Allen & Overy releases partner gender pay gap data following criticism from MPs

By on

Magic circle outfit publishes 2018 and 2017 results

Magic circle player Allen & Overy (A&O) has released its long-awaited partner inclusive pay gap data. Publication of the fresh figures come just months after the firm was accused by the chair of a parliamentary select committee of refusing to “come clean” over its 2017 partner results.

Lumping total annual pay for all UK-based partners and employees together, A&O’s 2018 mean gender pay gap comes out at 61.2%. Its median is 39%. Taking its mega-earning partners out of the equation, its 2018 hourly gender pay gap sits at 20% (mean) and 32.8% (median) respectively. A&O is the first City law firm to release its 2018 results.

On this new partner pay gap data, A&O’s report states:

“Our overall gender pay gap is more pronounced when we include our partners because we have a much higher proportion of men than women in our partnership, as well as a higher number of men in the most senior partner positions. We are focused on reducing this year on year and know that achieving real progress relies on improving the gender balance at the most senior levels of our business.”

In June, we reported that the firm was subject to criticism after declining a request from the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) Committee to recalculate its 2017 gender gap including partners.

The 2018 Firms Most List

Linklaters and Clifford Chance already included the stats in their public pay reports, while Freshfields and Slaughter and May complied when written to by the committee. A&O was the only magic circle firm not to provide its partner data.

In a statement issued at the time, committee chair and MP for Leeds West, Rachel Reeves, accused the magic circle player of refusing to “come clean” and “dragging its feet” over the publication of partner figures. Responding, a spokesperson for A&O told Legal Cheek that the firm had already committed to publishing its partner results in September as part of its 2018 report.

So, Reeves will be pleased to see that today’s report also includes A&O’s 2017 partner results.

The firm’s backdated figures show a mean gap of 65% and a median gap of 42.1%. In March, A&O revealed a median hourly pay gap of 27.4% and a mean of 19.8% — both figures excluding partners.

Now public, how do A&O’s 2017 partner pay gap figures stack up against its magic circle rivals’?

Freshfields reported a mean pay gap, inclusive of partners, of 60.4%, while at Slaughter and May it was 61.8%. It is worth noting that both outfits had omitted partner figures when disclosing their pay gap data under the Equality Act regulations earlier this year.

Meanwhile, Clifford Chance and Linklaters included partner data in their 2017 gender pay reports, posting mean results of 66.3% and 60.3% respectively. However, Linklaters released its partner data around a month after its original report, amid growing calls for law firms to be more open about their gender pay gaps.

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek's careers events:

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub



“Wealthy men in male dominated industry are wealthy”.



Men continue to financially out-compete women at law-firms due to the different life choices that the genders (on average) freely choose to make.

The evidence that any of this is actually a problem remains at a big fat NIL!


What does this teaches us? That notwithstanding standing and wealth, people may still pick Sofitel over Westin or NH. Hard to believe


Or Ritz-Carlton for God’s sake!


Sofitel Munich is a really great hotel. City Centre, heritage building, 5 stars.


This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.


Great, one measuremnt number.

No indication of hours worked (billable and non billable) or levels of responsibility. Let’s just focus on the £££ in isolation then…….


Genuine question:

Is a trans employee counted, for statistical purposes, in the birth-assigned gender or their chosen gender?


How dare you even ask. This is 2018.


Outrageous that they do not have a gender fluid category… Its 2018 !


Surely if some of the men volunteered to be gender fluid, they could count themselves in the female category when they needed to demonstrate equality


It’s not a choice that should be abused or statistics!


Of course it’s a choice! If you are gender fluid, that means you change your mind about what gender you are all the time. So they could just say that they’re women one day. Simple stuff


I think the real issue is that every firm will have to have multiples of 58 partners in order to achieve true gender equality:

The following are the 58 gender options identified by ABC News:
Cis Female
Cis Male
Cis Man
Cis Woman
Cisgender Female
Cisgender Male
Cisgender Man
Cisgender Woman
Female to Male
Gender Fluid
Gender Nonconforming
Gender Questioning
Gender Variant
Male to Female
Trans Female
Trans* Female
Trans Male
Trans* Male
Trans Man
Trans* Man
Trans Person
Trans* Person
Trans Woman
Trans* Woman
Transgender Female
Transgender Male
Transgender Man
Transgender Person
Transgender Woman
Transsexual Female
Transsexual Male
Transsexual Man
Transsexual Person
Transsexual Woman


Or we good go with Humans…..


People with different gender identity aren’t human?


If a person who is physically and biologically male has the right to be recognised as female, why do I (who am physically and biologically human) denied the right to be recognised as a zebra?


Because you’re actually just a race-fluid horse

Join the conversation

Related Stories