Despite constant movement of lawyers between legal departments and private practice, a visiting in-house legal expert has called for the end of remuneration comparisons between the two.
Richard Stock, from Catalyst Consulting, who is in Australia to present the findings of the 2010 Legal Department Benchmarking Report, said comparing in-house and private practice is like comparing “apples and oranges”: “It’s really long overdue to stop comparing pay between law firms and those who work in corporate and government sectors,” he said.
“I think the pay structures in legal departments are really quite different to how law-firm employees and equity partners make money. You are paid a lot less based on your personal performance than you are on how the company does. Your [in-house legal staff] point of reference is not how much you get paid compared to [lawyers in] law firms, it’s how your industry is paying and how you are paid compared to others in your company,” Stock said.
He added that personal contribution and personal merit were much more important to the overall remuneration received in a private-practice law firm than in an in-house legal department, where lawyers are paid to be part of a team.
The Legal Department Benchmarking Report is complied by the Australian Corporate Lawyers Association and Corporate Lawyers Association New Zealand every two years. The report outlines more than 100 tips for legal departments to improve the method in which they do business, and how law firms can make collaborations between the two parties more effective.
A detailed look at the report’s findings will appear in the September issue of ALB Magazine.
Related stories: