Criminal bar unfurls strike banner
Nine out of 10 criminal barristers are prepared to take direct action in protest against low and late payments, a survey by the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) has revealed as their leader for the first time sanctions ‘strike’ action.
CBA chair Max Hill QC will tell members today: ‘The time has come to bypass our political masters. If they won’t listen to us, let us go to the public, because that is where governments are vulnerable.’ In unprecedentedly strong language, he will say: ‘Let us fight, and let us remember the option to strike.’
A survey of association members shows 89% of respondents would be prepared to take lawful direction, such as not attending court, in protest over the situation and future proposed changes to the delivery of criminal defence services. About half the CBA’s membership responded to the survey.
According to the survey 89% of respondents said payment levels of publicly funded criminal work are not ‘proper and fair’ and 88% would be prepared to refuse to accept instructions over them. And 85% said the same in respect of prosecution fees.
Most, 82%, said they had had to wait more than nine weeks for graduated fee payments, while 69% had waited more than four weeks for very high-cost cases payments.
In 2013, the government is to consult on the introduction of price competitive tendering for the delivery of publicly funded criminal defence services.
This may involve tendering for contracts of blocks of cases with the provider receiving a single fee per case covering both the litigation and advocacy fee, under a payment scheme called one-case one-fee.
Asked about the planned scheme, 92% of respondents said they would be against it on the basis that the advocacy fee is not ring-fenced.
More than half (61%) of the criminal barristers who responded said they would oppose the introduction of the quality assurance scheme for advocates if it allowed for assessments methods other than judicial evaluation, and 78% said they would oppose it if plea-only advocates had a separate grade.
Commenting on the findings at the CBA’s annual dinner in London tonight, Hill will warn the government that the criminal justice system is at risk because the role of barristers within it is becoming increasingly less viable. He will say that it is criminal barristers who uphold the public interest in access to justice and the maintenance of a proper criminal justice system, while the government, which wrongly accuses lawyers of being greedy, is itself ‘obsessed with money’.
On the payment delays, Hill will criticise the ‘wanton failure’ of central government to shore up the Legal Services Commission to ensure it paid barristers in a reasonable time had caused ‘heartache, depression and personal bankruptcy’.
Comments
As Solicitors have been
As Solicitors have been warned before, I do trust that Counsel will also be warned that such an organised strike may be against Competition laws and also their Code of Practice...
The Brave Bar
New Labour tried the cometition laws on the bar at the time of the last strike. The bar told them where to go. Needless to say the Law Society kow towed and also said referral fees could not continue because of competition law, which proved to be rubbish. I don't see the bar giving in this time.
Speaking of the last bar strike...
It was a disaster for the bar and, in most places, over before it began.
Srtrike
I've heard the law society beat on about anti competition laws prohibiting strikes but it makes no sense to me. I for one would be prepared to stand with the bar and refuse instructions. What can possibly be wrong with refusing to work due to the derisory rates of pay. if we stood firm together (which we will never do) we could force an increase in the rates, the first for 20 years. in fact the failure to increase the rates of pay is tantamount to a reduction accounting for inflation of course.
Of course the above is a self promoting point, what about the interests of justice, the price of justice or the cost of injustice. We must advocate the needs of the vulnerable defendants, those who are actually innocent or even the guilty who suffer abuse at the hands of the police, mistakes by the courts and prosecutors:
Oh hang on a minute, i just realised nobody cares.
Battling childish myths
As I heard on the Today programme, John Humphries asking Max Hill "Don`t you (barristers) all earn millions ?" Exactly like asking an actor "so what Hollywood film are you in then ? "
With the unashamed childishness of such questions, legal professionals are given an uphill task but that task must now be undertaken using strike action if need be. If the Government need educating as to the real situation confronting the administration of justice, so be it.
Max Hill on Today
Unfortunately, Max Hill then answered that an average criminal barrister earns about £50,000. If he thinks that that is a way to attract the support of Joe Public, I fear he is sadly mistaken.
Bar strike
Out of interest, if the Bar went on strike, would anybody notice? It may have escaped Mr. Hill QC's attention but since October 2011 and the last full round of cuts, solicitors don't send work out any more if there is any way they can do it in-house.
In most robing rooms, members of the bar are notable by one thing: Their absence. The CBA may oppose QASA and OCOF. In doing so, it also may just generate a P45 for most of its members who discover the hard way just how important they really are.
Got to do it
Until the Crime Bar gets out and shows the general public and Government that they are not 'fat cats' the MoJ will always have them in a corner.
Barristers need to get the message across that many thousands of the 14,000+ barristers in England and Wales are not rich at all.
That is the number 1 PR message to get across. If anyone at the BSB/Bar Council is reading this then please recognise this.
The MoJ will destroy your efforts by publishing details of those Silks that do make £1m+...
you have to fight a media war with the MoJ - and get out on the streets too.
You can do it if you really want to.
Hot air
Does anyone really think a strike would disrupt anything sufficiently to do any good? All it will do is alienate the profession and it has no chance of lasting long enough to extract concessions.
Strikes do work
'Does anyone really think a strike would disrupt anything...'
I have heard this self-defeating line so many times from those people who seem to remember nothing from their history classes at school.
Every single right we have was earned by collective action. Any position, any right has to be defended against those that would remove it for their own advantage.
This is very simple, politicians respond to threats from the public. If you jam up the courts everyone will get upset. Then the media will look for someone to blame. The MoJ and the Daily Mail will blame you. You need to strike and then fight back hard on the media side, e.g. don't roll out someone who earns £1m a year to defend your position. Get a load of juniors out there who make no more than a trainee school teacher. Invite the cameras in. Get some sympathy.
Getting Bob Crowe as an adviser may seem daft, but he knows a thing or two about striking and public opinion.
Sabre rattling.
Sabre rattling.
Direct action - Scargill was right!
The last Bar strike was ruined by a lack of leadership. Barely ten days into the action, one Circuit Leader announced - without consulting the membership - 'We have made our point and have gone back to work'. The CBA may hire Bob Crow as a locum adviser this time round.
Let there be no misunderstanding amongst solicitor advocates: opposition to a 'Plea Only Advocate' grade is a widespread point of principle for members who have endured cuts for the last decade and are in no mood for compromise.
The criminal bar has been on
The criminal bar has been on notice for the last decade that the deluge was coming. They have spouted a lot of hot air about changes they will make to become competitive (anyone remember ProcureCo). I am afraid you are dinosaurs and the asteroid has already hit.
If we are dinosaurs....
So far as I understand the history of our planet, the wiping out of the dinosaurs saw them being replaced by more advanced creatures with larger brains.
Probably time to find a better analogy?
False. They were replaced by
False. They were replaced by small mammals who could survive on limited resources and did what was necessary to survive. But the fact that those lowly creatures took the place of the dinosaurs did not stop the dinosaurs dying out...
Seen Solicitors
The writings been on the wall for a while. They've seen how the solicitors have been put on nailbeds for the last few years. Death by a thousand cuts. They are not prepared to accept the same happening to them.
Wrong...
Wrong. They think they've been put on the bed of nails by their solicitors and they would prefer to see solicitors sleep there instead.
Bar strike
Bet you there'd be no strike if they got first dibs on the cash...
How exactly does a
How exactly does a self-employed person "strike"?
Withdrawing labour from their employer (themselves)? I really am confused. If this is some form of collective action then there would be very difficult issues as to competition law, cartels and the like, wouldn't there?
Solicitor Advocate A (or indeed blackleg Barrister B) turns up for a trial and (say a four handed violent disorder) and two advocates are not at court for the fixture. A or B apply for wasted costs against C and D. Either the judge awards it (reluctantly) or the refusal is challenged to a higher court. Or does A & B have a private law action against C & D for damages? Does the Bar Mutual have a defence to refuse to pay the award as it was a wilfull refusal to work, rather than an action or omission done whilst working?
Equally, we all saw with the VHCC strike that 120 odd barristers ignored the strike and for some of them their punishment has become rishes beyond their wildest dreams as they cornered the marked to this day.
Genuinely baffled by this threat. The problem is that the "self-employed" model no longer functions below a certain level of seniority or work, ultimately probably the level of silk. (IMHO)
The analogy fits perfectly
The analogy fits perfectly well as you will all become museum pieces
"Let us go to the public"
Unfortunately for your profession, going to the public requires some sympathy with your predicament. The public has no sympathy with your profession. Greed, lack of ethics and corruption is not forgotten easily.