Our recent report, Disloyal lawyers: has the partner track lost its lustre?, explores the shifting ambitions of associates and the future of the partnership model. Our report demonstrates that the partnership model, with lawyers working up the ranks, no longer seems inevitable.
The implications are being felt across the legal sector globally. UK and US law firms are witnessing changing priorities, struggling with retention and recruitment, and trying to meet the demands of the moment.
Here, we compare UK and US law firms' associate expectations, exploring key differences in pay, work-life balance, and career development.
Our report revealed that 71% of associates place work-life balance on their list of top priorities. That's partly driven by new opportunities: lawyers have more options and more potential career paths than ever, ranging from freelancing to alternative legal service providers, and platform law. But shifting ambitions are also driven by negative perceptions: the report shows that associates believe partners suffer from a , which puts off many aspiring lawyers. However, this is only one side of the story.
When asked which changes would encourage associates to remain at their existing firms, our report found that 70% of associates referenced a higher salary and only 36% referenced a better work-life balance. Work-life balance is clearly a priority, but pay can prove decisive. One solicitor, with two decades of experience working in human rights and civil litigation, neatly summed up the situation: "In my experience, in the early stages of their career very few [junior lawyers] favour experience and knowledge over remuneration."
Pay has long been a retention problem for UK firms. The survey suggested that US law firms are pushing their way into the UK legal market, partly due to their ability to offer higher pay packages. The top UK firms pay roughly 35-40% less than US peers, according to a . Even Magic Circle firms aren't able to match elite firms when it comes to associate salaries, despite the continuous US expansion.
UK firms largely operate , with partner seniority determining pay. That means your hierarchical position, or rank alone determines pay, with elements such as skill level, performance, or qualification playing no role. That can prove problematic for upcoming associates. If you're a top-performing lawyer, generating huge profits for your firm, you might resent subsiding older partners and having to wait a long time to earn your worth.
US firms largely operate on a meritocratic compensation model which can prove enticing in terms of recruitment and retention. It attracts the best of the best, the best partners from UK firms, and the best upcoming lawyers, because the highest performers are typically attracted to that model. It's why, according to , US firms have won the war for for partner talent.
But, as top UK firms continue their expansion into the US market, the pay differences might change. Paul Lewis, Managing Partner at , recently that 'lockstep is not an issue anymore' when it comes to compensation for lateral hires. But how that will play out in practice remains to be seen. It's clear, however, that UK firms need to rethink compensation models if they want to recruit and retain the best talent.
As mentioned, US firms often pay significantly more than UK firms. But UK firms seem to perform better in terms of assuring a greater work-life balance. And a better work-life balance has become exceptionally important. As shown in the , staff across the whole sector have sought a work-life reset after the pandemic, with more than two-thirds (67%) of employees re-evaluating how they spend their time. 72% believe that employers need to rethink what work means to employees.
The increased priority for a better work-life balance has led to considerable changes in the US and UK. According to our Disloyal lawyers report: "Most firms experienced several waves of staff turnover during and directly after the pandemic. The Great Resignation saw lawyers readjust their career priorities, especially regarding work-life balance." UK firms are already taking positive steps especially with remote and flexible working.
One key difference between UK and US firms is working hours. UK lawyers are working long, hard hours, but compared to the US and global firms, UK firms fare well. measured start and finish times for lawyers across a range of law firms and found junior lawyers at UK firms work just over 10 hours a day, compared to 14 hours in US and global firms. US firms often have more competitive work cultures, which can create stress and unhealthy expectations.
Consider billing targets. Elite US firms expect associates to bill. But even Magic Circle firms set lower targets, typically around 1,700-1,900 hours. UK firms have often cited reduced billing hours to counter the allure of US pay packets. Associates might gain higher compensation, UK firms claim, but they have to work harder for that pay.
Be at the forefront of the generative AI revolution, join Lexis+ AI Insiders today and stay ahead of the curve.
UK and US firms both face competition, from various places, in various forms. The once-assumed legal career paths are changing: partnership models are no longer assumed. And both UK and US law firms are meeting the challenges. For example, UK firm introduced the 'Legal Director' route. This gives top-performing associates the option of taking on high responsibility and autonomy, without the financial responsibilities or business obligations of a partner. The route will help retain top talent and enables progression, without the work-life imbalance associated with partnership.
US firm has also created a 'Professional Attorney' track which resembles the 'Legal Director' route in that it provides career advancement, skills development and firm involvement with no business development obligations. In the , CEO David Foltyn, reported that as of 2022, roughly 20 Honigman lawyers had pursued the attorney track. Firms in the US, such as , and , have also slashed the expected time of the partner track, appealing to top-performing associates.
UK firms are offering less stressful, less demanding career paths. For example, offer a scheme called 'switch on/switch off', which allows associates to reduce their core hours to 0.9/0.8 FTE in exchange for a reduction in pay. The scheme boosts flexibility, retains talent, and ensures a long-term career path. The move will likely prove popular with associates . The reduced-hour career path may also prove popular with other responsibilities, such as parents and carers.
US firms, such as , are changing the nature of their partner track, minimising the target hours. As we've seen above, US firms typically demand long hours, but Lathrop GPM are giving associates options of billion 1,600 or 1,900 hours per year, allowing greater flexibility and a better work-life balance. Both US and UK law firms, as we've seen, are reacting in various ways.
Delve into the full insights in our report, Disloyal lawyers: has the partner track lost its lustre? Download today!
* denotes a required field
0330 161 1234