When discussing the recent indefinite strike action by the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) with a family member, they responded with ‘they’ll get no support with that down the pub’. 
We all have an idea of what a lawyer does. Criminal barristers are extremely recognisable, largely due to high profile TV dramas and films, artfully building a narrative in which the defendant inadvertently confesses to everything (maybe that’s just Legally Blonde). 
The other well-known side of being a lawyer is money, and usually lots of it. I believe this is what my family member was alluding to regarding the lack of support. ‘How can those minted lawyers possibly be going on strike for more money?’

 

Why are barristers who specialise in criminal law asking for better pay?

Criminal barrister Jo Sidhu, who was the Chair of the Criminal Barristers Association, made some excellent points about this on the podcast ‘Talking Law’.

Sidhu challenges the misconception that the strikes have been entered due to the sole goal of wanting more money. He states that those who join the criminal bar are not there for the money, but usually following a calling to fulfil a sense of public duty. 

However, having seen a 28% pay cut in real earnings over the last 20 years, alongside a neglect of the criminal justice system (“CJS”) through inadequate investment, becoming and remaining a criminal barrister has become really difficult. 

In the first three years of qualification, the average take-home wage for a criminal barrister is around £12,500 - hardly much reward for the years of expensive training required to be a barrister, nor the fiercely competitive process of gaining a pupillage in the first place. As a result, it has been reported that roughly 300 barristers left the criminal bar in the last year alone. 

With so many barristers leaving, Sidhu raises concerns regarding the future of the profession, and consequentially, the diversity of the workforce. 

We’ve all got a right to a fair trial

At some point, you or someone close to you, will encounter the criminal justice system. It is reasonable to assume that when this happens, you would expect a fully-functioning, independent system that provides justice. 

In the podcast, Sidhu highlights the damage that underfunding has had on this system, which only serves to undermine public trust in justice and therefore puts the civilised democracy that keeps us safe at risk. 

I think we can all agree that without the ability to seek justice effectively, it’s likely more people would relay to taking matters into their own hands; no-one wants that.

 

The risks of eradicating an independent bar

It’s important to remember why the bar must also remain an independent group of advocates. Sidhu makes his case on constitutional grounds: if barristers are brought under a public prosecution department, then their ability to hold truth to power is compromised. Since they are self-employed, the state’s ability to stop them from striking is non-existent. 

As anyone who has completed any Public Law module will know, if the Executive attempt to bypass appropriate scrutiny, then other arms of state move in to hold them accountable (Miller). 

The British constitution has been put under considerable strain post-Brexit, and by eradicating an independent bar, this only leaves greater opportunity for immoral and extreme policy makers to rule unchecked. 

 

The results are in…

After months of strikes, barristers returned to the courts on 18th October having accepted a 15% pay rise, which is significantly less than the 25% they initially requested. Conditions were only accepted by 57% of the voters. 

So, will this save the criminal justice system? 

With a 61,000-case backlog and with some of the new funds not available until 2024, there is a long way to go to ensure a CJS that is fit for purpose. Additionally, this pay increase is only applicable to barristers, yet solicitors are facing similar issues regarding retention and recruitment. Of the small amount of duty solicitors available across the country, only 4% of those are under 35. It could be the solicitors who follow suit if things show no sign of improvement.

Just like the emergency services within society, the CJS is chronically underfunded and as a result, it’s been failing. As a student who has dedicated the last three years to studying law, with a view to working in the field, I want to see a system that encourages and retains the best possible new talent. I believe a society should be judged by the quality of its support for those in their darkest of moments, and a way to ensure this is to provide a CJS that retains quality advocates available to all.

Barristers uphold a cornerstone of our democratic society and are central to the freedoms of the rule of law; we simply cannot afford to lose them.

 

References

Burns, J. (2022). Barristers start indefinite strike action over pay in England and Wales. [Online]. BBC News. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62757099 [Accessed 1 December 2022].

Sidhu, J. (2022). “Crisis in the CJS: What Price for Justice?”. Law Friends Society. November 2022. [Podcast]. Available at https://vimeo.com/763808969. [Accessed 1 December 2022].

Burns, J & Casciani, D. (2022). Criminal barristers vote to end strike over pay. [Online]. BBC News. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63198892 [Accessed 1 December 2022].

Sidhu, J. (2022). “Jo Sidhu”. Talking Law with Dr Sally Penni MBE. 5 September 2022. [Podcast]. Available at https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/jo-sidhu/id1446876356?i=1000578365912. [Accessed 01 December 2022].

The Law Society. (2022). Fix the broken system – back our criminal justice campaign. [Online]. The Law Society. Available at: https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/campaigns/criminal-justice [Accessed 1 December 2022].

 


More from the blog

All blogs