Solicitor v Barrister Pay

paky

Do barristers make more money than solicitors? What kind of money can you expect to earn starting off?

bath handle

Some do, some don't.
€10,000.

johnnyskeleton

bath handle wrote: »

Some do, some don't.
€10,000.

In the first year of barristerrin anyway, that would probably be the outer limit (unless the person has contacts who are prepared to send lots of high paying briefs their way).

The lowest pay for the first year of barristerrin' would be -4,000 i.e. no money coming in and 3k to law library, 1k for wigs and gowns and such. If on circuit or travelling a lot, this rises significantly with transport and accomodation costs.

Wolfe Tone

So barristers can expect to be living off raw spuds for their first year or so then?

1k for wigs and gowns and such

What percentage of barristers wear wigs these days? No way in hell I will be wearing one if I get there.

Wolfe Tone

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

So barristers can expect to be living off raw spuds for their first year or so then?



What percentage of barristers wear wigs these days? No way in hell I will be wearing one if I get there.

Some do, I'd say the majority don't. It's a personal choice although some judges have quite strongly held opinions on the matter.

johnnyskeleton

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

So barristers can expect to be living off raw spuds for their first year or so then?

Raw spuds if you're lucky etc.

Seriously though, it depends on what sort of a warchest you build up before practice, what sort of part time/lecturing work you can do, how decent your master is about letting you bill for work done and any other work or sources of income that you have.

I think the safest thing is to expect to make no money, and any money made (from barristerrin' as opposed to part time work etc) should be considered a bonus.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

What percentage of barristers wear wigs these days? No way in hell I will be wearing one if I get there.

47.3%. If you don't want to wear one then don't buy one either. A shocking number of barristers buy a wig but never use it.

paky

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

In the first year of barristerrin anyway, that would probably be the outer limit (unless the person has contacts who are prepared to send lots of high paying briefs their way).

The lowest pay for the first year of barristerrin' would be -4,000 i.e. no money coming in and 3k to law library, 1k for wigs and gowns and such. If on circuit or travelling a lot, this rises significantly with transport and accomodation costs.

cheers johnnyskeleton. the first number of years dont seem too attractive but im sure it would pay off in the long run. why is the training less for a barrister?

johnnyskeleton

paky wrote: »

the first number of years dont seem too attractive but im sure it would pay off in the long run.

There's no guarantee of that. That's not said to put you off, but just be aware that enduring a few years of little or no pay at the start of a barristerrin' career does not mean that it automatically follows that you will start earning after that.

There may be those on this forum who will tell you that there is no scope to survive as a barrister - I don't necessarily think that is correct. But that is not to say that it isn't a very competitive profession with no guarantee of success.

paky wrote: »

why is the training less for a barrister?

Self employed from the start.

paky

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

There's no guarantee of that. That's not said to put you off, but just be aware that enduring a few years of little or no pay at the start of a barristerrin' career does not mean that it automatically follows that you will start earning after that.

There may be those on this forum who will tell you that there is no scope to survive as a barrister - I don't necessarily think that is correct. But that is not to say that it isn't a very competitive profession with no guarantee of success.



Self employed from the start.

would you say a barrister has it easier than a solicitor as far as work is concerned?

Wolfe Tone

In reality does the taxi rank thing actually work out or does everyone give cases to their mates?

Bosco boy

Do minimum wage rates not apply to the legal profession?

McCrack

Counsel are self employed so min wage does not apply.

The cab rank rule works in that Counsel are obliged not to discriminate against Briefs but all that said it's a matter for solicitor/barrister to ensure that Counsel can commit, solicitors will have a select pool of regular barristers that they brief time and time again. They have built professional working relationships with these barristers.

The two jobs are different, each has there own pecularities and difficulties unique to each no one cant say another is "easier".

Remmy

What do people think of the idea of training and practicing as a Solicitor for a few years to build connections before 'transfering' over to being a barrister?A friend of mine said he was thinking of doing that because he knows noone in the profession.

Is it a good idea or would it just leave you behind the page?

johnnyskeleton

paky wrote: »

would you say a barrister has it easier than a solicitor as far as work is concerned?

I'm sure both will say theirs is the harder work. Barristers have less overheads and consequently less stress about keeping the door open and paying wages. Barristers generally have less contact with clients and correspondence and such, which take up an awful amount of time for solicitors. Solicitors are the ones that are ultimately responsible to the client. However, barristers often have to make calls on more uncertain points and have to research, understand and advocate more complex legal principles. So it depends on which of those is harder (I would imagine solicitors, but that's just my view).

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

In reality does the taxi rank thing actually work out or does everyone give cases to their mates?

I'm not sure you understand the taxi rank rule. Taxi ranks are misleading in the sense that the taxi who has been waiting the longest picks up the next fare. It's not that barristers sit in a queue waiting to pick up a brief, it's that if a customer comes up to their taxi of choice, the taxi cannot refuse to bring them where they want because of the colour of their skin, or their accent, or because they want to go on a long journey etc.

So it is really only a metaphor for the idea that barristers don't discriminate between clients or types of cases unless they don't have the expertise, sufficient fees aren't paid, they are in another case that day etc. There is no formal or informal way for work to be passed down to people who are waiting. Work comes from solicitors who usually chose which barrister to brief (although some clients will have preferences). In that regard, barristers are more like apples in a basket waiting to be picked than taxis in a rank waiting their turn.

johnnyskeleton

Remmy wrote: »

What do people think of the idea of training and practicing as a Solicitor for a few years to build connections before 'transfering' over to being a barrister?A friend of mine said he was thinking of doing that because he knows noone in the profession.

Is it a good idea or would it just leave you behind the page?

Good idea. If you can get an apprenticeship from a solicitor who doesn't mind/doesn't know that you will jump ship after a few years.

The minimum is 3 years to do the quick conversion, by the way. Less than that will mean being out of practice for a year or two, which could result in any benefits from contacts being lost.

Remmy

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Good idea. If you can get an apprenticeship from a solicitor who doesn't mind/doesn't know that you will jump ship after a few years.

The minimum is 3 years to do the quick conversion, by the way. Less than that will mean being out of practice for a year or two, which could result in any benefits from contacts being lost.

Thanks for the quick reply!

Bosco boy

McCrack wrote: »

Counsel are self employed so min wage does not apply.

The cab rank rule works in that Counsel are obliged not to discriminate against Briefs but all that said it's a matter for solicitor/barrister to ensure that Counsel can commit, solicitors will have a select pool of regular barristers that they brief time and time again. They have built professional working relationships with these barristers.

The two jobs are different, each has there own pecularities and difficulties unique to each no one cant say another is "easier".

Would people who work for the self employed counsel not be eligible for minimun wage as they are an employee, I think if you work for someone legally there is obviously some form of contract. If theres some form of contract of employment then they should be treated like every other employee and paid at least minimum wage!

Reloc8

An employee of a barrister stands in exactly the same shoes as any other employee in any other employment in the country.

I don't follow what you're getting at.

Remmy

Aside from alligning oneself with a good Master are there certain ways in which one can make a name for themselves in their first few years and be known as 'that guy' in any particular area of law.I'm guessing there are a pool of 'go to' guys for each area of law that are known for there expertise in each field?

Or is it just a case of slogging away for the first few years and taking any bits and bobs of work from the Master and completing them to a very high degree?Sorry if my questions are a bit on the vague side btw.

Bosco boy

Reloc8 wrote: »

An employee of a barrister stands in exactly the same shoes as any other employee in any other employment in the country.

I don't follow what you're getting at.

Thanks for clearing that up! Why then are some people being paid €10,000 or €4,000 per annum and working practically full time as qouted here already. If McDonalds have to do it why not the legal profession.

NoQuarter

Bosco Boy you seem to keep missing the point. McDonalds staff are employees of McDonalds and therefore have to be paid minimum wage.

Barristers are not employed by anyone* and so they only get paid for the work they do. They dont work by the hour etc. When they do a full day they might just be hanging around the courts so to speak in the hope of getting a case.

Its like if you start up a business selling phones for example, how can a person who has just began a company be paid a minimum wage? who is going to pay them one?? They have to make their living by selling as many phones as they can. And it takes a while for a new company to build up a reputation so people will always buy from them.




*apart from the obvious.

Reloc8

Bosco boy wrote: »

Thanks for clearing that up! Why then are some people being paid €10,000 or €4,000 per annum and working practically full time as qouted here already. If McDonalds have to do it why not the legal profession.

Eh.

You're welcome.

Barristers who are in practice on their own account are not entitled to be paid the minimum wage because they don't have an employer to pay them a wage.

Some receive more money than others because they have less work or work of a different type.

Just like lots of plumbers, taxi drivers, dentists, doctors, electricians, builders, anyone else who operates on a self-employed basis do not receive a wage from anyone. The legislation you're talking about doesn't apply to them.

You seem to be under a fundamental misapprehension of how self-employed barristers are self-employed.

Or that low-earning barristers are employed as employees by other barristers.

McCrack

Bosco boy wrote: »

Would people who work for the self employed counsel not be eligible for minimun wage as they are an employee, I think if you work for someone legally there is obviously some form of contract. If theres some form of contract of employment then they should be treated like every other employee and paid at least minimum wage!

Sorry yes I thought you were wondering why barristers themselves are not paid min wage. If a barrister employs a secretary then of course he/she must be paid min wage.

I'm not sure what the situation is with devils (barristers pupils), somebody from the bar side might clarify that. Certainly trainee solicitors are entitled to min wage.

Bosco boy

McCrack wrote: »

Sorry yes I thought you were wondering why barristers themselves are not paid min wage. If a barrister employs a secretary then of course he/she must be paid min wage.

I'm not sure what the situation is with devils (barristers pupils), somebody from the bar side might clarify that. Certainly trainee solicitors are entitled to min wage.

Thanks, it's the devils I'm referring to or are they self employed too.

johnnyskeleton

Bosco boy wrote: »

Thanks, it's the devils I'm referring to or are they self employed too.

They're self employed too.

Bosco boy

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

They're self employed too.

I was just being the devils advocate!

johnnyskeleton

Remmy wrote: »

Aside from alligning oneself with a good Master are there certain ways in which one can make a name for themselves in their first few years and be known as 'that guy' in any particular area of law.

Short of actually running the top cases in that field? You could write books and articles about it.

Remmy wrote: »

I'm guessing there are a pool of 'go to' guys for each area of law that are known for there expertise in each field?

Solicitors are always on the look out for new barristers, while at the same time remaining loyal to a select few. Over time, the new barristers either become the select few or fall by the wayside.

Remmy wrote: »

Or is it just a case of slogging away for the first few years and taking any bits and bobs of work from the Master and completing them to a very high degree?Sorry if my questions are a bit on the vague side btw.

I think you're looking for a pattern in a whirlpool to be honest.

paky

the barrister system seems to be more hassle than its worth. would you be better off going to the states where they dont differentiate between barristers and solicitors?

Jo King

paky wrote: »

the barrister system seems to be more hassle than its worth. would you be better off going to the states where they dont differentiate between barristers and solicitors?

They don't have barristers or solicitors in the States so no question of discrimination arises.

Reloc8

paky wrote: »

the barrister system seems to be more hassle than its worth. would you be better off going to the states where they dont differentiate between barristers and solicitors?

Yes, if you want to live and practice law in the USA.

Bosco boy

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

They're self employed too.

So they would have to register for vat in order to work for counsel?

Tom Young

This thread is most tiresome.

No not initially, they would only once they meet the threshold for registration to bill VAT on legal services which you can go and read about here: www.revenue.ie

EDIT: as pointed out by Reloc8, below. Barristers can opt to register for VAT if they wish immediately.

Reloc8

A barrister in practice at the bar is self-employed. That is all of them. 100%. Every last wig amongst them. No exceptions. No loopholes.

Some self-employed barristers who are self-employed earn more money than other self-employed barristers who are self-employed. They could be compared to many other trades in this regard. In fact, they could be compared to any other self-employed person who earns more or earns less than another self-employed person who works in the same or a similar area.

A self-employed barrister may if they choose register for VAT purposes immediately on becoming a self-employed barrister. A self-employed barrister must register for VAT purposes on them generating turnover above the limits in the link given by Tom. The requirements for self-employed barristers in this regard do not differ from any other self-employed person.

There are no self-employed barristers who are 'employed' by other self-employed barristers.

NoQuarter

Reloc8 wrote: »

A barrister in practice at the bar is self-employed. That is all of them. 100%. Every last wig amongst them. No exceptions. No loopholes.

Some self-employed barristers who are self-employed earn more money than other self-employed barristers who are self-employed. They could be compared to many other trades in this regard. In fact, they could be compared to any other self-employed person who earns more or earns less than another self-employed person who works in the same or a similar area.

A self-employed barrister may if they choose register for VAT purposes immediately on becoming a self-employed barrister. A self-employed barrister must register for VAT purposes on them generating turnover above the limits in the link given by Tom. The requirements for self-employed barristers in this regard do not differ from any other self-employed person.

There are no self-employed barristers who are 'employed' by other self-employed barristers.

Wait im struggling a bit here...are you saying barristers .... are...... self employed?!?!??!?!???:pac:

paky

the entrance exam states that you must have a degree to enter kings inn or the higher diploma in legal studies. i read somewhere that barristers are sometimes approached to give their expert opinion? how would doing a two year diploma make anyone an expert in law? or does the 2 year diploma cover all aspects of law?

drkpower

paky wrote: »

how would doing a two year diploma make anyone an expert in law?

It wouldn't!
Newly qualified devils are never very rarely asked for an Opinion.

FreudianSlippers

drkpower wrote: »

It wouldn't!
Newly qualified devils are never very rarely asked for an Opinion.

and if you do have an opinion, just keep it to yourself!

paky

so how intensive is the two year diploma? would you be better equiped as a barrister if you had a law degree?

Tom Young

It is pretty intensive.

kala85

how much pay does a trainee solictor get paid?

NoQuarter

Big firm: 30-40k

Middle firm: anything in between

Small firm: minimum wage


All approx.