Does anyone mind telling me what a new fixed-share partner in a City law firm earns?

[AmongTheNarcissi]

Not really AIBU (although maybe a bit unreasonable to ask friends and relations...)

I am a senior associate in a mid-tier City firm. 7 years PQE, IP specialism. Currently earn £102 000. Pay for associates in my firm is generally thought to be on the low side. I am going through the partner selection process at the moment and am hopeful of being offered fixed-share partnership soon. At which point I will have to negotiate my renumeration package from what I feel is a position of weakness as I have no idea of the norm. I have no good friends who are partners yet and can't ask colleagues (or at least they can't tell me). Online salary surveys are hopelessly vague.

If anyone is able to share their experiences of salary negotiation and what a reasonable sum might be, I would be very grateful!

I also don't see what the problem is with the OP posting here. Quite a few mums might be in similar positions, their spouses might be or perhaps they know what the going rate for those roles are.

I recently went for interview and was offered the position. It's a short term contract and I wasn't really that keen so I asked for the max salary they stated, said I'd only work 4 days a week and a couple of other things and they agreed to it all. It was a revelation . Now I just have to see if I have the balls to do it for a job I actually want!

littleolewimedrinkerme - that sounds similar to my billings- 600k/950k.
Interesting that you negotiated a bonus pegged to billings. I should be able to exceed my billings target so it would be in my interests to do something similar.

thesaurusgirl you are onto something with the salary negotiation classes- I can't be the only one who find the whole process excruciating !

Can't help you but good luck with the process!

DrMaybe you are quite right. How are we going to achieve fair and equal pay when the only people who know the 'going rate' are those doing the job already and who probably don't expect those of us in skirts to command that rate anyway?

It can't just be an issue in the law or the City. I bet women in all professions come across this at some point. My sister works in the public sector and once discovered a guy with the same (extensive) professional qualifications and experience to her was paid 2 points higher up on the salary scale- just because he'd asked to be!

WandyMum No-one is salaried/FS partner for a couple of years. That's not how it works any more, these days you're looking at five if you're exceptional and never if you're on the Mummy Track.

During that time of course you have to negotiate, otherwise each year that your salary stalls and inflation rises you're accepting a pay cut in real terms despite increased experience and, hopefully, seniority.

I've just sent a lengthy PM reply to someone but it's worth restating that the unspoken 'rules' are different for women and you can coast for a little while if you have young children, provided you play the game in other ways. It's not so easy for men.

Equity is a whole different game but it's a really poisonous one. By that time you may be taking home a normal person's lifetime earnings annually, but you'll deserve them. It's not an inexorable process, it's a proper achievement.

The other thing worth mentioning is that the OP has done spectacularly well even to be a contender for FS partner.

Many firms have stopped making people up entirely, and others are letting the equity numbers deflate by waiting for senior partners to retire, except they're not doing so because their pensions have suffered in the recession.

There's a significant backlog of lawyers who would have been made up no problem seven years ago who are still slogging away as associates despite eight figure billings.

thesaurusgirl - I'd be wary of such generalisations.

It varies wildly from firm to firm depending on the nature of the partnership, its values, profitability etc... The process of shifting up the ranks to equity is even more secretive than getting salaried partnership and of course equity partners move less regularly so it is almost impossible to generalise these days.

I know from personal experience that you are wrong (sorry)

Mintyy, people like you who accuse posters of "flashing their cash" are exactly why women are routinely paid less than men. You might not understand why, but your attitude is one that you should be ashamed of.

OP good luck.

Am I? Care to explain why?

Sorry, that wasn't as clear as I intended. The point about equity partner moves being rare is that they come into contact with the recruitment industry less often which, coupled with firms secretiveness, means it is very difficult to get an overview of procedures across the firms.

Read DrMaybe's post at the top of this page.

Neither you or DrMaybe know a thing about me, so I find your accusations laughable.

Souljacker Congrats! You've played it just right. Most women don't ask so they don't get.

I've placed several people in exec jobs which are only 4 days a week, and in some cases those people don't even have kids. They just refused to accept anything other than the terms they wanted, and happened to have a sought-after skill. Employers think they'll get the same number of hours for 20% less money so they say yes more often than they say no. Yet how many women complain that there are no part-time senior roles?

Wow, it's like a whole other language here!

I have nothing to add except to say, fantastic on you OP for wanting to be better informed and be paid what you are worth. Don't undersell yourself. Good luck with the negotiations. I am all for transparency with wages as otherwise it disadvantages women. Remember to come back and let us know what you end up earning (for transparency's sake, of course).

As you work in the industry Wandy, of course you will know more than I do.

But I've not met a lawyer in literally years who has spent just a "couple of years" in FS - at any firm, not just the notorious ones.

I do agree that it's impossible to compare across firms and sectors, but the OP was referring specifically to MC firms, all of which my colleagues deal with on a daily basis.

Actually Op was referring to her "mid-tier" firm, I have her confused with another poster.

Yabu for posting in aibu without a aibu!

Re salary, always take what you think and add some

How much you are paid is directly proportionate to the amount you are billing IME.

So, you might be sponsored well - ie have a heavy duty sponsor or rainmaker giving you a load of billings - but it is still a load of billings (and billings means bunce - this is how things work tbh)

Or you might be an absolute star and rainmaker in your own right - ie have those billings because you have clients who are loyal to you and only you.

In the absence of either of the above you will find life an awful lot harder.

I would also say that people aim for promotion without thinking. It's just the next stage in their minds. But actually, with each promotion and each payrise comes an additional level of risk. I have just been trying to explain this to my No2. He has just had a super promotion and a super payrise. I have been trying to explain to him that this is brilliant but it comes with strings and additional performance measures. If I don't get that message through to him properly he will be out of the firm within 12 months.

I think it's about 150-180k based on information we were given at a recent training session on running a law firm. But am lowly dredge so unsure for definite.

Well done you though. Hope interviews etc go well

Why is talking about salary "flashing the cash" Mintyy?

I'm heading home now but something everyone should know: a headhunter will charge 10%-15% of your annual salary to replace you with an external candidate. Anything you ask by way of pay rise will be cheap by comparison.