To think that no newly qualified lawyer can be worth a salary of £150k?

By that stage, all candidates will have had three years of identical teaching at university, so they enter the fray on a level playing field. By that stage, where they went to school is immaterial.

An NHS consultant won't be working 60-70 hours per week. That's why they are able to do one day a week private practice

A law degree (or mine was) is a lot of work as in large volume of subjects. Not particularly academically rigorous I’d agree and that tends to follow through to a lot of solicitors, albeit barristers are a different story.

And yes before anyone starts it was a good university

To add to this, the money used to increase the wages for NQ lawyers was (I’m almost definite) taken out of the non lawyers bonus/pay rises and they are currently taking the fall out with extremely low bonuses and pay rises this year. And I’m talking barely in the three digit type bonuses for qualified and experienced staff at a ‘top law firm’.

What demographics summary are you referring to?

I’m not entirely convinced that this is for real. Even at law school people know what earnings are in different firms. Also it would be updated in the Law Society Gazette etc.

I worked as a consultant straight out of grad school. It’s a similar situation. Crazy high salaries, expense accounts, billion dollar clients, and work weeks that destroy personal lives and send people to early graves.

That salary is a pittance compared to the billable rates being charged and the hours people are putting in.

its amazing training. I eventually decided to step out for a slower and more ethical path and was able to secure my dream job. I don’t regret my time in the trenches at all.

These are the cream of the crop and top of their game - ie MC partners and KCs. NQs are not (yet). And so many flop. Academic distinction and surviving a training contract does not itself a great lawyer make!

OP, it's a completely different market. I'm the same as you, a qualified chartered accountants whose never even been paid enough to be a higher rate taxpayer as I'm working out in the sticks with a very small private practice. The fact your qualification is the same is completely irrelevant. The market, the customers, the type of work will be massively different. A bit like an expensive boutique hotel compared with a seaside B&B or a pair of Louboutin shoes compared with Tesco's own label - do the same job, but very different market/clientelle. I used to get annoyed at seeing younger and what I thought were less experienced accountants working in Big 4 firms earning 2/3/4 times what I earned, but then I realised that I'd not get near the kind of work they're doing, i.e. multi million pound deals, highly complex structures, etc., compared with me preparing the tax return of a local kebab shop!

My son left Uni last year and has got a job in one of the UK's largest pension/insurance firms, earning an absolute shed load considering his lack of experience and that he's basically "just a trainee", but, by God, they work him hard and have very high expectations from him, already chairing meetings, dealing on a daily basis with their branches throughout the World, dealing daily with figures of tens of millions of pounds. It's Worlds apart from the kind of thing he'd be doing in a local private firm of insurance brokers or financial advisors even though he's doing the same studying/exams for the same professional qualifications!

No, they're not. However, I don't suppose a newly qualified solicitor is really what they are paying for. They are using the salary to attract the best graduates who are money motivated and will moulded into experienced practitioners in the future. Along the way, they can weed out the ones who don't make the cut.

Law firms manage their junior people do very, very badly. This has not improved over the nearly 30 years since I qualified. When will the model finally break?

Spot on!!!

I’ve been lucky enough to work with a fair few magic circle partners and KCs; these are super-bright people. The analytical ability, the command of detail, the articulacy can be awe inspiring.
thats why they get paid a lot ….

One of the Magic Circle firms is now starting NQ's a £180K.
An NHS consultant would be lucky to get that after 20 years.
Nice to know that we have our priorities sorted.

Regardless of worth it or not, it’s not a life I would wish on anyone. My friend’s daughter is one of these super clever new recruits. Never sees her boyfriend, has to cancel evening plans and holidays at short notice and works hideous hours. A shell of her bright bubbly self. My friend was so proud and now all she does is worry.

OP you may not have the salary but I daresay you have an easier life, if what you say about your salary is true.

The short answer is they are not worth it. I speak from experience of having worked in City law for 20+ years.

There was huge wage inflation post-covid. It was focussed at NQ level. Charge out rates could only go up so much without driving clients away so there is now a lot of salary bunching. You used to be able to expect a decent pay rise each year as you gained more experience but the increases are now small with many experienced lawyers just below partner level (who really add value to a team) paid little more than the NQs. I was a partner in an international firm and saw the salary spread and wage increases across the team. We lost some really good senior associates who were pissed off at their unimpressive pay rises.

Magic circle is where the big ££ is

I don't think any client would think an NQ for £X amount per hour is worth it and I find it hard to believe an NQ is worth that - but as other people say, they're absolutely beasted for it.

I always thought (when I was just out of uni) that firms who had gyms and GPs on site sounded amazing not realising it meant you'd never leave the work.

I'm in a top 20 firm but wouldn't want to be in a MC firm.

You are extremely underpaid for your experience/level in the company if you’re working full time.

This is a You problem not a them problem. Ask for more or move where you’re paid properly.

Unless you’re working many less hours and/or for pro-bono work,
youre underpaid/

A lot of London lawyers are getting the London factor in their pay.
8-8, commutes for an hour each way, stressful workloads.

To be honest, your salary sounds really low. I'm a teacher (Head of Department) and I also earn more than you. Partner of a law firm, only £60k?

@SingleMummyHere1
I think the real intellectual demands of law come much later - usually at partner level or as a judge or barrister. It’s having to design a whole transaction or see how some small change in the facts or law affects your client’s position or apply old law to a new technology / business model, often under severe time pressure.

I work in tax, which is quite technical. Getting your head round the rules can be tricky but applying them to real situations and deciding between various options is a different level. It’s nothing like learning the ratio of Donoghue v Stevenson. It’s the equivalent of claiming that rocket science is easy because you passed GCSE physics.

I agree there are plenty of more intellectually demanding careers that pay less and what law really requires is very good analytical ability, which is not the highest form of intelligence. But intellect is certainly a key factor in our recruitment process, not because it’s required to put together a bundle etc. but because it’s usually required in future partners.

YABU to refer to them as snobby London firms. 60k for a partner sounds very low. I hope you enjoy your job, but I'm guessing you practice in an area of law that isn't very lucrative, or you aren't able to get high paying clients.

At the end of the day, like any profession, there's a wide spectrum. The solicitor who sorts your bog standard house sale might be super clever but they don't need to be to follow a fairly basic process; the solicitor negotiating terms for a multi million acquisition probably does need to be very intelligent. These firms want the best of the best and need to pay what the market demands to get it.

Maybe they’re better than you?

I don't know anyone who was 'super bright' who went into law, it was a mix of people who wanted to do the provincial practice with a safe and reliable profession with a good salary living in the location they wanted (presumably like the OP) and those who were willing to sell their soul to chase the money in London. The 'super bright' people I knew all wanted an intellectual challenge and were less worried by the salary so did PhDs and went into research either in academia or in industry, basically they wanted to be more creative than law allows.

You sound very bitter OP - nurses in the US make that. It's probably about time firms in the UK started paying people fairly for the work they do.