_{What's the deal at your shop - minted or skint-ed?}

It might not be enough to distract from this week's big news at the firm, but staff at US firm Paul, Weiss (96%) are the most happy with their salary in UK private practice, RollOnFriday's Best Law Firm's to Work At 2026 survey has found.

Extremely satisfied

"King in the castle, king in the castle," said a senior lawyer at Paul,Weiss - presumably channelling Borat, rather than referencing Brad Karp. 

"Extremely well compensated," commented another lawyer, "although Rachel Reeves is doing her best to stop that."

Salary can fluctuate (presumably from very good to very, very, very good) as a junior lawyer confided: "Cravath pay, but tracks fluctuations in exchange rate from USD to GBP," clarifying, "NQs are on whatever the current GBP equivalent of US$225k is (not on GBP 180k)".

US firms dominate the top ten and Akin Gump (91%) placed second, with a delighted junior lawyer commenting: "I earn five times more than my university flatmate and she’s trying to cure cancer".

A fellow junior said: "I can buy a house in London at 29, while my uni mates are in flatshares of 6". While another comments: "Paid nearly twice what Starmer is and I supervise zero nuclear weapons, currently. No complaints."

In 3rd equal, a Debevoise & Plimpton (87%) lawyer stated that pay was "top of market with a decent exchange rate." For business services staff, "standards are high, but pay is as well".

Several green-eyed lawyers at other firms referenced Kirkland & Ellis (87%), which shares the third spot for its "excellent" salary. A junior lawyer noted "It’s good but the exchange rate cap does put a bit of a downer on some months," as the world's smallest violin plays in the background.

A business services staffer at the elite US firm said: "Kirkland pays well but with everything, you really work for your money. It's sometimes hard on your kids, but with the pay comes opportunities for them, so mummy can be on emails all the time".
  

Very satisfied

In the "very satisfied" category, HSF Kramer (81%) placed sixth. Starting off their career on a salary high, a trainee beamed: "I am an early 20s man with no discernible life skills or experience earning 60 grand a year." 

The survey's overall joint-winner Burges Salmon (79%) was in seventh spot. "£50k+ per year as a trainee feels very generous," said a trainee in Bristol. "Once you have accounted for deductions and the additional living costs of living in London, I don't think it is far off what trainees are earning at top City firms". 

At eighth-placed Horwich Farrelly (78%), a partner notes how the firm's alternative structure affects salary: "Extremely competitive - as a limited company, more of a meritocracy than most partnerships." 

In tenth-equal spot, a junior lawyer at Baker McKenzie (76%) said that while pay is "slightly below the Magic Circle firms" BM offered "more autonomy and flexibility" so it's "a good compromise."

Sharing the 10th spot is Goodwin Procter (76%), where as well as having "top of the market" salary, there's also "equal pay within PQE bands irrespective of your department, and there is one bonus target to hit."

Just outside of the top ten, a Hogan Lovells (73%) junior lawyer stated: "Clearly not top of market and bonuses could be better but I think it's fair given the culture and work/life balance aspects, which net that out in my opinion". A HogLove partner agreed: "We are a mid-Atlantic rather than a US firm, but I would sooner be here on lower drawings than have my soul extracted from me every day".

A Ropes & Gray (73%) lawyer stated: "Provided we hit 1900 hours (which I always do) we are paid Cravath, although a lot of this comes through the year end bonus. Can't ask for more really".

At Travers Smith (71%), a junior factored in the cost-savings on food when evaluating their pay cheque: "Paid less than some similar firms - but not having to pay for breakfast, lunch or dinner 5 days a week makes up for that". 

A Bird & Bird (71%) partner took the firm's work/life balance into consideration when summing up their salary satisfaction: "The pay is good, but it's really the whole package that makes this such an excellent place to be. You couldn't pay me enough to make it worth being at a US firm; here I get paid a very large amount whilst also having high levels of autonomy, supportive colleagues, great working environment etc."

Satisfied

In the satisfied category, a Macfarlanes (69%) lawyer commented: "Pay generally pretty good, though still not quite large enough jumps at senior levels." 

At Mills & Reeve (69%) a business services staffer had mixed feelings: "The firm has always paid slightly behind the market rate, and part of the 'deal' is that for this, you have better work life balance and a better culture than you would perhaps get elsewhere. That's fine, and many of us are happy with that, but over the last year that has been increased pressure to deliver, coupled with lower pay rises and bonuses."

At Michelmores (65%) one staffer stated: "I think we are well rewarded overall in terms of benefits and pay / bonus taken together, but it would always be great to earn more!"

There was a similar feeling at Ashurst (65%), where a junior lawyer thought the balance was about right: "Could be more, but any more and we'd be expected to work as much as a Links etc."

However, at Slaughter and May (65%) one junior felt they had a better deal than the rest of the Magic Circle: "Paid on par with other MC firms but without billable hours target and no face culture at all - whilst some of my greedier colleagues are perennially dissatisfied, I think this is a great deal, especially with the fact we have better benefits (holidays notably)".

At Trowers & Hamlins (65%) a junior lawyer reports that there's a "good starting salary, but the yearly increases are then poor" and the "Christmas bonus being removed and 'amalgamated' with performance bonus was a very poor move and no discernible increase in performance bonus noted." 

At HFW (62%) a business services staffer noted: "Could get paid (quite a lot) more elsewhere, but I actively like working here and probably have a better work/life balance than I would elsewhere."

And a TLT (61%) staffer had a similar view: "I know I could vastly improve my salary working for a different Law Firm, but TLT have great working flex and WFH options that really help me keep the cost of commute lower, with less time on trains and buses" noting "the only benefit of being in the office is to attend training and team meetings...I see more benefit spending my time actually doing my job."

Find the overall scores here.

Somewhat satisfied

In the 'somewhat satisfied' category, a Fieldfisher (59%) partner said "the new model means you’re rewarded for the business you bring in so there’s an incentive to upsell clients and do work for other partner’s clients now."

A Norton Rose Fulbright (59%) junior said they were "satisfied" with salary "but the firm needs to be careful with putting hours up and not reflecting pay. They need to remember where they sit in the market."

Pay at last year's Golden Turd Shakespeare Martineau (57%) was "not bad, but if it's supposed to be 'in line with market' and competing against the firms we say we want to, it's not good enough", said a junior lawyer.

A Dentons (57%) trainee in Scotland pointed to a disparity between the regions: "High by Scottish standards but lagging badly behind our compatriots in London and the hours are not much different, and the cost of living is increasing making many Scottish cities mirror London." 

(An Eversheds Sutherland (56%) senior lawyer also noted the imbalance in salary across offices: "Pay poor outside of London - where senior associates are regularly paid less than the junior associates in London they are supervising.")

Over at DAC Beachcroft (57%), a partner pointed to a different disparity: between departments. "The business seems to be very proud of just how much money the Partners and Equity in the LLP side of the business are earning, while laughing all the way to the bank at the poor underpaid Partners in the personal injury (CSG) side of the business." 

At Linklaters (57%) a senior associate was waiting for the next round of increases across the Magic Circle: "I wish Freshfields would hurry up and announce our next raise." 

A Taylor Wessing (56%) partner confided: "Pay for those who are allowed to hog credit for relationships that are the result of firm-wide efforts do very well. Laterals who talk a big game get paid big bucks too even if they prove to be full of hot air. Pay for the rest of us is okay, but some way off the firms we are supposedly going toe to toe with."

While at Shoosmiths (56%) "the firm is squeezing pay and many other benefits in favour of reaching it's financial goal," says one staffer.

At Freshfields (55%) a senior lawyer opined: "Salary is great but the trade-off is the culture and attitude of management is terrible".

A Clyde & Co (55%) staffer noted: "We always pay below benchmark. It's just what we do and I'm not sure it will ever change. I am still here and there are other things I value about being here but ultimately I still feel dissatisfied." 

An A&O Shearman (52%) staffer was also not best pleased with their pay:  "A&O wanted to become a US firm - now they are one they should probably also start paying their lawyers like one."
 

Somewhat dissatisfied

In the 'somewhat dissatisfied' bracket, a Mishcon de Reya partner stated that "Partner compensation is in essence a variant of the hunger games - albeit with the adding sprinkling that some 'Partners' (who are not fee earners...) get to play the games whilst respawning with more profit share each time they would otherwise be put to the sword".

A Weightmans (48%) senior lawyer stated that "chargeable hours targets look reasonable on paper but are completely undermined by a frankly heroic level of administration and assorted 'extras' that consume time and goodwill in equal measure". 

DWF (46%) "are way behind the rest of the market on pay.", said a junior lawyer.  "There is a lack of transparency around pay brackets and this leads to an unfair system where people with the same amount of years PQE are not being paid equally."

A Stephenson Harwood (44%) solicitor complained of "pay bunching for associates".  Which also appeared to be the case at Watson Farley & Williams (41%), where a senior lawyer noted: "The focus has been on raising NQ pay for years so there’s a lot of bunching together of associates. The difference between an NQ and the max for an associate is just over 40k now. Pay rises were abysmal this year - under inflation."  

At Golden Turd Broadfield (40%) there was "below market value pay and no transparency on pay brackets," says a senior lawyer. "Existing partners and employees are being left behind pay for shiny new employees. Morale is low."
 

Dissatisfied

The bottom trio of firms fell into the 'dissatisfied' category when it came to pay.

"Below market and hasn’t kept up with inflation the last few years," summed up a partner at Cripps (35%).

At Reed Smith (35%) a junior lawyer said they were "paid undermarket. The firm tries to market us as a full service US firm, however, they do not pay anywhere near US firms. 3 year PQEs at Reed Smith are paid less than NQs at magic/silver circles." While for business services staff at the firm: "They're demanding a lot more from us without upgrading our pay".

In last place, Gateley (32%) staff complained that the salary was "lagging behind the competition" and "as low as possible". 

"Salary increases are less than inflation" and there was "no bonus for support staff despite being sold this at interview", complained one empty-pocketed member of businesse services.