Lawyers prefer cash over perks – survey

Topics: Law firm & practice management

  • Print
  • Share
  • Comments (11)
  • Save

Related images

  • Money

Employers could be wasting money on workplace perks, according to research showing that lawyers would rather receive higher salaries than other incentives.

Workplace perks were highly valued by 42.9% of legal professionals who responded to a survey by online job site CV-Library.

Advertisement

However, when asked to choose between perks at work and a pay rise, 93% of legal workers would opt for the money, especially in the post-Christmas months ‘when money is notoriously tight’.

More than 2,400 UK professionals took part in the survey to determine how workers feel about perks offered by their employers.

More than a quarter (28.6%) of legal professionals said they received perks at work which, according to CV-Library, is higher than the national average of 24.3%.

Free food was cited as the top perk, followed by free trips and vouchers, early finishes and ‘money savers’ such as gym membership.

CV-Library managing director Lee Biggins said: ‘When ran effectively, workplace perks can go to great lengths to creating a happy and productive workforce.

‘However, it’s important that perks aren’t used as a replacement for fair salaries and bonus schemes, especially if you’re bringing staff on board in January, when many employees experience a funding drought after the Christmas period.

‘Legal professionals have revealed that higher salaries and bonuses are more important than workplace perks, and businesses need to take this into consideration when recruiting for their vacancies.’

Readers' comments (11)

  • How lucky some people are to even get a choice! I would kill for some perks or a decent salary! Instead, I get neither!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous7 January 2016 12:02 pm beat me to the punch.

    I was actually laughed at by a machinist the other day because they're on £10K (I am on less than £30K) more than me and I got into £30K work of debt to get to where I am.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anon 12:09,

    That reminds of the joke about the barrister who arrived home one Friday night to find his house flooded by a water leak. He called a plumber. Just as the plumber had finished investigating the source of the problem, the barrister asked him how much the work would cost.

    'That's a perfectly fair question,' said the plumber. 'You've called me out at 10 o'clock on a Friday night, so there's my emergency call-out charge of £300. The work itself is relatively straightforward and should take no more than two hours, at an emergency hourly rate of £300. Your parts will add another £150, then you've got VAT on top of the lot, and there's your price.'

    The barrister looked aghast. 'My father sweat blood to send me to Charterhouse, and I sweat my own blood getting in to Oxford. Since then, I've carved out a niche for myself in an area of law in which I am acknowledged as a leading practitioner. Clients from all over the country beat a path to my door, yet I can't charge anything like £300 an hour.'

    'No' said the plumber, 'Nor could I when I was at the Bar.'

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If you wanted perks you should have started work in the 1980s.

    Generous travelling expenses plus a company paid for car.

    Pension and private health insurance.

    Huge long lunches/pub breaks with colleagues twice a week or so.

    Not to mention the job that compared to now was an absolute piece of cake.

    I know that I'm looking at this through rose tinted lenses when I compare my day now to then and compare remuneration now to then. Well, there is no comparison

    nor any perks.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • And yet we go on training ever more lawyers for a shrinking market simply because the courses are available in numerous higher educational institutions which need to be filled to ensure survival.. What happens thereafter is not their concern, they have done there bit and charged the going rate leaving a debt burden that may never be cleared on the shoulders of their former alumni.
    Hence the legal profession remain trapped in a never ending sequence of academia and practice with the former offering a promising future in a sadly depleted market place especially for those who achieve the best grades. Sadly for many if not for most the outcome is disappointing.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • When will youngsters comprehend that there just is no decent pay nor conditions in general legal practice these days; only stress and worry. Legal qualifications do not mean - good pay or good job

    They just don't seem to be able to accept these facts to be the case, even when they are presented very clearly by various commentators over and over again. Presumably this refusal to accept the obvious truth is caused by the misconceptions engendered in them (and their parents) by many years of the 'untouchable, fat cat' lawyer image of yesteryear which must truly be very deeply ingrained in their consciousness.

    LB

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I would have thought that was obvious.

    Unless the perks can somehow avoid being taxed, and so cost less than the value you receive, any normal person would rather have cash. With cash, you decide what you can do with it. With perks someone else decides whether you get something you want or something that is more or less useless - but you still have to pay tax on it.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @Anonymous 7 January 2016 02:42 pm

    ".....If you wanted perks you should have started work in the 1980s.

    Generous travelling expenses plus a company paid for car.

    Pension and private health insurance.

    Huge long lunches/pub breaks with colleagues twice a week or so.

    Not to mention the job that compared to now was an absolute piece of cake.

    I know that I'm looking at this through rose tinted lenses when I compare my day now to then and compare remuneration now to then. Well, there is no comparison

    nor any perks. "

    Nor any Unions.

    Nor any Professions.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Raymond Goddard is obviously bored today!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Very. Actually last night, because I was waiting to go out and kicking my heels and biding time.

    True though that the Claims Handling Society is merely a picture of gun to hold up to the Govt. ?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10per page20per page

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

  • Print
  • Share
  • Comments (11)
  • Save

Advertisement

Sign up for email news alerts

Daily Update. Keep abreast of the latest developments that affect the profession

PRACTICES FOR SALE, MERGERS, ACQUISITION & ASSOCIATION

SOLICITOR, RETIRING, seeks to dispose of general private client practice in Finchley North London londonlegalservices@outlook.com

EXPERIENCED PRACTITIONER with a following wishes to acquire a small practice preferably in the London area or nearby. Please contact: enquiries578@gmail.com

SELLING? MERGING? VALUING? Acquiring? Free information from 01494 483728. raymondafox@aim.com www.BottomLineConsultancy.com or www.SolicitorSupermarket.biz

Browse the magazine

Current Issue

The Gazette offers you up-to-the-minute national and international news, opinion, features, in-depth articles plus a jobs and appointments section.

Please click the link below for a digital edition