SURVEY 2010

THE NEW LEGAL LANDSCAPE } CORPORATE

Corporate Lawyers  Company Secretaries  Contract Lawyers
CONTENTS
Foreword1
Introduction3
Corporate Lawyers 6
Company Secretaries 12
Contract Lawyers 16

Figures contained within tables in this

survey have been rounded to the
nearest $500 and are quoted in
local currency.

© Mahlab Recruitment (NSW) Pty Ltd 2010

© Mahlab Recruitment (VIC) Pty Ltd 2010

www.mahlab.com.au
FOREWORD
BY KRISS WILL
With the strengthening
of the market for
legal services and
the corollary need
for talented lawyers
increasing, firms are
focussing their minds
on the levers of effective
engagement and talent
retention.
P1  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE
There is a clear link between the level
of engagement an employee has with
their workplace, and their likelihood
of leaving that workplace. An
Australian Institute of Management
survey found that “disengaged
employees generally feel
undervalued, have negative opinions
of their managers, perform less than
others, have higher absenteeism
rates and are less committed
and satisfied with their jobs”.1
No business wants their employees
to feel and act this way, yet
research shows that in 2008 (before
the weakened economic times
really impacted on employment)
21% of employees were actively
disengaged.2 On the positive side,
Gallup Consulting research indicates
that actively engaged employees are
51% less likely to leave, 15% more
productive and 12% more profitable
than disengaged employees.3
According to their research, there
were 18% of employees in this
actively engaged category, leaving
61% of employees somewhere in
between the poles of really negative
and fabulously productive.
In recent times, the leadership of
legal practices in both the private
and corporate sectors has been
tested. Difficult economic times have
meant that many firms have had to
implement one of the most difficult
business decisions – the reduction
of staffing costs by reducing the
number of people on the payroll. This
has been an extremely challenging
time for everyone impacted and this
impact is not limited to those who
lost their jobs. The bond of trust
between remaining employees and
employers has been severely tested.
The online job board SEEK surveyed
over 6,000 employees across the
Australian job market in late 2009 and
found that 33% of employees felt
1 What Keeps Employees Engaged
With Their Workplace?, Australian
Institute of Management, 2006
2 Gallup Employee Engagement
Survey Results, 2008
3 Gallup Employee Engagement
Survey Results, 2008
burnt out and disillusioned.4 Whilst
higher turnover will occur as a result
of greater employment opportunities,
there is no room for complacency.
There are daily reports regarding
the likely impact of the economic
upswing on employee turnover.
One report from May 2010 said the
rate of employee exodus has been
exaggerated and that only 23% of
employees plan to leave their current
employer in the next 12 months.
With the investments made to
develop, promote and retain talented
lawyers and support staff, I do not
think a predicted rate of turnover of
only 23% is acceptable.
Leadership and retention
There is clearly an enormous
opportunity for improvement and
legal employers are actively exploring
ways to increase the level of
employee engagement. Within firms
the discussions often focus on “what
are other firms doing?” and invariably
the conversations turn to stories
of free massages, generous leave
policies and provision of the latest
technology toys/tools. In my view,
these are the perks and benefits
which are ultimately just the fancy
icing on what is a multi-layered cake,
the ingredients for which are not
exotic but often hard to mix. I think
the question needs to be “what are
we doing?” and the focus needs to
start with the firm leadership.
Without good leadership it is very
hard, if not impossible, to create a
culture where people feel valued and
engaged. Employees are looking to
the firm’s leaders to set and maintain
a clear direction, and imbue this
direction with some enthusiasm.
They want authentic and empathetic
relationships with the partners and
managers in the firm and they want
to feel that the firm can be trusted.
Many in the legal profession believe
the Australian economy is through
the worst and work levels are
showing all the commensurate
positive signs. Confidence needs
to be restored and employees are
4 2009 Satisfaction & Motivation
Report, SEEK
looking to the firm’s leaders to show
the way. However it is important
to remember that whilst there is
quiet relief that there is more work,
people have not forgotten their
colleagues who have had to leave
the organisation. For many their own
personal concerns about job security
remain. Leaders need to focus on
rebuilding trust and confidence in
a way that does not whitewash
the personal impacts of the last
18 months.
Steadily grow your leaders
Who is responsible for this? In my
view, good leadership needs to be
across the organisation – not just
one charismatic managing partner,
CEO or general counsel. The day
to day experiences of people in
workplaces are what create their
realities – not the story the website
spruiks, the latest award the firm has
won or the recent media profile for a
particular case.
The development of good leaders is
a challenge for many organisations;
however law firms often fall into
the trap of failing to recognise the
benefit in starting this development
early in a professional’s career.
Many firms have recognised that
leadership training, like career
planning, needs to start from day
one, and those that have are today
reaping the benefits of this long term
approach. Leadership training often
sounds “high-falutin’” but the reality
is that it starts with basic people
management and self management
skills. Coaching from others in the
business can provide the valuable
guidance needed to develop these all
important fundamentals.
P2  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE
And one final difficult bit
Finally, too often one hears that a
firm is not comfortable committing
to leadership development as this
means having to articulate and live
by the expressed values of the
firm. Good leaders promote these
values by example. Good leaders
also address behaviour that does
not support the firm’s values, and
this can be very confronting. Having
the courage and the competence to
have these difficult conversations
is, in my view, the hallmark of a
good leader. Too often in private
law firms the aberrant behaviour of
partners is tolerated as it has become
too difficult to address. Often
these aberrant behaviours damage
relationships and trust. The failure
of the leadership team to “walk
the talk” often results in a culture
of cynicism which undermines the
investments and initiatives of the
firm at every turn. Engagement will
remain low and turnover will be
higher in firms where there is not the
courage to address poor leadership.
Kriss Will is the Managing Director
of Kriss Will Consulting Pty Ltd, a
consultancy firm which specialises
in management consulting
and training and development.
Kriss has a Master of Business
Administration and an honours
Arts degree (double major
in Psychology).
She has worked in the professional
services sector for over 20 years,
holding in-house roles as an HR
Manager, Marketing Manager and
General Manager, and established
her own management consultancy
business in 1996. Kriss consults to
law firms of all shapes and sizes
and really enjoys working with
lawyers to create sustainable
successful businesses.
INTRODUCTION
Welcome to Survey
2010. Mahlab’s
annual survey is
Australia’s most
comprehensive survey
of the legal profession,
encapsulating market
trends and accurate,
current remuneration
ranges captured from
the 2010 salary reviews.
We are pleased to
bring you up to date
and comprehensive
information on market
conditions and trends
in the legal profession
in Australia and around
the globe.
KATHERINE LISA
SAMPSON GAZIS
P3  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE
Enter the new legal landscape. The
global financial crisis has changed
the legal landscape. Relationships
between clients and law firms and
between staff and employers have
changed. The outlook for 2010 and
beyond is optimistic and has been
borne out of a most challenging
and confronting time for the legal
industry. Expectations in terms
of staffing, service delivery and
response to client requirements have
also changed. In this new landscape,
there is not only a renewed
optimism but greater efficiencies,
improved profitability and signs
of a slow, steady move towards
better times. The focus for the year
ahead will be rebuilding teams,
processes, relationships and trust. It
is a time for rejuvenation, retention
and recruitment.
Many law firms were negatively
impacted by the global financial crisis
in 2009, particularly the top tier and
boutique firms that previously relied
upon large transactional work for a
few major clients. Redundancies,
salary freezes and the dismantling of
practice groups was commonplace
given the severity of the market.
Lawyers who retained their positions
were grateful and understood why
their salaries were frozen.
For various reasons, the mid tier
firms fared better than the top tier,
and in some cases, strengthened
their client list and market share.
For many of these firms strong
recruitment levels were maintained.
Many of their practice groups were
significantly enhanced with the
recruitment of lawyers and partners
and/or senior practitioners with
transportable practices who may not
have considered a move to a mid tier
firm prior to the global financial crisis.
The start of 2010 brought with it
a lifting of recruitment and salary
freezes. This activity was again led by
the mid tier firms and more recently,
the top tier firms. Practice areas
that have experienced increased
recruitment activity include resources
law, corporate law (in particular,
public mergers and acquisitions
and private equity work), banking
and finance, commercial law, IT/IP,
employment, insurance and litigation
as well as banking and finance. It is
anticipated that scarcity of specialist
lawyers will once again become
a problem as the Australian and
international economies strengthen.
In 2010 almost all lawyers received
a salary review. Some firms made
interim salary adjustments as well
as conducting annual salary reviews.
It is interesting to note that by 2010
lawyers certainly expected salary
increases, although expectations
varied wildly as to quantum. This
year lawyers in private practice
have achieved salary increases
of between 12–14% on average.
Broad and varied salary increases
have occurred this year due to some
lawyers receiving more than one
increase while others receiving none.
The salary bands within law firms
generally did not increase. There
is a clear trend amongst law firms
to remunerate strong performers
by selectively offering bonuses
while closely managing base salary
increases. Employers continue to
make clearer the link between the
performance and value staff bring
and remuneration.
Retention is now a key issue for
employers as many lawyers are
contemplating making a move.
The difficult market conditions,
demanding clients who are controlling
hourly rates and have more stringent
requirements of service delivery,
salary freezes and the requirements
for staff to do more with less, as well
as a stalling of career progression
have all begun to take their toll. Many
lawyers have been waiting patiently
for the market to improve before
canvassing their options. Lawyers
are considering opportunities within
Australia in law firms, corporations
and government bodies, as well as
some international opportunities.
Rejuvenation of the work
environment and staff engagement
will be another key focus for law
firms and is inherently linked to
retention. It will be imperative that
firms ensure employee engagement
is renewed and remains high. The
main issues are staff perceptions
of how employers treated them
and their colleagues during the
financial crisis, how the firm
demonstrated its loyalty towards
staff, and how the firm responded
to an uplift in market conditions not
just in terms of financial rewards
but also in relation to quality of
work, training, development and
career advancement initiatives. It is
expected that the number of lawyers
resigning from private practice firms
in pursuit of alternative opportunities
will rise in the next 12 months and
this will put pressure on the legal
employment market.
The arrival of the international firms
such as Norton Rose (through merger
with Deacons) and the subsequent
opening of Allen & Overy, will also
put pressure on the employment
market. Whilst these firms undertake
domestic work it is believed that a
major impetus for their arrival has
been to use Australian offices as
part of an integrated strategy to
further expand market share in Asia.
It also allows such firms to provide
a seamless service internationally,
which appeals to global clients. In
the case of Norton Rose, its merger
with Deacons has allowed the firm
to draw Australian lawyers into Asian
offices. The trend for international
mergers and strategic alliances will
continue. As a result, Australian
local firms are now competing
for talent directly in Australia with
strongly branded international firms
practising locally. The kudos of
working for an international law firm,
the quality of work, the international
exposure and career opportunities
are very appealing to young lawyers.
These firms will strongly challenge
the Australian law firm appeal
domestically and impact on the legal
talent pool.
Law firm mergers in 2009–2010
increased. Mergers have been
particularly prevalent amongst the
mid tier firms pursuing strategic
growth. Recent mergers include
Thomson Playford with Cutler
Hughes & Harris in Sydney and
then Thomson Playford again with
Dibbs Abbott Stillman in Melbourne,
P4  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE
Norton Rose with Deacons, and in
Brisbane Cooper Grace Ward with
Bain Gasteen. Strategic ambitions to
increase service offerings by being a
larger firm, with more infrastructure
and resources and having more depth
of experience across practice areas
and locations, are key motivations.
Partner movement also increased in
2009–2010. As firms restructured and
did away with less profitable practice
areas, other firms exploited this trend
to grow their businesses strategically
by acquisition. Partners with time
on their hands in a less active
market had more time to consider
their careers and options and many
moved. Property partners, corporate
and commercial law partners,
partners in banking and finance,
insolvency partners particularly
in financial services law were all
represented in such moves.
For law firms, the balance of power
has now shifted and in-house counsel
and clients have greater influence in
relation to the services they expect
from firms and fee arrangements.
Pressure imposed by clients to tightly
manage and in many cases reduce
legal spend has forced firms to
seriously consider and accommodate
billing arrangements such as fixed
fees, success payments and other
alternative billing methods. This
pressure will ultimately impact
revenue and how lawyers in law
firms at all levels are remunerated
as current remuneration models
are inextricably linked to hourly rate
billing targets.
On the international scene, we
anticipate that recruitment of
Australian lawyers will remain
somewhat subdued until the end
of 2010. The Middle East and Asian
markets have remained steady
while the UK market, although
challenging, has begun to show
glimmers of improvement with
salary freezes lifting and recruitment
activity increasing. The USA market
remains subdued.
On the corporate front, recruitment
activity was encouraging with a
steady number of jobs occurring
in most sectors. This is reflected
not only in increased permanent
vacancies but also in the conversion
of fixed term hires into permanent
hires. The trend of employers
seeking to recruit in-house lawyers
on a contract basis will continue
throughout the year. These roles
have been particularly valuable in
situations where employers have
found it difficult to predict long
term work flow or where increasing
permanent head count was not
possible. Contract lawyers have been
recruited by companies for projects
such as acquisitions, restructures and
divestments and to manage litigation.
While in-house recruitment activity
in 2009–2010 was mainly focussed
at the junior to senior counsel
levels, it is anticipated that as the
market improves there will be
more head of legal positions and
greenfield roles on offer. Industry
sectors which are experiencing
increased activity include energy and
resources, information technology
and telecommunications, health
and pharmaceuticals, banking and
finance and FMCG. The increase in
regulatory requirements has also
resulted in a growth in compliance
and regulatory positions.
As a result of the pressures to reduce
costs within corporations there has
been a noticeable change in how
in-house counsel are perceived both
within organisations and outside. The
influence of the in-house counsel
is rising and there is also a greater
recognition of the value they bring
in terms of the work performed and
the costs they manage. In some in-
house teams, KPI’s for bonuses for
in-house counsel include the ability of
the lawyer to reduce external spend.
In-house counsel are now more
vocal in their demands namely, in
asking for better, more relevant and
value-added services from external
providers, competitive fees based on
alternative billing methods and timely
service delivery.
Salary packages generally remained
frozen during the global financial
crisis but many corporations have
now lifted salary freezes and
reviewed staff rewards. While many
reviews have been in line with CPI,
reviews have resulted in a national
average increase of 4.06% and many
star performers were rewarded
with bonuses.
Shared services professionals
namely, management, marketing,
business development, human
resources and knowledge
management specialists are slowly
recovering from a difficult 2008–2009.
Salary freezes were commonplace
and for many professionals in these
areas, roles and working hours were
reduced. Where recruitment activity
took place it was often on a fixed
term basis, although since January
2010 there has been an increase
in the number of job opportunities
becoming available, particularly in
the business development area,
reflecting increased activity and
optimism. Salary reviews in this area
have been particularly modest. It
is anticipated that this market will
steadily improve towards the end of
2010 and into 2011.
P5  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE
Thank you We welcome your feedback.
Once again we are grateful for Please direct your comments
the support shown by our clients, to Sophie Waters, National
private practice solicitors, company Marketing Manager:
secretaries, corporate lawyers sophie.waters@mahlab.com.au
and professionals in marketing,
human resources and knowledge
management who participated in the
survey. Thank you for your support.
We particularly thank the Australian
Corporate Lawyers Association
(ACLA), Australasian Professional
Services Marketing Association
(APSMA), Victorian Women Lawyers,
The Law Society of New South
Wales Young Lawyers, Women
Lawyers Association of Queensland,
Young Lawyers Victoria and the Law
Institute of Victoria, Legal KM Forum,
and Women Law Association NSW
for circulating our questionnaire to
their members. We appreciate their
ongoing commitment to making
Survey 2010 a success. Thank you.
Survey 2010 responses are
supplemented by up to date data
collected from Mahlab’s Australian
and international clients and
candidates, with an emphasis on
information that reflects 1 July
2010 reviews.
Katherine Sampson Lisa Gazis
Mahlab gratefully acknowledges the support of these industry associations
in circulating links to the online questionnaire to their members.
CORPORATE
LAWYERS
Although the effects of
the global financial crisis
continued to impact the
corporate market, the
past financial year was
generally less troubled
for in-house counsel
than most of their law
firm counterparts.
P6  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE
Remuneration levels remained
relatively steady, with smaller
bonuses on offer. There is a
reasonable level of job security in the
corporate market, notwithstanding
some high profile corporate
collapses. In contrast to previous
economic downturns, the number
of redundancies was relatively small
and generally limited to those sectors
which were most impacted by the
global financial crisis, namely financial
services and property. This is no
doubt a reflection of organisations
recognising the added value in-house
counsel provide and the view of
corporate decision makers that the
in‑house legal function is “essential”.
Only 36% of in-house counsel
received a salary increase in July
2009 at the height of the salary
freezes. This year the average
percentage increase in salaries
for corporate lawyers is 4.06%
compared with 3.5% in 2008–2009
and 5.7% in 2007–2008. Those
who were reviewed at a higher
percentage were star performers
whose companies were keen to
retain them.
While base salary levels have
increased a little, the bonus
component of in-house remuneration
is more important than ever before,
ranging from 10–50% nationally.
This year the bonus paid tended
to be at the low to mid level of the
available range rather than at the
top, with company performance
being the main influencer in this
economic climate. As a rule, the
higher bonus percentage applies to
the more senior positions, with the
average target for a mid level lawyer
being 20%.
A combination of any of company
performance, legal department
performance and individual
performance targets is the basis of
the bonus calculation. Nearly 3 in
5 respondents received a bonus,
with the majority of those who did
not advising that this was due to
either their company not performing
well or the business remaining
cautious about the economic
climate. 73% of bonuses paid to
corporate lawyers were performance
based although some companies
relied on discretionary bonuses in
order to acknowledge significant
contribution and ensure they retained
strong performers.
In some instances a new recruit was
offered a choice between a slightly
lower base/higher bonus component
and the reverse.
In-house counsel still report a high
level of satisfaction in their roles,
with 7 in 10 respondents either
being “very satisfied” or “somewhat
satisfied” despite increased
workloads and tight constraints on
external legal spend. However, 45%
advised that they were considering
leaving their current organisation, a
slight increase from 41% in 2008–
2009. Of those considering leaving
their current employer 80% are
seeking another in-house role, a 20%
increase over the previous year.
In many cases, in-house teams
expanded during 2009–2010,
either through the engagement of
permanent staff or through the use
of contractors and/or secondees as
corporations increasingly look to cut
their external legal spend. Corporate
restructuring and rationalisation led
to a continued focus by corporate
legal departments to reduce their
reliance on external legal providers.
Legal departments achieved this
by retaining the legal work in-house
and expanding the team. Survey
2010 reveals that more than 60%
of organisations sought to reduce
their external legal spend during the
past financial year, with 40% having
negotiated new terms with their
external legal service providers and
36% having changed their external
legal providers.
Vetting requests for external advice,
requesting fixed price estimates or
maximum fee arrangements from
external legal providers, tightening
the scope of instructions and having
competitive tenders for larger pieces
of work are just some of the ways
in-house counsel sought to reduce
external legal spend. Interestingly
37% of those surveyed advised that
they anticipated their external legal
 “More high quality work
is being done in-house,
attracting a greater number
of private practice lawyers”

73%
of bonuses paid were
performance based
60%
3 in 5 of organisations
receive a bonus reduce legal spending
45%
considering leaving
their employer

4.06%
salary increases

P7  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE

spend to increase in the new financial
year as market conditions improved,
and corporate activity increased.
A cost conscious corporate market
means that more high quality legal
work is being done in-house. This is
attracting a greater number of private
practice lawyers, with more such
applicants registering for in-house
roles, especially in the second half of
the year. Dissatisfaction with law firm
remuneration and less opportunities
for lawyers to work overseas also
account for the increase in private
practice applications. The nature and
quality of the work retained by the
legal team has also led to improved
in-house retention rates.
Demand for corporate counsel
was evident across a range of
industries during the financial year,
with a notable rise in recruitment by
financial institutions, property, and
energy and resources companies
towards the end of 2009 and
continuing throughout 2010. Recent
recruitment activity in these sectors
follows an extremely difficult period
during the global financial crisis with
limited opportunities available and
redundancies taking place.
There is a noticeable increase
in demand for IT and
telecommunication lawyers.
Opportunities are also occurring
in professional services, FMCG,
health and pharmaceuticals and the
renewable energy industry. Similar
to last year, the government sector
also produced a number of very
interesting senior level opportunities.
Regulatory and compliance roles
were particularly prevalent. A general
trend is the increasing regulatory
component of in-house roles across
most industries. The property and
construction sector has also bounced
back, with recent recruitment activity
for in-house lawyers at all levels.
This is in some part related to the
Federal Government’s continuing
infrastructure program.
An interesting and growing trend
in the corporate market is the
employment of more specialized
lawyers within their teams as
permanent or temporary members.
P8  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE
Larger corporations see the attraction activity will continue to see in-house
of having specialist lawyers “on legal teams grow in 2010–2011.
call”, particularly where the company 40% of corporations surveyed said
is facing a major change in the their legal teams will grow in the
regulatory framework, internal next 12 months with approximately
processes or a major deal or two-thirds of those new hires being
project. This has led to an increase permanent staff and the remainder
in opportunities for M&A lawyers, being contract appointments.
competition law and IT and IP law
specialists. It has also created
opportunities for bright, mid level
general commercial lawyers willing
to undergo training in-house and
devote themselves to one major
project for a year or more, thereby
creating specialists from generalists.
This trend is driven by a desire for
increased productivity, efficiency and
most of all, cost reduction. Some law
firms are taking note of this trend and
its likely impact on the traditional law
firm offering.
The enthusiasm of senior associates
to move in–house clearly out
weighed the availability of corporate
roles during 2009–2010. Many aim to
increase exposure to the corporate
world through secondments or to
take a greater risk than previously
contemplated by leaving their
permanent law firm job to take up
a contract role in a company or
government entity in order to “get
their foot in the door”.
More in-house counsel are working
part time, up from 7% in 2008–2009
to 13% in 2009–2010, with working
hours per week rising from 29 to
32 hours. Most survey respondents
advise that they are working part‑time
due to family commitments, however
some (11%) advise that this is due
to employer requirements, a further
likely impact of the global financial
crisis. Interestingly, this figure is
half of what it was in the previous
financial year, which reflects a
growing confidence in the economy
by the employer.
The last quarter of the financial
year has seen a flurry of new
in‑house opportunities across all
industry sectors. While corporations
remain cautious more opportunities
are coming on to the market as
confidence in the economy improves.
These encouraging signs of improved
 SALARIES } CORPORATE
SYDNEY
Year Level Range Mode
1 $65,000 – $85,000 $76,000
2 $75,000 – $95,000 $92,500
3 $90,000 – $120,000 $111,500
4 $109,000 – $145,000 $137,500
5 $125,000 – $160,000 $158,000
6+ $135,000 – $230,000 $184,500

DGC
DGC $165,000 – $280,000 $238,000

GC
1 2 3 4 5 6+
GC $170,000 – $600,000+ $289,000

MELBOURNE
Year Level Range Mode
1 $58,000 – $80,000 $75,000
2 $70,000 – $95,000 $87,000
3 $85,000 – $113,000 $101,500
4 $92,000 – $139,000 $123,000
5 $117,000 – $158,000 $147,000
6+ $130,000 – $220,000 $176,000

DGC
DGC $150,000 – $250,000 $204,000

GC
1 2 3 4 5 6+
GC $170,000 – $600,000+ $283,000

Salary bands in the corporate market tend to be very broad. An individual’s position within a band Figures refer to total package
will depend on a number of factors including background and experience of the individual, size including benefits but
of the organisation and its legal function, industry sector and level of management responsibility excluding bonuses and share
within the role. Please contact our consultants for tailored advice. options.

P9  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE

 BRISBANE
Year Level Range Mode
1 $60,000 – $75,000 $68,000
2 $65,000 – $90,000 $80,000
3 $75,000 – $110,000 $97,500
4 $90,000 – $125,000 $113,500
5 $95,000 – $155,000 $138,500
6+ $110,000 – $190,000 $162,000

DGC
DGC $135,000 – $220,000 $177,500

GC
1 2 3 4 5 6+
GC $150,000 – $500,000+ $230,000

PERTH
Year Level Range Mode
1 $65,000 – $80,000 $74,000
2 $68,000 – $94,000 $86,500
3 $82,000 – $115,000 $104,000
4 $98,000 – $140,000 $128,000
5 $110,000 – $160,000 $144,500
6+ $120,000 – $240,000 $176,000

DGC
DGC $135,000 – $260,000 $200,000

GC
1 2 3 4 5 6+
GC $150,000 – $500,000+ $258,000

ADELAIDE
Year Level Range Mode
1 $55,000 – $76,000 $72,000
2 $70,000 – $90,000 $84,500
3 $80,000 – $105,000 $101,500
4 $88,000 – $127,000 $115,000
5 $95,000 – $150,000 $133,500
6+ $120,000 – $190,000 $165,500
DGC

DGC $145,000 – $245,000 $195,500

GC

1 2 3 4 5 6+
GC $145,000 – $500,000+ $222,000

Salary bands in the corporate market tend to be very broad. An individual’s position within a band Figures refer to total package
will depend on a number of factors including background and experience of the individual, size including benefits but
of the organisation and its legal function, industry sector and level of management responsibility excluding bonuses and share
within the role. Please contact our consultants for tailored advice. options.

P10  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE

 CORPORATE LAWYER } BENEFITS OFFERED
% of surveyed lawyers

2007–2008

2008–2009

2009–2010
TECHNOLOGY
Blackberry / iPhone 51 54 63
Home computer internet connection 25 21 26
Laptop 69 72 69
Mobile phone 62 60 60

FINANCIAL
Share plans/options 44 37 34
Additional superannuation 29 33 31
Vehicle 16 N/a 19
Car parking 47 44 53
Income protection insurance 32 29 34
Life insurance/private health insurance 26 34 20
Paid parental leave 55 16 50
Corporate credit card 60 62 61

LIFESTYLE
Reduced working days per week 38 32 36
Time in lieu 43 36 39
Additional leave without pay 60 54 47
Working from home 60 59 59
Emergency childcare/parent’s room 14 23 14
Extended/indefinite leave 29 30 27
Purchase annual leave 31 30 31

CAREER DEVELOPMENT
Management training 66 71 61
Further study – full fees 41 38 38
Further study – part fees 47 47 42
Paid study leave 53 48 45
Unpaid study leave 53 48 45
Professional memberships 89 91 87
Secondments – international 22 23 21
Secondments – local 24 26 20
Travel – international 48 47 47
Travel – interstate 76 79 77

P11  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE

COMPANY There were only a limited number of
senior roles for company secretaires
around”. Last year, all who said they
were looking to move said they

SECRETARIES in the past year. Despite this, many

Consistent with
market conditions
generally, there were
a more limited range
of opportunities for
company secretary
and assistant company
secretary professionals.
In contrast, compliance,
governance and
regulatory work
increased and these
professionals are in
greater demand, often
recruited as members of
an in-house corporate
legal team. Complex
regulatory requirements
and market scrutiny
make it necessary for
corporations to focus
even more on corporate
governance and
compliance issues.
mid level and senior lawyers are still
keen to undertake company secretary
qualifications. Most of these lawyers
do not wish to pursue pure company
secretarial roles. Rather, many
undertake the qualification with a
view to progressing their career
into a blended general counsel and
company secretarial role. Survey
2010 results show that three quarters
of respondents hold a Bachelor
of Law degree in addition to their
company secretary qualifications.
This year more company secretary
respondents indicate that they are
working in sole roles. There is a
decrease in the number of company
secretaries surveyed working in
secretariats comprising 2–5 people.
70% of respondents indicated they
are satisfied with the outcome of
their salary review, as opposed to
only 50% last year. Approximately
85% of respondents did not receive
an annual salary increase in July
2009. However 40% of respondents
did enjoy some form of salary
increase in the first half of 2010 to
make up for the lack of increase the
previous year.
The vast majority of respondents
surveyed work for organisations
offering performance based bonuses,
in line with previous years. It is
important to note that just under 60%
of respondents received a bonus this
year, an increase from about 40%
last year.
would move to another company
secretary role, indicative of the
lack of opportunity for company
secretaries to consider broader
options in the very tight market. This
year, nearly 30% said they would
consider moving to a role other than
a company secretary one, illustrating
a greater confidence in the market
that they would be attractive to an
employer in a role outside of their
specialist skill set.
The most common factor that would
influence a company secretary to
join another organisation is career
progression, closely followed by
the quality of work being offered.
Seeking a better work/life balance
and being involved in the strategic
input of the company are also popular
factors influencing their decision
to move to a new organisation.
Compared with last year’s results, the
opportunity for career development
is more important, indicative of
respondents believing their careers
halted during the global financial
crisis and now seeking to make up
for lost time.

Compared to last year, over 4 in 5

respondents said that their hours
of work have increased. However,
despite being busy, two thirds of
respondents said the size of their
company secretariat would stay
the same.

40% of company secretaries

surveyed indicated that they are
considering leaving their current
employer. This is an increase from
only 25% last year when the global
financial crisis meant professionals
were holding onto their roles and
seeing little opportunity to “look

P12  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE

 Work hours
70% increased for
satisfied with 80%
salary review

40%
are considering leaving their
current employer.

4.06%
increase in
salaries

COMPANY SECRETARY } SALARIES

PUBLICLY LISTED
State Range Mode
NSW

NSW $145,000 – $480,000 $240,000

VIC

VIC $125,000 – $450,000 $245,000

NOT PUBLICLY LISTED

State Range Mode
NSW

NSW $115,000 – $300,000 $200,000

VIC

VIC $110,000 – $290,000 $180,000

Salary bands apply to Figures refer to total package There may be some individuals in major companies who are
individuals undertaking full including benefits but excluding earning outside the bands revealed by the survey, however
company secretary roles. bonuses and share options. they would be the exception. Please contact our consultants for
tailored advice.
 COMPANY SECRETARIES } BENEFITS OFFERED
% of surveyed
company secretaties

2007–2008

2008–2009

2009–2010
TECHNOLOGY
Blackberry / iPhone 50 50 73
Home computer internet connection 31 38 27
Laptop 63 75 73
Mobile phone 56 63 33

FINANCIAL
Additional superannuation 25 13 27
Car parking 50 25 47
Income protection insurance 38 25 27
Paid parental leave 38 25 53
Private health insurance/life insurance 44 100 67
Corporate credit card 56 50 67
Share plans/options 63 25 67
Vehicle 19 13 20

LIFESTYLE
Reduced working days per week 25 100 20
Time in lieu 44 50 47
Additional leave without pay 53 50 33
Working from home 50 88 60
Emergency childcare/parent’s room 0 13 27
Extended/indefinite leave 18 38 27
Purchase additional leave 25 13 27

CAREER DEVELOPMENT
Management training 44 75 60
Further study – full fees 56 38 47
Further study – part fees 36 13 47
Paid study leave 39 38 67
Unpaid study leave 31 38 47
Professional memberships 87 100 93
Secondments – international 25 100 13
Secondments – local 13 13 13
Travel – international 56 25 73
Travel – interstate 81 63 67

P14  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE

CONTRACT
LAWYERS
In the past financial
year, many contract
opportunities arose
where an extra legal
resource was called for
and concerns over head
count and increased
costs prevailed.
P15  MAHLAB SURVEY 2010 } CORPORATE
A number of corporate clients used
a contract appointment to test the
need for a permanent appointment.
Maternity leave, a major project
or an interim appointment while a
corporate review or restructure was
undertaken led to the need for a
senior contributor for 6–12 months.
Many of the latter roles continued
beyond the initial contract period,
becoming longer term contracts or
permanent appointments. Both the
corporate and government sectors
produced contract opportunities,
presenting valued roles for
many senior lawyers who found
themselves between roles.
Sole purpose law firms were
established in 2009–2010 to provide
lawyers for short term in-house legal
roles. These law firms provided a
valuable alternative to the traditional
secondee arrangement, particularly
given the limited pool of secondees
available. They also provided
employment opportunities for senior
lawyers who either undertook
contract work on a regular basis or
were looking for a short term contract
while they sought a permanent
in‑house role.
Most contract appointments were
remunerated on a pro rata basis on
market rates without the “loading for
risk” factor which sometimes applied
in previous years.
Sydney Level 9, 6 O’Connell Street, Sydney 2000 Melbourne Level 1, 535 Bourke Street, Melbourne 3000
T: (02) 9241 1199  F: (02) 8243 4646  T: (03) 9629 2111  F: (03) 9629 2155 
E: syd@mahlab.com.au E: melb@mahlab.com.au

www.mahlab.com.au