Thousands of criminal barristers vote for all-out strike in row with government

Watch more of our videos on Shots! 
and live on Freeview channel 276
Visit Shots! now
Criminal barristers in England and Wales have voted in favour of an all-out strike in a row with the Government over jobs and pay.

Members of the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) have been walking out on alternate weeks but were balloted on whether to escalate the industrial action with an indefinite, uninterrupted strike that would start on Monday September 5.

The continuous walkout effectively begins next week because the current alternate weeks are ongoing. This means Friday will be the last working day for barristers before they walk out on Tuesday August 30.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The ballot closed at midnight on Sunday and the result was announced on Monday morning.

Barristers picket Leeds Crown Court on the first day of nationwide strike action over legal aid fees. Picture: Asadour GuzelianBarristers picket Leeds Crown Court on the first day of nationwide strike action over legal aid fees. Picture: Asadour Guzelian
Barristers picket Leeds Crown Court on the first day of nationwide strike action over legal aid fees. Picture: Asadour Guzelian

How many barristers cast a vote?

The CBA said 2,273 barristers cast a vote, exceeding numbers taking part in polls in March and June.

In the latest ballot, almost 80 per cent – 1,808 people – voted in favour of escalating the action while 11 per cent – 258 people – wanted to continue current action and nine per cent – 207 people – called for an end to strikes.

How much disruption have the strikes caused so far?

According to Ministry of Justice (MoJ) figures, more than 6,000 court hearings have been disrupted a result of the dispute over conditions and Government-set fees for legal aid advocacy work.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Data released under freedom of information laws show that during the first 19 days of industrial action – between June 27 and August 5 – there were 6,235 court cases disrupted, including 1,415 trials, across England and Wales.

Will it have an impact on cases due to be heard in Leeds?

It looks likely to cause disruption to hearings scheduled to take place at Leeds Crown Court as there have been barristers in the city taking part in earlier walkouts.

When the first walkout took place on June 27, they staged a picket outside the court building and delivered speeches to highlight the reasons they were supporting the action.

Read More
'We'd welcome cameras in court': City's top judge backs TV coverage for high-pro...

What has the Criminal Bar Association said about the strike action?

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

CBA vice chairwoman Kirsty Brimelow QC said this is "last-resort action" over a demand for less money than it costs the Government for the courts to sit empty.

She told BBC Breakfast: "The effect (of the strike) will be that the courts continue to sit empty with trials and cases not being heard. It is a last-resort action.

"The remedy is for an injection of money into the backlog of cases, which currently stands at 60,000 cases, that barristers are working on that will cost the Government only £1.1m per month.

"Currently, it's costing much more for the courts to sit empty."

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Criminal barristers are due to receive a 15 per cent fee rise from the end of September, meaning they will earn £7,000 more per year.

But there has been anger that the proposed pay rise will not be made effective immediately and will only apply to new cases, not those already sitting in the backlog waiting to be dealt with by courts.

What is the Government saying?

Justice Minister Sarah Dines said: "This is an irresponsible decision that will only see more victims face further delays and distress.

"The escalation of strike action is wholly unjustified considering we are increasing criminal barristers' fees by 15 per cent, which will see the typical barrister earn around £7,000 more a year."

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The MoJ previously said it had "repeatedly explained" to the CBA that backdating pay would require a "fundamental change" in how fees are paid, adding: "That reform would cost a disproportionate amount of taxpayers' money and would take longer to implement, meaning barristers would have to wait longer for payment."