News

Norton Rose Fulbright unveils 90% autumn retention score

By on
18

Global giant retains 28 out of 31 rookies

Training contract retention rate law students Norton Rose Fulbright

Norton Rose Fulbright (NRF) has revealed its autumn 2018 trainee retention score.

Of the 31 trainees due to qualify this September, 28 were offered permanent positions at the international outfit’s London office — all accepted. This hands NRF, which offers around 45 training contract positions each year, a solid autumn retention score of 90%.

Today’s news is a marked improvement on the firm’s spring score. On that occasion, the global titan kept hold of just 18 of its 24 newly qualified (NQ) lawyers (plus two on fixed-term deals), equating to a score of 75%. The 59-office-outfit recorded a rate of 62% (16 out of 26) last autumn and 83% (20 out of 24) in spring 2017.

The 2018 Firms Most List

Legal Cheek‘s Firms Most List shows newbie associates at the firm’s London HQ will earn £77,000 upon qualification. First year trainees start on a recently improved salary of £45,000, rising to £49,000 in year two.

A number of top City outfits have now confirmed their autumn retention scores.

Earlier this week, we reported that 43 of Linklaters’ 59 qualifying trainees were staying put, handing the firm an autumn rate of 73%. Meanwhile, Herbert Smith Freehills and Charles Russell Speechlys notched up results of 82% (31 out of 38) and 88% (23 out of 26) respectively.

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

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub

18 Comments

Anton

It’s not 100% though, is it?

(1)(1)

Anonymous

Go away, you braying mule!

(0)(0)

Anonymous

I love their office. They have soft toilet paper.

(7)(0)

Barry from the local

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

(2)(1)

Anonymous

Wink wink Barry

(0)(0)

Barry from the local

Who the f*ck are you? Stay away or you’ll eat fist.

(2)(0)

Trev

No need to be such a pr*ck Barry

(2)(0)

Anonymous

Ah yes the firm who charged double my hourly rate in a case recently. Wondering if their clients receive twice the level of skill and service.

(8)(2)

Anonymous

likely so – given they still wish to pay them

(9)(2)

Anonymous

Hah. OP got told.

(5)(3)

Anonymous

Nope. They were an odd panel nomination due to a conflict.

(3)(0)

Anonymous

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

(0)(0)

Greenberg Glusker NQ

Is it a top firm?

(1)(1)

Pillsbury Winthrop Trainee

No WE are a top firm.

(0)(2)

Dorsey NQ

Utter BS, Dorsey always ahead.

(0)(1)

Anonymous

Ha, some folk at crappy random US outposts tryna claim they’re “top”…you’re not even white shoe m8!

(3)(1)

Greenberg Glusker NQ

How dare you

(1)(0)

Anonymous

zzzz

(5)(0)

Comments are closed.