[cbbg]

Is the discrepancy really this big?

General:
UK: £22,486-£54,952 (~$34,904.44-$85,294.01), according to http://www.payscale.com/research/UK/...licitor/Salary
US: $44,741-$167,371, according to http://www.payscale.com/research/US/..._Lawyer/Salary

Starting salaries of lawyers at an international firm that I was looking at:
UK: £61,000 (~$94,687.38)
US: $160,000

Factoring in years of experience:
UK: http://www.payscale.com/research/UK/...ars_Experience
US: http://www.payscale.com/research/US/...ars_Experience

The time and cost of uni + law school tends to be significantly higher in the US than the time and cost of undergrad law or uni + law conversion in the UK.

UK: 3 years + 1 year (undergrad law + LPC), or 3 years + 2 years (undergrad non-law + GDL + LPC) = 4 to 5 years, and could likely cost over £19,000 (the 4-year route) or £28,000 (the 5-year route)

US: 4 years + 3 years (uni + law school) = 7 years, and could likely cost over $300,000

Factoring in the above, if you had the choice to practice law in either country, which would you be more likely to shoot for?

[amyelizabeth2681]

I grew up in the US fascinated with the US legal system, yet I'll be studying law in the UK come September . I think if you look at it purely for monetary reasons, you're more likely to make more money in the US. As soon as you pass the Bar, you can practice law. Unlike the UK, there is no division between barristers in solicitors. The same lawyer in the US can draft contracts just as much as he can appear in a court room. Not to mention, litigation is a lot more active in the US. Mass torts for instance bring in a lot of cash for lawyers, whereas that aspect of law is a bit more restricted in the UK.

That being said however, I would never EVER trade my education in the UK for one in the US. The utter cost of studying to be a lawyer is absolutely daunting. The barriers to entry are ridiculously high, especially if you want to go to a top university. It's sad just how restrictive the profession is in the US and brilliant students are forced to study at sub par community colleges just because it's cheaper. However, in the UK, the financial help available to students helps bridge this gap and help the best legal minds get to the best law schools.

I also got the impression that in the US, the practice of law is more cut throat, and can even be downright sleazy. The honourability of the profession seems to have gone out the window. After all, they don't call them "sharks" or "ambulance chasers" for nothing. Overall, I'd pick the UK, but that's my own opinion.

[jacketpotato]

Before the credit crunch there was a salary war amongst the US firms in New York which didn't catch on in London.

If you look at offices outside New York and take into account the fact the top UK firms pay for the GDL/LPC, the difference is smaller. But its still true that New York firms pay their junior associates more.

Personally, if I had a choice, I would practice in New York. The attitude is a bit less stuffy than in England and junior lawyers do get paid more. Having studied the legal system, I find it a bit more interesting - the interface between federal and state systems is more challenging than the England-centric system we have here. However, I don't really have a choice. I'm not a US citizen so I don't have the right to work in the US; and in terms of your legal knowledge switching from being an English lawyer to a New York lawyer is not straightforward.

[Brevity]

If your aim is profit maximisation, in the short to medium term, you can definitely earn more money in the UK. For instance, let's consider Sullivan and Cromwell:

UK:

BA: £40,000 (approx.)
LPC: -- (paid for)
Trainee: £50,000
NQ: £97,500

Debt: £40,000 (without interest--since its pegged to inflation it's essentially 0).
Pay by NQ: £197,500

US:

BA: $165,000 (approx. from http://www.cnbc.com/id/41603641/Ivy_...e_of_Admission)
JD: $217,800 (approx. from http://www.law.harvard.edu/prospecti...on10--it'd have to be somewhere like Harvard, T14 at least, to make SullCrom)
Associate: $160,000

Debt: £244,444 (approx. at today's conversion rate) (with substantial interest, since there're no government loan).
Pay by NQ: £102384

In this example, you have £200,000 less debt, a significant smaller amount of interest to pay annually (which, when you factor in the amount of time it would take you to pay off £244,444, becomes quite considerable), having earned two years more money. Even if the education costs are overstated somewhat (and even including bonuses that you could obtain by, say, clerking for a Supreme Court Justice), you can see how, if profit maximisation is your goal, studying law in England and working at US law firm is easily more profitable than attending HLS and working at a white shoe firm in New York.

(This obviously doesn't factor in the difficulties of making partner which, as we all know, is where the big money lies. However, the chances of making partner at somewhere like SullCrom are so small, whether you're in London or New York, I think it would be foolhardy to factor that into your calculations).

[jacketpotato]

(Original post by Brevity)
If your aim is profit maximisation, in the short to medium term, you can definitely earn more money in the UK.

You are right, but its important to remember that a tiny number of people get this deal. Its a bit of an anomaly stemming from the fact that SullCrom and others need to pay New York rates to junior lawyers to get them to move to London, and have decided to pay the same to their English associates.

I've been looking at moving to a top-tier US firm when I qualify. It seems that there are only two firms in the whole of London which pay £100k to NQs that are currently recruiting. This equates to something like three or four NQs who are hired from other firms in the whole of London, plus a handful of trainees who are retained by the firm.

[jjarvis]

(Original post by jacketpotato)
You are right, but its important to remember that a tiny number of people get this deal. Its a bit of an anomaly stemming from the fact that SullCrom and others need to pay New York rates to junior lawyers to get them to move to London, and have decided to pay the same to their English associates.

I've been looking at moving to a top-tier US firm when I qualify. It seems that there are only two firms in the whole of London which pay £100k to NQs that are currently recruiting. This equates to something like three or four NQs who are hired from other firms in the whole of London, plus a handful of trainees who are retained by the firm.

Interested to know why moving to a top-tier US firm appeals to you. Is it the hierarchy, higher pay, opportunities? I'm not sure I'll end up wanting to stay at the firm where I qualify long-term (agnostic about it at the moment), but I'm interested in what factors into your decision.

[Brevity]

(Original post by jacketpotato)
I've been looking at moving to a top-tier US firm when I qualify. It seems that there are only two firms in the whole of London which pay £100k to NQs that are currently recruiting. This equates to something like three or four NQs who are hired from other firms in the whole of London, plus a handful of trainees who are retained by the firm.

I'd be interested to know which those two are. The only firm that I know pays £100k to NQs was Bingham (and you wouldn't really want to go there because it's not really in the top tier of US firms). I suppose some of the higher paying ones would be willing to go over £100k to hire laterals though.

[jacketpotato]

(Original post by jjarvis)
Interested to know why moving to a top-tier US firm appeals to you. Is it the hierarchy, higher pay, opportunities? I'm not sure I'll end up wanting to stay at the firm where I qualify long-term (agnostic about it at the moment), but I'm interested in what factors into your decision.

The main factor is the higher salary, the second factor is environment and culture. Personally I feel I would be more suited to working in a smaller team where I get more responsibility - the idea of being thrown in at the deep end on a leanly staff deal appeals to me. There are disadvantages too, it really depends on where you want to quality (the US firms paying big bucks seem to be focused mainly on private equity, if corporate private equity work isn't your thing there isn't a lot out there) and the kind of person you are.

The NQ market is ludicrously competitive - only a very small number of US firms are recruiting and I understand they are basically only interviewing Oxbridge grads.

[jacketpotato]

(Original post by Brevity)
I'd be interested to know which those two are. The only firm that I know pays £100k to NQs was Bingham (and you wouldn't really want to go there because it's not really in the top tier of US firms). I suppose some of the higher paying ones would be willing to go over £100k to hire laterals though.

I don't think there are any firms willing to go over 100k for NQs even if they are lateral. For that money they have a selection of the best NQs in the city already.

Afraid I'm not really sure I'm supposed to say which firms were recruiting as its not public, they recruit through consultants (although I have spoken to the main consultants and they were mostly aware of the same roles).

[The West Wing]

Another factor is US firm bonuses (for elite corporate firms) are more regular and bigger than UK firm ones (even in London).

[jjarvis]

(Original post by jacketpotato)
The main factor is the higher salary, the second factor is environment and culture. Personally I feel I would be more suited to working in a smaller team where I get more responsibility - the idea of being thrown in at the deep end on a leanly staff deal appeals to me. There are disadvantages too, it really depends on where you want to quality (the US firms paying big bucks seem to be focused mainly on private equity, if corporate private equity work isn't your thing there isn't a lot out there) and the kind of person you are.

The NQ market is ludicrously competitive - only a very small number of US firms are recruiting and I understand they are basically only interviewing Oxbridge grads.

Cheers, JP. Didn't realise you were so keen on corporate private equity--but I don't know why I would have done.

[Aack]

There's a lot more to it than just comparing salaries and bonuses.

What about the cost of living? Inflation? Taxation?

[Med2Ky]

Some really insightful comments- thanks to folks for sharing their insights! It seems like while there are certainly some significant upsides to joining one of the US firms, chances remain slim.

[cbbg]

(Original post by Aack)
There's a lot more to it than just comparing salaries and bonuses.

What about the cost of living? Inflation? Taxation?

All of those tend to be higher in the UK atm.

[Brevity]

(Original post by cbbg)
All of those tend to be higher in the UK atm.

I don't know: average rent in New York is now $3418 a month (third paragraph: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/22/re...pagewanted=all), which is £2203. You could get a pretty luscious apartment in London paying £26,000 rent a year (for instance, this report by Shelter suggests you could rent a 3-bedroom apartment in inner London for that kind of money: http://england.shelter.org.uk/__data...Rent_Watch.pdf).

[Wildcard]

(Original post by Brevity)
I don't know: average rent in New York is now $3418 a month (third paragraph: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/22/re...pagewanted=all), which is £2203. You could get a pretty luscious apartment in London paying £26,000 rent a year (for instance, this report by Shelter suggests you could rent a 3-bedroom apartment in inner London for that kind of money: http://england.shelter.org.uk/__data...Rent_Watch.pdf).

While I agree that NYC (well, Manhattan) is often prohibitively expensive to live in, I think that Shelter report is overstating things significantly. http://www.net-lettings.co.uk/ provides a more accurate and up-to-date resource, and having looked at a few central locations, you're looking at a decent two-bedroom, or a flat with a very small third bedroom (somewhere between broom cupboard and single bed) for that kind of money. Still, it's pretty hard to compare averages and so forth, and I think overall most would agree that Manhattan is more expensive than London.

[jacketpotato]

(Original post by Brevity)
I don't know: average rent in New York is now $3418 a month (third paragraph: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/22/re...pagewanted=all), which is £2203.

No, that's the average rent for an apartment in Manhattan - Manhattan isn't really a residential area. The rents in places like Brooklyn or Queens won't be as high. You would need to compare Manhattan rent with somewhere like Kensington & Chelsea or the City to get a fair comparison.

[Brevity]

(Original post by jacketpotato)
No, that's the average rent for an apartment in Manhattan - Manhattan isn't really a residential area. The rents in places like Brooklyn or Queens won't be as high. You would need to compare Manhattan rent with somewhere like Kensington & Chelsea or the City to get a fair comparison.

Oh, I dunno about that. There're plenty of places to live in Manhattan (TriBeCa, The Village, Lower East Side) that aren't Kensington / Chelsea levels of affluence. I think Manhattan is more like Zones 1 + 2, whereas Brooklyn or Queens are more like zones 5 + 6.

[cbbg]

Wow, it's currently level-pegging between the UK and US (9 vs. 9). I'm surprised about the current poll results, moreso considering that thestudentroom.co.uk is a UK-based site, and many people who know about both the US and UK systems seem to think that the UK system is more reasonable overall. I would be interested in hearing more about why people selected what they did.

[lyrical_lie]

I don't really have a reason except I'm studying law in Scotland and not America so I don't really have much to go on. I'm not doing it for the money, I mean money is nice and all and I definately wouldn't say no to it, but I just want a job I'll enjoy so I'll stick with UK.

But I do want to point out studying law in each country of the U.K differs. For example, I'm studying law as an undergrad and it's 4 years + my diploma year, then hopefully a 2 year traineeship so that's 7 years not 4. But that's for Scotland.