Law firm mergers are reshaping London's legal market. As firms combine their practices, expand internationally and bring together different business models, questions inevitably arise about what these changes mean for the lawyers working within them.
For associates, one of the most immediate considerations is remuneration.
When two firms with different salary structures merge, does everyone move onto the same pay scale? Are existing salaries protected? Could a merger affect bonuses, seniority or future earning potential?
Recent combinations involving leading UK and US law firms demonstrate that there is no single approach. While some firms maintain different remuneration structures within the same organisation, others introduce new salary arrangements.
For associates at merging firms, understanding how these decisions affect their individual circumstances is an important part of planning their careers.
Why salary structures can become complicated after a merger
Law firms do not all approach associate remuneration in the same way.
Many leading US firms operate salary structures linked to an associate's class year, with remuneration benchmarked against the New York market. UK firms are more likely to use salary bands, with compensation varying according to experience, performance and individual firm policies.
When firms with different approaches combine, aligning their remuneration structures is not necessarily straightforward. One firm may offer substantially higher base salaries, while another may have different bonus arrangements, billable-hour expectations or progression structures.
Immediately bringing every associate onto the same scale could have significant financial implications for the combined business. Equally, maintaining different arrangements may create questions about consistency and longer-term progression.
The result is that a merger does not automatically mean all associates will receive the same salary.
Recent London mergers illustrate different approaches
Several major combinations in 2026 provide useful examples of how associate remuneration can be affected.
Hogan Lovells Cadwalader: Different salary scales within one firm
When Hogan Lovells and Cadwalader combined in July 2026, reports indicated that London associates joining from Cadwalader would retain their existing New York-linked salary arrangements.
Hogan Lovells had increased its London NQ salary to £145,000, while the legacy Cadwalader scale started at approximately £170,000 for first-year associates.
That created a reported difference of around £25,000 at junior level between the two legacy groups.
The combined firm acknowledged that its London remuneration structures differed, noting that legacy Cadwalader lawyers were compensated according to New York salary scales and billable-hour targets.
This illustrates an important distinction: two associates working within the same merged firm may remain subject to different remuneration arrangements.
It also raises questions about how those structures might evolve as the combined business develops.
Winston Taylor: A new NQ salary following the merger
The combination of Winston & Strawn and the UK-led business of Taylor Wessing offers a different example.
Before the merger, Winston & Strawn's London NQ salary was reported at £160,000, while Taylor Wessing's was £115,000.
Following the formation of Winston Taylor in June 2026, the combined firm established a London NQ salary of £125,000.
The figure demonstrates how a merger can lead to a newly established salary benchmark that differs from the previous arrangements at both firms.
However, an important distinction should be made between a published NQ salary and the remuneration of existing associates.
The announcement of a new NQ rate does not, by itself, establish whether individual lawyers experienced salary reductions, retained protected arrangements or moved onto revised packages.
For associates, the implications depend on the terms applied to their particular circumstances.
Ashurst Perkins Coie: Questions surrounding salary alignment
The combination of Ashurst and Perkins Coie also brought together firms with different historical approaches to associate remuneration.
Before the merger, the firms had substantially different reported London NQ salaries, reflecting their respective positions within the UK and US legal markets.
Following the combination, published salary information has not fully explained how remuneration arrangements across all legacy associate groups have been aligned.
This highlights another important consideration: salary integration may not be immediately apparent from the announcement of a merger.
Associates need to distinguish between publicly reported NQ figures and the actual compensation policies applying to their individual roles.
What happens to bonuses?
Base salary is only one component of associate remuneration.
Bonus arrangements can differ considerably between firms, particularly where one operates a more structured US-style compensation system and the other uses a discretionary approach.
A merger may therefore raise questions about:
- Whether existing bonus arrangements will continue.
- How eligibility and performance will be assessed.
- Whether billable-hour thresholds will change.
- How bonuses will be calculated during the transition.
- Whether different arrangements will apply to legacy groups.
For example, an associate whose compensation previously included a substantial year-end bonus may want to understand whether that opportunity remains available under the combined firm's structure.
Equally, a lawyer moving onto a higher base salary may need to consider whether other elements of their overall package have changed.
The important comparison is total remuneration, rather than base salary alone.
Could a merger affect your seniority or progression?
Remuneration is closely connected to how firms assess associate seniority.
At firms operating class-year salary scales, the level at which an associate is placed can have a significant impact on earnings. Other firms may use broader PQE-based bands or more individualised assessments.
When two systems come together, associates may want clarification about whether their existing seniority will be recognised and how future salary progression will work.
The implications can extend beyond annual pay reviews.
Different firms may have different expectations around promotion to senior associate, counsel or partner. A merger may bring changes to team structures, reporting relationships and longer-term progression opportunities.
None of these outcomes should be assumed simply because a merger has been announced. However, they are important questions for associates to raise as the combined firm's policies become clearer.
Five questions associates should ask when their firm merges
For lawyers affected by a merger, understanding the details early can help avoid uncertainty further down the line.
1. Will my current salary be protected?
Clarify whether your existing base salary will remain unchanged, whether you will move onto a new scale and when any changes are expected to take effect.
2. Will my bonus arrangements change?
Ask how eligibility, performance criteria, billable-hour requirements and payment dates will operate following the combination.
3. How will my seniority be recognised?
Understand whether your PQE or class-year placement will remain the same, particularly if the combined firm is adopting a different approach to salary progression.
4. Will the merger affect my promotion prospects?
Consider whether changes to team structures, leadership or promotion criteria could influence your longer-term career opportunities.
5. How does my overall package compare with the wider market?
A merger can be a useful opportunity to reassess your position.
Understanding what comparable firms offer associates with similar experience can help you evaluate your remuneration and career prospects within the new organisation.
Does a merger create opportunities to move firms?
Although mergers can introduce uncertainty, they can also create opportunities for associates.
A combined firm may offer access to a broader client base, new practice areas, additional international offices or more varied work.
For some lawyers, these developments may strengthen the case for remaining with their firm.
Others may find that changes to remuneration, team structure or career progression prompt them to reconsider their longer-term plans.
The important consideration is whether the new organisation continues to align with their professional ambitions.
A merger does not necessarily mean that an associate should explore the external market. However, understanding the opportunities available elsewhere can provide useful context when evaluating their position.
Looking beyond the headline salary
The recent wave of law firm mergers demonstrates that combining two businesses does not automatically mean combining their remuneration structures.
Some firms may retain separate salary arrangements, while others introduce new benchmarks or take time to determine how compensation will operate across the combined organisation.
For associates, the implications can extend well beyond their next payslip.
Bonus eligibility, seniority, promotion opportunities and the structure of the team they work within can all influence the long-term value of remaining at a merged firm.
Ultimately, the most important question is not simply whether a merger will increase or decrease an associate's salary, but how the changes will affect their overall career prospects.
