1 Industry Pays Certain Women In-House Counsel More Than Men
"For the first time in any industry, we're seeing females at the managing counsel level outearn their male counterparts," said Brittney McDonough, managing director and chairwoman of health care and life sciences at BarkerGilmore.
February 05, 2020 at 04:13 PM
3 minute read
While the gender pay gap for in-house counsel stubbornly persists, something different—and, perhaps, encouraging—appears to be happening within the health care and life sciences realms.
Women at the managing counsel level for health care firms are earning 15% more than men. In life sciences, male managing counsel are paid just 2% more than women, according to a new report from legal recruitment firm BarkerGilmore.
"For the first time in any industry, we're seeing females at the managing counsel level outearn their male counterparts," said Brittney McDonough, managing director and chairwoman of health care and life sciences at BarkerGilmore.
"Health care has always predominantly been a more women-led industry and I think it comes down to education," she added. "We often see women who get into the clinical side of medicine and may come up through nursing and decide to get their J.D. They're arguably a bit further ahead for opportunities in that field."
But as women climb the corporate ladder, their pay appears to drop when compared with men at the top levels of legal departments. Female general counsel in the health care and life sciences sectors are paid 13% and 21% less than their male counterparts, respectively, according to BarkerGilmore's report.
The median total pay for women GCs in life sciences was $560,500, compared with $713,500 for men. In the health care industry, the GC gender pay gap was $401,500 to $464,000.
Overall, life sciences firms are paying women in-house counsel nearly 20% less than men while the gender pay gap is 13% at health care companies, according to the study.
The report also noted that the average base salary for in-house lawyers in both industries has increased by about 4%.
Still, the median pay for women in-house counsel across all positions in life sciences was $340,000, compared with $420,000 for men. In health care, the median pay for women was $285,000 to the men's $328,250.
Unfortunately, the gender pay disparity findings echo gaps seen throughout the in-house world in all industries, where the differences range from 15% to more than 18%, depending on the survey.
The latest findings are from BarkerGilmore's larger in-house compensation survey in 2019 of more than 2,000 U.S.-based in-house lawyers, 20% of whom work in health care or life sciences. Some other noteworthy takeaways include:
- The highest-paying in-house practice areas in health care are compliance and insurance. In life sciences, intellectual property expertise brings the biggest paychecks.
- In-house lawyers for health care firms are a bit restless and want better pay: 42% said they will likely embark on a compensation-related job hunt within the next year, compared with 31% of life sciences lawyers.
- Interestingly, though, life sciences lawyers reported that they're getting smaller raises, reporting that their base salaries increased by 4% in 2018, compared with 5.2% the previous year.
- As for those health care lawyers who are ready for a higher-paying job? They said their salaries went up 4.4% in 2018, compared with 4% the previous year.
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 AllTrump's SEC Likely to Halt 'Off-Channel' Texting Probe That's Led to Billions in Fines
Ballooning Workloads, Dearth of Advancement Opportunities Prime In-House Attorneys to Pull Exit Hatch
Am Law 100 Partners on Trump’s Short List to Replace Gensler as SEC Chair
4 minute readElon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
Trending Stories
- 1Senators Grill Visa, Mastercard Execs on Alleged Anti-Competitive Practices, Fees
- 2Deal Watch: Gibson Dunn, V&E, Kirkland Lead Big Energy Deals in Another Strong Week in Transactions
- 3Advisory Opinion Offers 'Road Map' for Judges Defending Against Campaign Attacks
- 4Commencement of Child Victims Act at Heart of Federal Question Posed to NY's Top Court
- 5Bolstering Southern California Presence, Sidley Austin Settles Into Revitalized Downtown LA Office
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