Hudson: bar strike would ‘damage profession’
Strike action by the bar will damage the legal profession and the justice system, the Law Society’s chief executive Desmond Hudson has warned, after a survey showed that nine out of 10 criminal barristers are prepared to refuse work in protest over fee rates and reforms.
A survey completed by 1,685 Criminal Bar Association members - half the membership - revealed that 89% of respondents would be prepared to take lawful direct action. Grievances include falling fees, late payments, competitive tendering and a ‘one case, one fee’ payment model, as well as the new accreditation scheme for advocates.
In a speech last week, CBA chair Max Hill QC told members: ‘Let us fight, and let us remember the option to strike.’
Solicitors reacted coolly to the call. Hudson said successive cuts to legal aid had affected every criminal defence lawyer in the country, with many paid less than nurses and teachers. However ‘a strike is likely to cause further damage to the legal profession, defendants, victims and the justice system as a whole’.
Hudson added: ‘We will continue to press government to reform the many procedural and other problems that lead to wasted expenditure and to change the fee structure which currently means some advocates are paid much more than others.’
Other representative groups were reluctant to indicate whether solicitors would back barristers.
Chair of the Solicitors Association of Higher Court Advocates Yvonne Spencer said the bar had not consulted the group over any action. While many of the bar’s grievances concern solicitor-advocates as well as barristers, ‘strike action is unlikely to be successful’ due to the oversupply of advocates, she said.
The group’s former chair Avtar Bhatoa said: ‘While a commonality of interest clearly exists between advocates, the outdated tribal nature of practice means there is no unity between self-employed barristers and higher court advocates. There is simply no fraternal dialogue between them.
‘Bodies like the CBA and Bar Standards Board are hostile and spend a great deal of their time scheming against and criticising solicitors in terms that are unprofessional and most unwise, but are a predictable symptom of competition in an environment where one side sticks to a referral model only but watches in anguish as its caseload diminishes.’
However, Bill Waddington, vice-chair of the Criminal Law Solicitors Association, said: ‘We will be as supportive as we possibly can.’
News
- Unanimous: profession votes for ‘training days’ action in protest over cuts
- International firms call off merger
- Hundreds attend legal aid protest rally
- Small business spurning legal services – LSB research
- HMRC proposes crackdown on LLP ‘disguised employment’
- PCT will mean the death of Welsh justice, lawyers warn
- Poor will suffer from court fee changes, MoJ warned
- Overwhelming public backing for legal aid: poll
- Fight PI changes, says MASS chair
- Mass meeting of barristers takes a stand on QASA
- Pannone turns to fixed-price mediation post-Jackson
- Grayling asks for quality standard for PCT firms
- 7,000 lawyers to hit the streets for free legal advice
- ‘Google’ asylum refusals
- Pilot aims to limit clinical negligence solicitors’ fees
- Will-writing could still be regulated
- In-house growth accelerating
- Appeal Court applies Russian law in dispute
- Insurers to revamp third-party code
- Court interpreters reject new contract deal
- European data plan labelled ‘demented’
- Saudi Arabia accepts registration of female lawyer
- Don’t worry about Jackson fallout – judge
- North-west paralegal initiative
- French revolution

Comments
Surely Desmond Hudson should
Surely Desmond Hudson should see that doing some damage by not being there is the whole point? To show they cannot be taken for granted. The gov't has said in the past it can keep reducing fees because someone will do it. Legal aid rates are already rock bottom. I wish the Law Society would grow a spine, I sometimes think they are out to work against the interests of solicitors rather than for them.
Justitia omnibus
It would not be good for a stable to democracy to have lawyers going out on strike and I do hope the strike does not go ahead. However, I do find it incredible at the sheer pace of reforms in legal services and how the pay and status of lawyers is diminishing to an absurd level. If you had told me lorry and supermarket companies would be getting involved in legal services 15 years ago I would have laughed. How did the lorry company find out - is there a transport consultancy in the regulatory apparatus?
The problem is that lawyers cannot defend themselves the way that unionised areas of the workforce can so I have sympathy with those that want to strike but would urge them not to.
Should they just accept ever
Should they just accept ever decreasing pay and conditions? Until no-one wants to do it any longer or it is no longer financially viable? Sympathy is nice but the utility and mortgage companies won't accept it in payment.
Damage the profession!!!
Mr Hudson is having a Giraffe! What a stand up, the man is!
Strike!
Just how unhelpful can you get? Des Hudson's comments do little other than to help ensure disunity within the legal profession. Personally, I can't bear the type of paymaster subservience he displays. So TLS is going to continue to lobby Government? What tosh. He may as well whip out the white flag again
I'm only an interested observer but, I wholly support the strike action and any portion of the legal profession that actually draws a line in the sand, especially in respect of the continuing decimation of legal aid. It's time to stand up, drop the disinterested air and cut the glib about 'damaging justice' - I don't know if you've noticed but justice remains in peril, Des. You should cut the internecine nonsense and protect her with all your might