Clerkships, Federal Government, Federal Judges, Money, Skaddenfreude

Law Clerk Salaries and Benefits: What's Going On?

By  
on

Since we’re smack dab in the middle of clerkship application season, let’s turn the spotlight to clerkly compensation and benefits. We hear that some changes may be in the works. From a tipster:

[H]ave you heard anything about progress on a proposal to end/limit/change the salary “matching” program for federal clerks with private sector experience? Several judges I interviewed with mentioned that the salaries for clerks coming from jobs in the private sector (e.g., after a year or more working for a firm) are in flux pending a proposal to eliminate or change the bump that clerks coming from (higher paying) private sector jobs traditionally receive. My understanding is that these clerks traditionally received an increase in their step level within the applicable salary grade. Supposedly a decision on this issue was expected in September.

As a matter of fact, yes, we have. Nothing definitive. But more discussion appears after the jump.


From a tipster currently clerking:

[A]pparently the judicial conference just cut benefits to law clerks. For example, I know that clerks hired in September 2007 will no longer be paid out for vacation time not taken when they leave the clerkship.

These cuts are a bad deal for the new clerks. For example – although I am going to another government job, you can’t transfer vacation time. Additionally, the judge cannot have both you and your successor on the payroll at the same time, so you could not take the vacation at the end.

Further, attorneys transferring from law firms will no longer receive any sort of matching salary. I know there are also other new restrictions pertaining to “permanent law clerks.” I think this deserves a post!

But not everyone is unhappy over the possible demise of salary matching. From a third correspondent:

[S]omething I’ve recently become aware of is that the federal system does ‘salary matching’ for clerks.

If you provide an offer letter, or if you previously worked for a firm, you can get quite a bump in your salary. (I know someone who is making low six figures as a federal clerk, although this someone was a firm attorney for a few years plus a state supreme court clerk first, and the COLA for our jurisdiction is really high.)

Also, if you previously worked in a lower paid job — say, a state court clerkship — they will actually decrease your salary. No joke. One of my co-clerks had a higher offer until pay stubs were faxed, then it dropped, then this person faxed in an offer letter from his/her firm, and it went back up. (Don’t recall if it was higher or lower than the original offer.)

Sponsored

This correspondent has a theory about the system:

One of my co-clerks thinks that the salary matching is probably the way it is b/c it is meant for all federal employees, not just clerks. I do think it is somewhat problematic, b/c I think it is a little unfair to people who want to work/worked in low paying public interest jobs. It is like — you already spent one year (or more) at a low salary, so ding, we’re giving you a lower salary than future firm attorneys whose credentials may not even be better than yours.

Well, if this proposal goes through, then the salary matching will be history.
Please share additional info and opinions in the comments. Thanks.
Earlier: Clerkship Hiring: Today’s the Day

Sponsored

Topics