Junior criminal barristers have expressed despair at the vote to end their indefinite strike, calling it a “death warrant” for the profession which resulted from senior colleagues accepting the government’s offer.
Barristers returned to work on Tuesday after 57% voted to accept a 15% increase in legal aid fees, which will also apply to the backlog of about 60,000 cases in the crown courts, despite originally demanding 25%.
The Criminal Bar Association (CBA) had framed the action, covering England and Wales, as a fight for the survival of the profession with particular emphasis on the low pay for juniors – said to receive £12,200 a year on average in the first three years of practice – and many believe it did not achieve its aims.
Kate Riekstina, who was called to the bar in 2016, was tearful, as she said: “I honestly think we signed the death warrant for the criminal bar. The only thing that I really genuinely wanted was for people from any background, any race, sex, religious beliefs, anyone who was capable and good to be able to come into this profession and at least it be survivable and I feel like we’ve lost that now.”
Riekstina said that at a Zoom meeting of young criminal barristers, 84% of about 200 junior barristers said they would be voting “no”. She said she understood that some people from the senior bar wanted to return to work because they had mortgages to pay, but added: “Juniors can’t afford to have a mortgage. At the moment, I don’t know how I’m going to pay rent next month, I’m using my tax money that I saved up to pay for it.”
She said the fact that the decisions of the promised new Criminal Legal Aid Advisory Board on pay would not be binding on the government had reinforced her opposition to the deal. She is now considering leaving the CBA and even becoming a social worker because “at least you get sick pay and annual leave”.
All of those the Guardian spoke to highlighted that the 15% was recommended as the minimum required immediately almost a year ago by the criminal legal aid review, while the CBA says criminal barristers have seen real earnings fall by 28% since 2006 while inflation is running at about 10%.
There are also concerns that fixed sums of money pledged for preparatory work, pre-recorded cross-examinations and youth courts will be insufficient.
Hamish McCallum, a barrister of two years’ experience, said the deal had not done enough to make the criminal bar an attractive proposition.
“It’s quite clear to me from the people I’ve spoken to that there’s a big divide between seniors and juniors,” he said. “If you’re further advanced in your career then a 15% increase on your fee income is probably quite attractive. If you are, like I am, typically doing hearings, which are of a fixed fee, £90 or £125, which often require you to travel a great distance for court – and travel expenses aren’t reimbursed – that change is significantly lower.”
Samuel March, who has also practised for two years, agreed that senior barristers, particularly those who only did criminal work, were keen to go back.
He said: “I think there are those on the ‘no’ side who think this is a matter of life and death for the future of the junior bar and they feel much more let down by those voting to go back. I can understand that level of sentiment.”
He predicted a slow death, with criminal specialists diversifying into other areas of law, as he has already started to do. “It will be that slowly it [other work] goes from being 30% of their practice to 50% to 60% until I’m actually only doing 10% legal aid work because that allows me to go home, meet friends once a week, have a bit more of a life, more money and less stress.”
