Get back to work!
Aren't you supposed to be teaching?
What, is Starbucks not open this morning?
Break time!
Ive alreday had my dad sharing fakenews tweets about train drivers striking
My sister-in-law ranting yesterday about train strikes, as if A) she'd ever get her fat arse out of her car & use public transport or B) she wasnt out to grift as much money as possible out of her job/benefits etc
GBNews has a lot to answer for
Sad troll if ever I saw one. If you had any idea of the issues facing criminal barristers and the reasons behind it, you wouldn't say that.
Try this as a starter to educate yourself:
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2022/06/27/the-criminal-bar-on-strike-9-things-you-need-to-know/
Im assuming aa was being sarcastic
Thats a whoosh for Jakester.
i think you missed the point, but still time to edit.
What, is Starbucks not open this morning?
What you did there, I see it.
Sad troll if ever I saw one. If you had any idea of the issues facing criminal barristers and the reasons behind it, you wouldn’t say that.
I assumed people would realise I was being sarcastic, I fully support everyone who feels they want to strike..another example of the gov running the country into the ground
Does feel like the decade+ of austerity is starting to bite. Year after year of the job getting worse and the pay going backwards.
Hmm, too subtle for me - in that there was nothing to indicate it was "ironic".
Isn't it an internet law that every post has to be taken at face value unless there is a 'wink' emoji?
Still, at least the information is there for those who might take it seriously...
I'm just disappointed the thread title wasn't "lazy barristerds"
Hmm, too subtle for me – in that there was nothing to indicate it was “ironic”.
I understood that it was a dig at the current government / biased reporting of transport strikes. It seemed obvious but maybe I spent too much time around here.
Isn’t it an internet law that every post has to be taken at face value unless there is a ‘wink’ emoji?
Yes? 😉
(No)
Anyway, thanks for the linked article.
Isn’t it an internet law that every post has to be taken at face value unless there is a ‘wink’ emoji?
Surely the "wink" is the face by which you value it?
Info is very good and interesting. I recommend everyone reads TSB's book about the law in general.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0753GBC5Z/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
It scared the shit out of me, how badly funded and broken the system is and how any of us could fall foul of it if things went badly for us. You might think 'I'm law abiding, what do i have to fear?' like I did......
It scared the shit out of me, how badly funded and broken the system is and how any of us could fall foul of it if things went badly for us. You might think ‘I’m law abiding, what do i have to fear?’ like I did…
Very much this.
Then read the follow up 'Fake Law" and be even more scared.
Isn’t it an internet law that every post has to be taken at face value unless there is a ‘wink’ emoji?
Try finding a QC to take that case on. Especially today.
I'm amazed we have any left! Their wages have been terrible for years and get worse every year.
Does feel like the decade+ of austerity is starting to bite. Year after year of the job getting worse and the pay going backwards.
Apparently £900/hr just isnt enough to live on.
On a related note to the TSB book and what do I have to fear etc, ages ago I came across this interesting talk. It's US based, but still quite an eye opener into how trying to help can end up incriminating yourself by accident...
Apparently £900/hr just isnt enough to live on.
Do you have a source for that and where do I sign up?
I think the issue they’ll face is that many folks may well think ‘lazy barristers’, as there is a perception that exists that lawyers are greedy overpaid parasites
Obviously the guys we are talking about on strike here are a million miles away from guys that give the profession a bad name. Why would you spend 5 years putting yourself through uni, to earn close on minimum wage. It’s ridiculous
If you think criminal barristers working legal aid cases earn £900/hr you need to stop reading the DM.
The figure the government are banding around is that a 15% pay ride would on average equate to a £7000 pay rise. This means on average they are earning less than £50k. My daughter quite fancied studying law but I think I'm going to suggest she trains as a train driver instead.
Access to the legal system has been systematically eroded for normal people for decades, bit by bit one small step at a time. IMO this is a bigger problem than "the bill or rights" which is going through at the moment (as bad as that is as well) because if you can't afford access to the legal system, then the mechanisms of the state, corporations and businesses can just roll over you indifferent to the law.
The barristers are just collateral damage in this objective.
Apparently £900/hr just isnt enough to live on.
That sort of fee is for those representing Russian oligarchs in libel cases and not those working on legal aid criminal cases.
12% of ALL barristers earn 30k or less.
Junior barristers starting out working legal aid cases can earn as little as £12k a year, which when you add in the non-chargeable time added to properly work a case is below minimum age.
Yes, the top QCs representing the big corporates own £1million/yr, but they are very much the tiny tip of a big iceberg. And they are BL@@dy clever!!!
which when you add in the non-chargeable time added to properly work a case is below minimum wage
This exactly. Even those on £50k will be working >60 hours per week. And this to stand up for someone who is almost certainly utterly defenceless against the state.
The issues being brought to attention here are not just about pay rates (shocking though they are).
Just wish the issues got as much media attention as the disruption to air travel and train strikes. The Criminal Bar Association should be consulting Mr Lynch for PR advice. Anyone reckon he’d do that pro bono?
dyna-ti
Apparently £900/hr just isnt enough to live on.
It isn't £900/hr.
Legal aid fees include a full trial (involving months of preparation) for £126 - in total.
Court appearance fees where train travel at peak time requires tickets of £100+ - £50.
Top commercial silks *might* charge £900/hr (though in my 20 years of working in the law I've never come across one - £675/hr being the most I've seen.) but even then that's a gross figure - at least 15% goes to chambers, plus tax, NI, pension etc.
Basically unless you are independently wealthy junior *criminal* barristers can't survive.
If you think criminal barristers working legal aid cases earn £900/hr you need to stop reading the DM.
I didnt say criminal barristers, and neither did the OP, you introduced it.
I didnt say criminal barristers, and neither did the OP, you introduced it.
As the strike being referred to is by members of the Criminal Bar Association, it's kind of implied though?
I recommend the third TSB book too, and they were interviewed by James O'Brien on his Full Disclosure thing recently, which was also interesting.
Access to the legal system has been systematically eroded for normal people for decades, bit by bit one small step at a time. IMO this is a bigger problem than “the bill or rights” which is going through at the moment (as bad as that is as well) because if you can’t afford access to the legal system, then the mechanisms of the state, corporations and businesses can just roll over you indifferent to the law.
Very much this - if the Crown charges you with a crime, if you're over the threshold for legal aid (which pays close to nothing anyway), you're liable for the costs of your defense. So you can very easily bankrupt yourself if you're ever wrongly accused of a crime, and there is no compensation available. Does that seem reasonable?
This ^ - you can run up costs in preparing a defence, which can then be delayed over and over due to court time and backlogs and the (also criminally underfunded) CPS not having their stuff sorted.....with the inevitable stress involved and the toll on you and your family. And then they realise they don't have a case after all and drop it.
No harm done eh. It's only cost you your life savings, your marriage and your health.
Very much this – if the Crown charges you with a crime, if you’re over the threshold for legal aid (which pays close to nothing anyway), you’re liable for the costs of your defense. So you can very easily bankrupt yourself if you’re ever wrongly accused of a crime, and there is no compensation available. Does that seem reasonable?
That truly scared me - the thought that I, on average wage, would have to sell my house and make my family homeless if the state decided to wrongly charge me with a serious crime in order to defend the charge.
Every right and protection that is removed from criminals/benefits cheats/foreigners etc etc is also taken away from you and I, our children, the disabled, the vulnerable. But the newspapers don't mention that when they are whipping up the hatred.
dyna-ti
I didnt say criminal barristers, and neither did the OP, you introduced it.
The thread is about the strike action being taken by members of the criminal bar.
Introducing hourly rates for commercial barristers working in an entirely different field is simply not comparable. But you knew that, didn't you?
Apparently £900/hr just isnt enough to live on.
Those days are over. My Wife's Uncle was QC before he retired, he specialised in 'Heavy Crime' and Serious Fraud. The Daily Mail went after him and a few of his peers a few years ago for claiming over £1m a year in Legal Aid cases (the cases he worked on lasted months). He also had some wealthy clients. He's very wealthy.
My Next Door Neighbour is also a retired Barrister, he lives with his Sister in a house they inherited. He drives a 20 year old Astra, he could be a miser, but I've never got the impression he's caked.
Anyway, my point is, there's a tiny % who make a lot of money, especially back when we actually funded criminal law, but these days there's almost no money in criminal law. We're being pushed toward a US system in which defendants are incentivised to plead guilty to avoid a trial (and 2 years on remand waiting for a date).
Don't feel bad about not knowing the details; neither does our deputy Prime Minister
https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1541353230826934273?s=20&t=cungxwRgVxj1qQKqlRFnjQ
We’re being pushed toward a US system in which defendants are incentivised to plead guilty to avoid a trial (and 2 years on remand waiting for a date).
Another TSB story tells of a man held on remand for GBH or something similar, it took six months for digital forensics to investigate his phone and when they did, it showed clearly and unambiguously that he'd been elsewhere at the time of the attack. So they let him out and that's it - six months in limbo for a crime he didn't commit, were his job, house and family still there waiting for him? Who knows - just take it on the chin and off you pop.
Meanwhile, as noted above, former lawyer Raab bleats on about barristers causing delays.