporate Legal Operations Consortium survey, in-house legal leaders may soon start pushing back against the raises with more than just words. But the survey also provided some evidence that anger isn't necessarily universal, particularly if costs of giving raises aren't getting passed along to legal departments directly.
The streak of raises began June 4 when Milbank announced its associates would get across-the-board pay boosts, bringing first-year associates to a salary of $190,000 a year. Other large firms have matched these rates and Cravath, Swaine & Moore, has exceeded them. Even midsize firms are joining in.
The CLOC survey, which was distributed between June 6 and June 8, prompted responses from 71 members.
Some 72 percent of respondents said they would be more likely to move work in-house or to an alternative provider, if their own law firms mirrored the salary increases seen recently. Eighty-five percent of the respondents indicated that they believe that the salary hikes “will” or “may” impact which firms get their business.
CLOC also gathered written responses from members, who remain anonymous in the survey, about associate pay raises. Some responses were negative:
“The decision to raise first year salaries to $190K is further proof that some law firms missed the lesson in 2008,” one respondent said.
Jeffrey Franke, who has multiple roles at CLOC and serves as its general counsel, said he understands why those who responded think that $190,000 for a first-year associate is a high salary and that he believes legal departments will push back on having first-year associates work with them as a result of recent raises.
However, Franke cautioned that given the fact that CLOC has roughly 1,500 members, and didn't get a response on the survey from the vast majority of those professionals, the raises might not be as much of a hot-button topic as many believe.
He said that the amount of debt first-year lawyers carry is understood by others in the industry and that companies will “begrudgingly” accept the raises, as long as the costs are not passed on to them.
“As long as it does not change the rates I am charged, they are free to overpay whomever they like,” one survey respondent told CLOC.
Another noted, “In the San Francisco Bay Area where the cost of living is unbelievably high, this increase is likely warranted simply to allow younger attorneys to live a decent life.”
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 All'Utterly Bewildering': GCs Struggle to Grasp Scattershot Nature of Law Firm Rate Hikes
Once 'Unheard Of,' $20M Partner Pay Becomes Standard to Meet at Davis Polk, Simpson Thacher
Wilmer Joins Kirkland, Sidley in Racking Up 8-Figure Fees From a Single Client
Blackstone Racked Up $165M in Kirkland Fees in Just 3 Years
Trending 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