Hogan Lovells pays female partners more than men, as Latham data highlights bonus gap
Hogan Lovells joins rank of firms releasing gender pay gap data for partners as Latham figures highlight bonus disparities
April 03, 2018 at 08:26 AM
4 minute read
Hogan Lovells paid its female UK partners almost 3% more than their male counterparts in total compensation last year, the firm's gender pay gap data has revealed.
The figures show female UK partners at the Anglo-US firm received on average 2.8% more than their male counterparts during the last financial year.
For non-partner lawyers in the firm's UK arm, the data shows there is no pay gap.
In contrast, looking at the overall employee ranks, including lawyers as well as support staff, the firm has a 48% mean bonus gap. More women received a bonus during the year, with 54% of female employees taking home a bonus, compared to 47% of men.
The average hourly pay difference between male and female employees at the firm for the year to April 2017 stood at 15%.
UK and Africa managing partner Susan Bright (pictured) said: "We are an equal pay employer, ensuring fair and competitive reward for equivalent work. We are committed to workplace equality and to recruiting, retaining and advancing a diverse workforce where all our people can be themselves and feel empowered to succeed. We are proud to be a family-friendly employer and promote agile and part-time working opportunities for all."
She added: "In relation to our partner data, we have long been regarded as a firm with a strong female partnership. The results are not surprising but they do underscore the culture and diverse range of talent we have at our firm. Women make up a quarter of the UK partnership and hold a wide range of senior management positions in the business, as well as leading major client relationships and market initiatives. We are working hard to increase further the proportion of women in our partnership."
As of 1 January 2018, women held 34% of partner management positions globally within Hogan Lovells, while 24% of the global partnership was female, nudging up to 25% in the UK.
Hogan Lovells has followed the lead of a number of other firms by choosing to reveal partner data in addition to meeting the compulsory reporting requirements for employees. The move has come amid calls for law firms to be more transparent about pay disparities among their senior ranks.
Other firms opting to reveal partner figures in their gender pay gap data include Dentons, Eversheds Sutherland, Reed Smith, Linklaters and Clifford Chance.
A&O and CMS have confirmed to Legal Week that they are also considering issuing revised figures.
US leader Latham & Watkins also unveiled its gender pay gap data earlier today, with its figures showing that female associates and counsel in London took home 21.2% less in bonus pay than their male colleagues last year.
The report shows that the average pay gap for this group stood at 14.8%, with the overall gender pay gap for all employees and lawyers rising to 39.1%.
The firm's average bonus gap for all staff and lawyers stands at 52.3%.
Sixty per cent of those in Latham's lowest pay quartile are women, as are 80% of those in the lower middle quartile. In contrast, women make up 49% of the firm's highest earning quartile and just over half of the second highest.
Laura O'Flaherty, Latham human resources director for Europe and the Middle East, said: "Although the differential in average salaries between genders is significantly impacted by a number of factors, including roles within an organisation, demographics, expertise and seniority, it is nevertheless a useful tool for evaluation. We remain committed to creating a law firm as diverse and as dynamic as the world we live in, and we will continue to expand our efforts to increase diversity at our firm and in the legal industry at large."
Other US firms in London have also reported significant gender pay gap figures.
Latham's gender pay gap is higher than its key US peers including Weil & Gotshal (38.1%), Kirkland & Ellis (33.2%) and White & Case (24%). However, its bonus gap is eclipsed by Kirkland which stands at 62.3%.
The deadline for companies to report data to the government website is tomorrow (4 April).
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 AllTed Olson, Legal 'Titan' and Former US Solicitor General Who Argued Bush v. Gore, Dies
Baker McKenzie, Greenberg Traurig, Clyde & Co. Expand In Middle East
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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