In-house lawyers increasingly valuable to their companies
Our readers already know that in-house is the place to be.
November 05, 2012 at 06:18 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Our readers already know that in-house is the place to be. The Wall Street Journal takes a look at why.
More and more general counsel are becoming one of the top-paid employees at their companies, largely because the legal and regulatory risks that businesses face these days make lawyers invaluable.
Compensation researcher Equilar Inc. released a report Monday that revealed the GCs who work closely with management are the ones raking in the most cash. For a GC who reports directly to the CEO, the median pay is $1.55 million, whereas for a GC who sits a little lower on the corporate ladder, the median pay is $760,000.
What's more, the value of a general counsel to a company is increasing, and fast. In 2011, GCs' pay increased at a rate of 12.8 percent, while CEOs' pay grew at 6.2 percent and CFOs' pay grew at 8.9 percent.
But for those in-house counsel, or aspiring in-house counsel who aren't quite at the GC level yet, there's another area of growth to keep an eye on: compliance. “The growth and the job security is, for better or worse, in compliance,” Cameron Findlay, GC of Medtronic Inc. told the Wall Street Journal.
Consero Group LLC polled 48 executives at a compliance forum held last week in Florida, and found that almost half of them said they had added compliance staff in 2011.
Wal-Mart is a great example of one such company that is pouring resources into compliance. After accusations that the company covered up bribery in Mexico, it spent $30 million to review its worldwide compliance program, and recently hired an internal compliance chief.
For more jobs-related numbers on InsideCounsel, see below:
Legal services jobs see slow growth, demand drops
Public interest law salaries stuck at 2004 levels
Facts & Figures: Businesses spending more on both in-house and outside counsel
This content has been archived.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
© 2025 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
White Castle GC Becomes Chain's First President From Outside Family
Beyond the Title: Developing a Personal Brand as General Counsel
Trending Stories
- 1South Carolina Physicians Challenge Abortion Ban Under Religious Freedom Claims
- 2Special Series Part 5: The State’s Bond Lock Impermissibly Delegates Legislative Authority
- 3President-Elect Donald Trump Sentenced to Unconditional Discharge
- 4JCPenney Customer's Slip-and-Fall From Bodily Substance Suit Best Left for a Jury to Decide, Judge Rules
- 5Products Liability: The Absence of Other Similar Claims—a Defense or a Misleading Effort to Sway a Jury?
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
