Clydes and 2Birds bolster links between pay and performance
Clyde & Co and Bird & Bird have become the latest firms in the UK top 20 to rejig their associate career paths in a bid to tighten links between pay and individual performance. The moves come as research by Legal Week shows that Clifford Chance (CC) is the only firm in the group that does not base lawyers' salaries on merit. The changes see Clydes move further away from post-qualification experience (PQE) as a measure for pay, with the firm putting in place a clear career development framework for associates. It focuses on performance and clarifying targets for progression.
February 20, 2014 at 04:38 AM
3 minute read
Clifford Chance only top 20 firm with no merit-linked salaries
Clyde & Co and Bird & Bird have become the latest firms in the UK top 20 to rejig their associate career paths in a bid to tighten links between pay and individual performance.
The moves come as research by Legal Week shows that Clifford Chance (CC) is the only firm in the group that does not base lawyers' salaries on merit.
The changes see Clydes move further away from post-qualification experience (PQE) as a measure for pay, with the firm putting in place a clear career development framework for associates. It focuses on performance and clarifying targets for progression.
The system was formally introduced in November, with lawyers from newly qualified (NQ) to two years' PQE classified as junior associates. Lawyers subsequently progress from associate to senior associate at around four years' PQE, with a new legal director tier introduced for those with typically at least six years' experience.
Lawyers are promoted through the ranks based on merit rather than experience, with pay at all levels linked to performance, as it has been for the last two years.
Meanwhile, Bird & Bird is tightening its existing structure by toughening promotion criteria at each level. This means promotion from junior (up to three years' PQE) to mid-level associate, and from mid-level to senior associate (around five years' PQE), is no longer automatic. Instead lawyers will be assessed against five criteria before they can gain promotion: matter management, people management, client management and business development, technical competence and personal qualities.
The firm is also adding winning business as a criterion in determining bonuses.
A spokesperson said: "We see both our salary structures and the mechanisms behind the bonus scheme evolving over the next couple of years to ensure that we incentivise and reward the correct ways of working to match the rapidly changing ways in which we are operating and charging for our services."
The changes at Bird & Bird and Clydes represent the latest in a string of moves by law firms to distance themselves from associate lockstep and instead link basic salary with performance.
Following the news that Linklaters is to introduce merit-based pay for lawyers at two years' PQE, CC is now the only firm in the top 20 without a banding system in place. The firm has no current plans to change this, although associates do not automatically progress through the lockstep.
Slaughter and May, traditionally the most conservative UK firm, last year introduced two salary bands for associates with 4.5 years' PQE and above.
A spokesperson for CC said: "Our current compensation policy is designed to motivate and retain our high-quality lawyers, and while it achieves this objective we see no reason to change it."
CC also operates a bonus structure, with bonuses awarded up to a maximum of 40% of base salary.
Of the top 20 Slaughters and Allen & Overy are the only two firms where performance-based pay kicks in purely for senior associates, with the majority opting to introduce it at around two years' PQE. Some, such as CMS Cameron McKenna, Ashurst and Hogan Lovells, operate merit-based pay from NQ onwards.
- For more analysis, see Can't get no satisfaction – half-hearted rewards system is worse than none at all
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 AllMalaysia’s Shearn Delamore Set To Expand Local Footprint With New Office Launch
CMA Uses New Competition Powers to Investigate Google Over Search Advertising
‘A Slave Drivers' Contract’: Evri Legal Director Grilled by MPs
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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