When does the point come when partners can feel convinced that the economic uptick is not just a “false economic dawn”? Where is the juncture that partners agree that the GFC is over and decide to lift pay freezes? Do partners sit down and actually think about these things, or do they just keep one eye on Firm Spy to check if other firms are acting and, in the absence of such action, decide to do nothing?

partners having a chuckle

These are the questions which are playing strongly on the minds of lawyers/accountants across the nation. “The partners are f*cking us”, one eloquent contributor recently wrote. We agree. And the following anonymous tip, emailed to us yesterday, sent us over the edge:

I read with interest the comments made several days ago (ostensibly by an Allens Arthur partner) about the way AAR has apparently systematically revised down lawyer performance reviews, in many cases in the face of opposition of partners. I hold a senior position at Blake Dawson and while I cannot say there has been a focus on giving bad performance reviews despite good performance, a growing number of my senior colleagues have grown tired with the way the firm is handling the pay freeze. As of at least a few weeks ago, I know for a fact that Blakes is tracking at more than 20% over budget for 2009/2010 - certainly not the kind of performance that justifies the current pay conditions being levied against most lawyers. It is time for Blake Dawson to increase lawyer pay or risk losing a substantial number of lawyers. And yes… even I agree that this is “remuneration f*ck us”.

“F*ck-you” strike, anyone? The post the tipster is referring to about AAR noted the following:

Allens Arthur Robinson’s management are aware that legal salaries across all levels are below market rate (although this has not been acknowledged or communicated to staff). At some levels, the discrepancy is as much as 20% below market rate. Salary compression at junior levels is also critical. “Thawing the salary freeze” offers the opportunity for the firm to consider a revision of its approach to remuneration. This may result in changes to the calibrated lock-step system currently in place. After the introduction of a forced-rank distribution sytem for performance reviews in 2009, the firm “successfully achieved its distribution curve”. (ie the firm reduced the number of staff achieving an “exceptional” or “very strong” rating and increased the number of staff who received a “strong” or “underperforming” grade). Some partners complained that they felt compelled to impose a grade on staff they did not agree with. Lawyers complained about flaws within the calibration system itself, including the fact that lawyers might be disadvantaged if they did not have someone to “champion” them during the calibration process (ie if they do not work directly with a high-ranking partner).

So how do you feel about your pay freeze? Are you confident that the partners of your firm - people who probably regard themselves as having the highest moral fibre - are actually considering your interest in being remunerated fairly when deciding whether to lift your pay freeze? Or are they just holding out, lining their already fat pockets, waiting for one of the other big firms to move before they do something?

Pour your heart out to the Firm Spy. We are your voice. Send the Firm Spy your news and views!

Related posts

1. ‘We Will Revolt’; Warning to Blake Dawson Partners on Pay Freeze Fears A storm is brewing at leading Australian law firm Blake...
2. How Much Do Blake Dawson Partners Earn? AFR Law Firm Profit Survey Thanks to the AFR for the following profile: Partnership Remuneration System Performance-based...
3. Blake Dawson Says ‘No Pay Freeze’… Yet Wages to Remain Steady A huge news story is emerging at Blake Dawson this...
4. A Very Unhealthy 18%; Blake Dawson ‘F*ck-Us’ Exposed Some dynamite just in from a Blake Dawson spy! Last month we reported a controversial...
5. The Blake Dawson Wikipedia Scandal In the wake of the largest Australian law firm layoff,...