Is soaring NQ pay impacting trainee retention rates?

Avatar photo

By Lydia Fontes on

6

The Legal Cheek team discuss NQ salaries, retention rates, financial results and a petition to reform the SQE — listen now 🎙️

business man looking ้his shadow rich under money rain success concept vector

The Legal Cheek Podcast returns this week as publisher Alex Aldridge and writer Lydia Fontes discuss this week’s biggest legal news stories as firms have released financial results, trainee retention rates and some have further boosted salaries for newly qualified lawyers.

This week we kick off by discussing the NQ salary rises that firms have announced so far this summer. We dig into what this tells us about how the UK legal industry is performing and how the growing presence of US firms in London impacts these figures. We also address the concept of “salary bunching” as associates complain that their pay hasn’t risen in line with that of NQs.

We ask whether the continual rise in NQ pay may be having an affect of the amount of qualifying trainees that firms keep on, examining some anecdotal reports from our readers that retention rates may be dropping. We discuss the figures which firms have released so far and what they tell us about the NQ market this year.

Finally, we touch on a student-led petition to reform the Solicitors Qualifying Exams (SQE) which has garnered attention from mainstream media outlets as well as from former Home Secretary Suella Braverman. Is this an example of Gen Z snowflake culture (as Braverman suggests) or valid criticism of a flawed set of exams?

You can listen to the podcast in full via the embed above, or on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

6 Comments

West Indian & Co.

It does. Rather than 10x $175k NQs to handle execution pages and printing, we not require 3x only. The rest can be handled by AI and paralegal

Duh

Yes. What else did anyone expect?

Michael

Yes it does. I own a successful high street practice in a medium-size town, and it’s absolute madness what young lawyers expect these days!

We’ve had lawyers ask to be paid 60,000 pounds just for qualifying! When I qualified in 1992, I was paid £28,000, which was a good salary then.

I know there’s been inflation, but these new lawyers shouldn’t be paid more than 40 or 50k, maximum – that’s the way the world works. When you work hard and become a respected partner like me, then you can earn six figures, and not before.

Yes, “the times they are a changing”…

PEP Guardiola

Here is a link to a helpful inflation calculator, which shows that £28,000 in 1992 would be £61,915 today. Your trainees are selling themselves short! https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/inflation/inflation-calculator.

I don’t see why associates shouldn’t be paid well when city firms’ PEP has soared in recent years. The fixation on NQ salaries is tedious.

Fork found in kitchen

Tommy

Rather than blame trainees or NQs, perhaps we should be looking at the partners who have long gotten overinflated salaries and profit shares yet 95% of their work involves getting drunk with clients (paid for by the firm under the guise of ‘business development’).

Partners who complain about NQ pay sound just like the boomers who blame millennials / Gen Z for everything.

Join the conversation

Related Stories

Will AI really replace paralegals?

The Legal Cheek team discuss AI and the future of legal jobs — listen now 🎙️

Jul 9 2025 8:42am
9

Should law firms stand up to Trump?

The Legal Cheek team ask how law firms should react to Trump's hostile executive orders – listen now 🎙️

Apr 29 2025 1:17pm
1

Will DeepSeek get you a training contract?

The Legal Cheek team contemplate using AI for law applications — listen now 🎙️

Feb 10 2025 8:11am