Barrister Salary Cap

Jim_Are_Great

Just had a discussion with a barrister about this, was interested to know what people think.

Could a cap on barristers' earnings be introduced? Would it have any beneficial effects in terms of deflating legal costs etc, or should the legal market be kept open?

dats_right

Sounds like populist nonsense! Two points of note; firstly, there is absolutely nothing stopping somebody who is instructing a barrister from negotiating fees, etc; secondly, one could argue that fees are somewhat 'capped' already by the system of taxation of costs.

Jim_Are_Great

Negotaitions aren't all that meaningful really. Clients don't always have full choice over their representation. A cap would deflate the wages of all barristers so that even where negotiations do take place, they could take place in an environment which is more litigant-friendly.

Sangre

I hear its all the rage in SOVIET RUSSIA you red commie.

Jim_Are_Great

In Soviet Russia, hackneyed turns of phrase make YOU.

Tom Young

Like any good taxi driver would know, Barristers are sole traders, best of luck applying that idea.

Jim_Are_Great

They perform a public function, though. Surely it's not completely unthinkable that the state should regulate private enterprise to some extent?

Quaver

How do they perform a public service? They're hired to do a job, just like anyone else.

As mentioned, they're fees are capped to a certain extent in that they can be taxed if there is a dispute. Also, you can get a quote from a Barrister for the work to be done, and if you don't like it, you can shop around.

Jim_Are_Great

Quaver wrote: »

How do they perform a public service? They're hired to do a job, just like anyone else.

As mentioned, they're fees are capped to a certain extent in that they can be taxed if there is a dispute. Also, you can get a quote from a Barrister for the work to be done, and if you don't like it, you can shop around.

They're hired to do a job which is legally mandated, and often form part of a transaction into which people have little choice but to enter.

Also, you can shop around, but all barristers determine their own fees (as far as my very limited understanding goes). If there was a cap, the highest salary echelons would be decreased, thus deflating prices across the board.

dats_right

But why stop there Comrade, sorry I mean OP, why not also cap restaurants, bars, shops, etc as they are all exploiting the proletariat.. In fact, why don't we do it properly and just abolish private ownership of land and private enterprise entirely.. Viva la revolucion!!

Jim_Are_Great

That's very witty, Dats_Right.

Shops in direct competition operate to keep prices low. Barristers in closed competition keep prices high.

Also, recourse to barristers is, in most legal matters of significance, inevitable. The entire legal system is predicated on representation by legal experts. Their services can be publicly mandated, but their operations are privately regulated? It's not as intuitive you suggest.

It's just a thought experiment, really.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

That's very witty, Dats_Right.

Shops in direct competition operate to keep prices low. Barristers in closed competition keep prices high.

Also, recourse to barristers is, in most legal matters of significance, inevitable. The entire legal system is predicated on representation by legal experts. Their services can be publicly mandated, but their operations are privately regulated? It's not as intuitive you suggest.

It's just a thought experiment, really.

Barristers are not in closed competition.

There are many barristers on the bread-line. Incentive, if ever I heard it, to slash prices to gain work.

Jim_Are_Great

Does that leave people, by and large, with an exclusive choice between successful barristers and affordable barristers?

Lefournier

dats_right wrote: »

Sounds like populist nonsense! Two points of note; firstly, there is absolutely nothing stopping somebody who is instructing a barrister from negotiating fees, etc; secondly, one could argue that fees are somewhat 'capped' already by the system of taxation of costs.

I think they have already reduced fees by 8% in line with all other contractors paid by the public purse. What is to stop them cutting fees by 50%. If an individual barrister chooses not to accept a thousand for a day's work, I think there will be no shortage of volunteers.

Jo King

The 8% reduction is on legal aid fees which are paid by the state. Nothing to do with the o/p's question, which refers to fees paid by the public.

mountainyman

There are 2 related points.

[1] Irish Barristers are generally overpaid. After 10 years the average earnings at the Irish bar are significantly higher than in the UK.

HOWEVER a salary cap is nonsense.

Look outside this jurisdiction at the Ardagh Glass case in the UK. Ardagh glass is seeking to force quinn to destroy a glass recycling facility worth hundreds of millions. If there were 4 barristers a side the skill and guile of the one barrister was more than another and Quinn spent 1 million on barristers fees for 2 months work and won wouldn't that still be money well spent?

Jim_Are_Great

mountainyman wrote: »

There are 2 related points.

[1] Irish Barristers are generally overpaid. After 10 years the average earnings at the Irish bar are significantly higher than in the UK.

HOWEVER a salary cap is nonsense.

Look outside this jurisdiction at the Ardagh Glass case in the UK. Ardagh glass is seeking to force quinn to destroy a glass recycling facility worth hundreds of millions. If there were 4 barristers a side the skill and guile of the one barrister was more than another and Quinn spent 1 million on barristers fees for 2 months work and won wouldn't that still be money well spent?

I'm not sure I follow your second point.

Jo King

mountainyman wrote: »

There are 2 related points.

[1] Irish Barristers are generally overpaid. After 10 years the average earnings at the Irish bar are significantly higher than in the UK.

?

What is your source for this?

Tom Young

mountainyman wrote: »

Look outside this jurisdiction at the Ardagh Glass case in the UK. Ardagh glass is seeking to force quinn to destroy a glass recycling facility worth hundreds of millions. If there were 4 barristers a side the skill and guile of the one barrister was more than another and Quinn spent 1 million on barristers fees for 2 months work and won wouldn't that still be money well spent?

I am not sure I get the point here either - however, there is one thing I will say, to vindicate rights or indeed have an intricate surgery, expertise is required and expertise costs money whether the matter be civil, criminal or surgical I know I'd hire the best I could afford.

Before this one turns into a fight of affording Barristers, I often look at certain non-reputable newspaper reporting of Criminal Legal Aid, which is totally and completely one-sided. If the state decide to have and retain the best possible prisecutors on a case, then I can say that a person who is yet to be found guilty of an offence and is before the courts needs the best possible defence team that money can buy, even if it is and comes in the guises of a criminal legal aid brief.


Tom

Johnny Utah

Not sure if it would fit well with the traditional wig and gown..........

Lefournier

Jo King wrote: »

The 8% reduction is on legal aid fees which are paid by the state. Nothing to do with the o/p's question, which refers to fees paid by the public.

OP was a comment on barristers' earnings in general and did not mention legal aid.

Incidentally, the vast bulk of barristers' earnings are underwritten by the State, directly so when the DPP or some other State body is a party to the action (and somehow that party gets fixed with costs more often than not), but also indirectly in areas such as insurance which are essentially a product of a system underpinned by the State. It's time to stop the gravy train.

focusing

Their fees are capped, if you just ask them what they'll be at the start of your case.

maidhc

Lefournier wrote: »

OP was a comment on barristers' earnings in general and did not mention legal aid.

Incidentally, the vast bulk of barristers' earnings are underwritten by the State, directly so when the DPP or some other State body is a party to the action (and somehow that party gets fixed with costs more often than not), but also indirectly in areas such as insurance which are essentially a product of a system underpinned by the State. It's time to stop the gravy train.

I know a lot of barristers, any many of them are excellent. Most earn less than your average civil servant.

Lefournier

maidhc wrote: »

I know a lot of barristers, any many of them are excellent. Most earn less than your average civil servant.

After a few years practice, the typical working barrister is earning much more than an average civil servant (remember most civil servants are in clerical grades). In any event, do you know of a way to protect the low-paid while hitting the big earners and the incompetent?

Johnny Utah

Lefournier wrote: »

After a few years practice, the typical working barrister is earning much more than an average civil servant (remember most civil servants are in clerical grades). In any event, do you know of a way to protect the low-paid while hitting the big earners and the incompetent?

You're talking through your hoop there buddy. Troll.

marinbike

mountainyman wrote: »

There are 2 related points.

[1] Irish Barristers are generally overpaid. After 10 years the average earnings at the Irish bar are significantly higher than in the UK.

HOWEVER a salary cap is nonsense.

Look outside this jurisdiction at the Ardagh Glass case in the UK. Ardagh glass is seeking to force quinn to destroy a glass recycling facility worth hundreds of millions. If there were 4 barristers a side the skill and guile of the one barrister was more than another and Quinn spent 1 million on barristers fees for 2 months work and won wouldn't that still be money well spent?

Irish Barristers are among the most overpaid in Europe. They must take a salary cut. Their fees are exceptionally high, compared to Barristers on the continent.

Most people have already taken a pay cut, I don't see why Irish Barristers should be any exception to this. Everyone is complaining about the high fees the legal profession are still charging. Rip-off

nuac

As a solicitor have had many years experience of choosing barristers. Most clients want the best available for the particular case, not the cheapest.

Barristers are in compeitition with each other for work. Capping their fees or income is nonsense. They don't get salaries.

There have been some massive fees paid for tribunal work. That should not have happened and should have been better controlled.

However tribunal work is a different planet from the normal daily legal grind

Skopzz

nuac wrote: »

As a solicitor have had many years experience of choosing barristers. Most clients want the best available for the particular case, not the cheapest.

Barristers are in compeitition with each other for work. Capping their fees or income is nonesense. They don't get salaries.

There have been some massive fees paid for tribunal work. That should not have happened and should have been better controlled.

However tribunal work is a different planet from the normal daily legal grind

If I was looking for a barrister, I would look for the cheapest. Barristers are paid outrageous sums of money for the work they do. Lawyers are also grossly overpaid.

Lawyers and Barristers should be forced to take a salary cap as well as a pay cut. Anything less that this constitutes greed. Thats whats keping prices so high in this country.

dats_right

Skopzz wrote: »

If I was looking for a barrister, I would look for the cheapest. Barristers are paid outrageous sums of money for the work they do. Lawyers are also grossly overpaid.

Lawyers and Barristers should be forced to take a salary cap as well as a pay cut. Anything less that this constitutes greed. Thats whats keping prices so high in this country.

Firstly, to clarify for you on your basic ignorances of the legal profession; a lawyer is a generic name for either a solicitor or barrister. In any event, either this is uninformed, ridiculous, nonsense or the poster is trolling. Whatever it is, it is not worthy of further comment.

johnnysmurfman

How could you possibly do this? Particularly when barristers are sole traders and where the amount earned depends on the quantity and type of work done. Could you cap sole trader bricklayers' fees?

A barrister can earn fees from so many sources that it would be very difficult to list them, and almost impossible to put in place a scale of fees. A planning law opinion might take 20 minutes or it could take 10 hours, how could you possibly say that the one that takes 10 hours will cost the same as the one that takes 20 minutes?

Barristers are required to provide estimates of their fees in advance though so that is of assistance.

Finally, why did you not suggest capping solicitors' fees when they are almost always higher?

servicecharge

This is a crazy thread. Most barristers at 5 years experience would, at a good guess, earn an average of 60-100k a year.

Our good friends in the ESB have average salaries larger than this. Middle ranking to senior gardai earn more than this.

Likewise middle to senior manangement in most civil service posts earn similiar amounts.

So why pick barristers? They have longer educations than all the above, the are also sole practitioners meaning it isn't an easy job and they don't have the pensions and associated benefits of all the above.

If you want to cap pay I would suggest starting with the public sector.

Tom Young

Would you pick a dentist for a triple bypass? If the answer is yes, then thats fine!

marinbike

servicecharge wrote: »

This is a crazy thread. Most barristers at 5 years experience would, at a good guess, earn an average of 60-100k a year.

Our good friends in the ESB have average salaries larger than this. Middle ranking to senior gardai earn more than this.

Likewise middle to senior manangement in most civil service posts earn similiar amounts.

So why pick barristers? They have longer educations than all the above, the are also sole practitioners meaning it isn't an easy job and they don't have the pensions and associated benefits of all the above.

If you want to cap pay I would suggest starting with the public sector.

Thats so typical of the law society: using the fact they done a few yrs of 'Law' education to justify such costs. Barristers will almost certainly live a happy life, no matter what recession hits Ireland.

Its unbelieveable how much greed some people acquire these days.

The current cost of legal fees from Barristers is crazy. I could become a barrister in a few years but I still wouldn't rip-off my clients. Maybe you would?

servicecharge

Marinbike: I love the way you quote me but then don't address any of my points.

Again my points is that barristers are, on average, paid similar rates to their equivalents in the civil and public service.

Nobody wants to address that point.

I'd also point out that unemployment across both legal professions is running at over 10%. So I very much doubt you would succeed in becoming a barrister in the first place, let alone have an opportunity to charge any fees.

(And just to let you know the law society represents solicitors not barristers. If you can't even figure that out I really doubt you'll ever make the grade)

servicecharge

To add to my above post re salaries levels of barristers and civil servants.

According to the competition authority the average salary of barristers of 7 to 9 years experience is €81,000 (with a median of 63k).http://www.tca.ie/templates/index.aspx?pageid=932

The average ESB salary, as reported in the media recently, is €92,000 (with poolebeg staff being 142k). http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/1001/energy.html

I like to see some people address these figures on the board. And remember barristers have an office to run and don't get pensions, so their salaries are significantly lower than the ESB.

servicecharge

I see some hard facts killed this thread!

nuac

Many do not realise that the Bar is one of the last of the free markets. Any solicitor large firm or one (wo)man operation can consult one of the leading specialists in e.g. planning, family law,crime or whatever at the Law Library.

If the bar did not practice through the Law Library system there is a risk that they would become linked to the big 5 offices, this further polarising legal services.

A good barrister in your corner in an important matter is worth the money.

I havent read any survey about comparative costs for legal services, but I hae had experience of seeing very high charges by lawyers in UK and USA.

Skopzz

servicecharge wrote: »

To add to my above post re salaries levels of barristers and civil servants.

According to the competition authority the average salary of barristers of 7 to 9 years experience is €81,000 (with a median of 63k).http://www.tca.ie/templates/index.aspx?pageid=932

The average ESB salary, as reported in the media recently, is €92,000 (with poolebeg staff being 142k). http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/1001/energy.html

I like to see some people address these figures on the board. And remember barristers have an office to run and don't get pensions, so their salaries are significantly lower than the ESB.

€81,000 salary is a mini-jackpot. Most people in the private sector are on €24,000 - €35,000 per annum. You're trying to say thats the same as a Barristers salary of €81,000? Even so, Irish Barristers are earning a lot more than Barristers in any other Eurozone country.

The prices irish Barristers charge are very high. Most private sector workers have led by example and taken a pay cut. But the ones at the top (Barristers, Lawers, Architects, Doctors etc.) are still cash greedy. Yes, they are the ones refusing to drop their fees and hopefully, they get no business as a result. Otherwise, the tax rate on such high earners should double as a deterrant.

You claim that irish barristers have an office to run, but thats no different than someone who runs a local business from their office.

maidhc

Skopzz wrote: »

€81,000 salary is a mini-jackpot. Most people in the private sector are on €24,000 - €35,000 per annum. You're trying to say thats the same as a Barristers salary of €81,000? Even so, Irish Barristers are earning a lot more than Barristers in any other Eurozone country.

A barrister has to

1) go to college (3-4 yrs)
2) Do inns exams
3) Go to the inns (1 year)
4) Work for free (1 year)
5) Work for peanuts (dry roasted or ready salted, they are allowed to choose) (1-5years)

So by the time they are are 30+ they are just beginning to work. The person who left school at 18 has already earned close to half a million at this point if they made an effort, the barrister is probably in debt to all and sundry.

And this assumes they actually made it at all. Many don't survive.

Johnny Utah

Skopzz wrote: »

€81,000 salary is a mini-jackpot. Most people in the private sector are on €24,000 - €35,000 per annum. You're trying to say thats the same as a Barristers salary of €81,000? Even so, Irish Barristers are earning a lot more than Barristers in any other Eurozone country.

The prices irish Barristers charge are very high. Most private sector workers have led by example and taken a pay cut. But the ones at the top (Barristers, Lawers, Architects, Doctors etc.) are still cash greedy. Yes, they are the ones refusing to drop their fees and hopefully, they get no business as a result. Otherwise, the tax rate on such high earners should double as a deterrant.

You claim that irish barristers have an office to run, but thats no different than someone who runs a local business from their office.

- Architects are going through a tough time at the moment. I think it's unfair to label them, in particular, as "cash greedy".

- The fees charged by Irish barristers, by international standards, are not high imo. If anything, both branches of the Irish legal profession in this country are vastly overpopulated compared to other countries of similar size, thereby creating a more competitive market.

- Doctors, in Ireland, operate in a closed shop.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Skopzz wrote: »

€81,000 salary is a mini-jackpot. Most people in the private sector are on €24,000 - €35,000 per annum. You're trying to say thats the same as a Barristers salary of €81,000? Even so, Irish Barristers are earning a lot more than Barristers in any other Eurozone country.

The prices irish Barristers charge are very high. Most private sector workers have led by example and taken a pay cut. But the ones at the top (Barristers, Lawers, Architects, Doctors etc.) are still cash greedy. Yes, they are the ones refusing to drop their fees and hopefully, they get no business as a result. Otherwise, the tax rate on such high earners should double as a deterrant.

You claim that irish barristers have an office to run, but thats no different than someone who runs a local business from their office.

rofl

Reloc8

You might as well debate whether plumbers, carpenters, electricians or any other self-employed professional should have their salaries capped.

Seriously...if we're talking about barristers engaged in practice as barristers (and not people employed who are qualified barristers)...how can you possibly say that they should have a salary cap ? Does that mean if they have earned the limit they are not allowed take any more clients for that year ?

Skopzz

Reloc8 wrote: »

You might as well debate whether plumbers, carpenters, electricians or any other self-employed professional should have their salaries capped.

Seriously...if we're talking about barristers engaged in practice as barristers (and not people employed who are qualified barristers)...how can you possibly say that they should have a salary cap ? Does that mean if they have earned the limit they are not allowed take any more clients for that year ?

The self employed have taken a pay cut already. Its the Barristers & Attorneys, the Doctors, the Dentists etc. who are still pinching the cash out of peoples pockets.

The country can't afford that.

dermot_sheehan

Alot of misinformation in this thread.

The fact is good legal advice and good advocacy are valuable things that can save a client multitudes of what it costs. For this reason in a free market clients are willing to pay for top legal advice, if a limit was placed on payment, other mechanisms of rationing legal skill would have to be imposed.

Reloc8

Skopzz wrote: »

The self employed have taken a pay cut already. Its the Barristers & Attorneys, the Doctors, the Dentists etc. who are still pinching the cash out of peoples pockets.

The country can't afford that.

You are 100% correct.

You should probably report these thefts to your local garda station.

Skopzz

Johnny Utah wrote: »

- The fees charged by Irish barristers, by international standards, are not high imo. If anything, both branches of the Irish legal profession in this country are vastly overpopulated compared to other countries of similar size, thereby creating a more competitive market.

- Doctors, in Ireland, operate in a closed shop.

Thats so misleading....

Their fees are among the highest in the Eurozone. Theres very poor competition at present because most Irish Barristers are closely following the prices of other Barristers (which are already too high). Anyway, theres a culture of 'I deserve more' still rampant in the Irish Legal profession.

Tester46

Skopzz wrote: »

Thats so misleading....

Their fees are among the highest in the Eurozone. Theres very poor competition at present because most Irish Barristers are closely following the prices of other Barristers (which are already too high). Anyway, theres a culture of 'I deserve more' still rampant in the Irish Legal profession.

You wouldn't by any chance have any hard facts to back up your wild allegations?;)

marinbike

servicecharge wrote: »

Marinbike: I love the way you quote me but then don't address any of my points.

Again my points is that barristers are, on average, paid similar rates to their equivalents in the civil and public service.

Nobody wants to address that point.

I'd also point out that unemployment across both legal professions is running at over 10%. So I very much doubt you would succeed in becoming a barrister in the first place, let alone have an opportunity to charge any fees.

(And just to let you know the law society represents solicitors not barristers. If you can't even figure that out I really doubt you'll ever make the grade)

Servicecharge,

The civil and public service pay rates are about to be cut in next weeks budget. What excuse will you and the Bar Council be using after that?!

The Bar Council (back in 2002) said 'we shall not be changed'. The Barristers employed by the state are contributing to the €22bn Exchequer Deficit. Of course Barristers would revolt against salary cuts but this will (and must) happen sooner rather than later. The pay rates are no longer applicable to the post-celtic tiger days. The problem was that their salaries were allowed to keep balooning (without anyone challenging this) and that was wrong. I am personally in favour of reform but nobody wants to pay their part. If everyone had that attitude, the country would be screwed.

Reloc8

marinbike wrote: »

Servicecharge,

The civil and public service pay rates are about to be cut in next weeks budget. What excuse will you and the Bar Council be using after that?!

The Bar Council (back in 2002) said 'we shall not be changed'. The Barristers employed by the state are contributing to the €22bn Exchequer Deficit. Of course Barristers would revolt against salary cuts but this will (and must) happen sooner rather than later. The pay rates are no longer applicable to the post-celtic tiger days. The problem was that their salaries were allowed to keep balooning (without anyone challenging this) and that was wrong. I am personally in favour of reform but nobody wants to pay their part. If everyone had that attitude, the country would be screwed.

Look, barristers in practice do not get salaries.

Secondly, barrister's engaged to act for the State and state entities have already had cuts imposed on their fees per case in line with all other service providers to the State and state employees.

Thirdly, barristers in practice do not get salaries.

If you are referring to qualified barristers who are employed by the State then you are talking about Public/Civil Servants.

marinbike

Reloc8 wrote: »

Look, barristers in practice do not get salaries.

Secondly, barrister's engaged to act for the State and state entities have already had cuts imposed on their fees per case in line with all other service providers to the State and state employees.

Thirdly, barristers in practice do not get salaries.

If you are referring to qualified barristers who are employed by the State then you are talking about Public/Civil Servants.

True, I addressed the civil/public service issue that servicecharge asked me to address above. Parallels were drawn between the civil service and Barristers when it came to defending the Barristers wages. That inferiority won't exist after next week when the government cuts the civil service pay.