England and Wales Lawyers walk out over legal aid cuts.

hullaballoo

Full story: http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jan/05/barristers-solicitors-walkout-legal-aid-cuts

Sherlock excerpt:

The Guardian wrote:

Criminal courts across England and Wales will be severely disrupted on Monday morning when barristers and solicitors stage an unprecedented mass walkout in protest at government plans to slash legal aid fees by up to 30%.

It is the first time barristers have withdrawn their labour, according to the Criminal Bar Association, and the first time the two wings of the legal profession have taken co-ordinated, national action...

The article goes on to mention some figures in an effort to point to the cruel reality for legal professionals working on legal aid but in doing so, suggests that £50,000 pre-income tax salary is somehow low. Obviously, there are those of us who only dream of making that kind of money. Some of the comments to the article give better figures, including the debt amassed as a result of training etc.

The story mirrors the situation in Ireland except I don't think Irish media would be so inclined to side with the lawyers. Certainly, the public reaction would not be the same here.

The main difference between here and England and Wales is that the policies being pursued here are even more Schizophrenic. On the one hand, we have a clearly stated policy objective of removing barriers to entry to the profession by way of the Legal Services Bill etc. At the same time, there is the counteractive policy objective of reducing fees payable to lawyers. The two policies cannot be reconciled since the main barrier to entry is the debt incurred throughout training. Banks cannot now lend on the basis that the money may be paid back at some indeterminate time in the future, depending on whether the individual has the legal career equivalent of striking gold. They used to take a punt. Not anymore.

I won't get into speculation about the other parts of the LSB that are incompatible with the objective of removing barriers to entry; that is an entirely separate thread.

Although readers of the Guardian are unlikely to give a representative view of public reaction in E&W, there does seem to be some sympathy there.

What would the reaction be here? Is it plausible that some sort of protest or demonstration here could work? Would it have any impact? Would it even be lawful?

Wheelnut

This is on the basis that legal aid should be a given right in the justice system, but the first thing to remember is that legal aid has nothing to do with justice, it's to make sure that lawyers get paid and the taxpayer foots the bill.

Bepolite

Wheelnut wrote: »

This is on the basis that legal aid should be a given right in the justice system, but the first thing to remember is that legal aid has nothing to do with justice, it's to make sure that lawyers get paid and the taxpayer foots the bill.

I don't understand why you think this. We have a very cheap justice system in relation to cost to the taxpayer, that results in high costs to the users, which is generally fair. The balance has to be addressed however where someone who is genuinely poor needs to avail of the courts. Modern negligence law is based on a case taken by a pauper.

We have advantages sharing the same legal systems of England and the US. Surely it makes no sense to switch to the civil system and massively increase the cost to the tax payer anyway.

Victor

What of competition law, what with them being independent contractors and not employees?

Wheelnut wrote: »

the first thing to remember is that legal aid has nothing to do with justice, it's to make sure that lawyers get paid and the taxpayer foots the bill.

Cynical much?

Pro Hoc Vice

Wheelnut wrote: »

This is on the basis that legal aid should be a given right in the justice system, but the first thing to remember is that legal aid has nothing to do with justice, it's to make sure that lawyers get paid and the taxpayer foots the bill.

Legal Aid in Ireland is mandated under both the Constitution and the European Court of a Human Rights so can't get more to do with justice than that.

In Ireland legal Aid has been cut by levels in excess of the now cuts in the UK, in Ireland legal Aid costs less than €50 million a year, which is less than the Arts Council.

The planned Cuts in Legal Aid in the UK amount to £220 million, criminal legal Aid in the UK costs about £1 billion a year. Based on that Ireland's bill is very reasonable.

AndonHandon

The legal aid fees are so low in Ireland that the key is to have many legal aid cases over the week in order to make a living. This can result in a lower standard of work for each case however.

johnnyskeleton

hullaballoo wrote: »

Full story: http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jan/05/barristers-solicitors-walkout-legal-aid-cuts

Sherlock excerpt:



The article goes on to mention some figures in an effort to point to the cruel reality for legal professionals working on legal aid but in doing so, suggests that £50,000 pre-income tax salary is somehow low. Obviously, there are those of us who only dream of making that kind of money. Some of the comments to the article give better figures, including the debt amassed as a result of training etc.

The story mirrors the situation in Ireland except I don't think Irish media would be so inclined to side with the lawyers. Certainly, the public reaction would not be the same here.

The main difference between here and England and Wales is that the policies being pursued here are even more Schizophrenic. On the one hand, we have a clearly stated policy objective of removing barriers to entry to the profession by way of the Legal Services Bill etc. At the same time, there is the counteractive policy objective of reducing fees payable to lawyers. The two policies cannot be reconciled since the main barrier to entry is the debt incurred throughout training. Banks cannot now lend on the basis that the money may be paid back at some indeterminate time in the future, depending on whether the individual has the legal career equivalent of striking gold. They used to take a punt. Not anymore.

I won't get into speculation about the other parts of the LSB that are incompatible with the objective of removing barriers to entry; that is an entirely separate thread.

Although readers of the Guardian are unlikely to give a representative view of public reaction in E&W, there does seem to be some sympathy there.

What would the reaction be here? Is it plausible that some sort of protest or demonstration here could work? Would it have any impact? Would it even be lawful?

Wasn't there a day of protest a few years back? Lawyers withdrew their services, cases were adjourned, the Irish times wrote an article, and the cuts seem to have gone off the boil since then.

johnnyskeleton

Wheelnut wrote: »

This is on the basis that legal aid should be a given right in the justice system, but the first thing to remember is that legal aid has nothing to do with justice, it's to make sure that lawyers get paid and the taxpayer foots the bill.

In the same way, schools have nothing to do with educating kids and everything to do with making teachers rich.

Wheelnut

Victor wrote: »

Cynical much?

Yeah, maybe a bit cynical but I've spent a lot of time hanging around courts.

Victor

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

In the same way, schools have nothing to do with educating kids and everything to do with making teachers rich.

Not quite.

Most people who can afford to send their children to school, funded from their own pocket, actually want their children their children to be educated.

Most people availing of free schooling can't afford it - they tend to have low to middling incomes.

Most people who can afford a their own choice of lawyer(s) in a criminal case don't end up before the courts very often (whether normally law-abiding or are criminal masterminds). They don't want to be in court.

Most people availing of legal aid can't afford a lawyer - they have low incomes and/or high outgoings. They don't necessarily care about being in court. So if the courts and society prefer for the accused to have a lawyer, as they are loathe to convict in the absence of legal advice we then have the situation where lawyers have done work, but have impecunious clients.

johnnyskeleton

Victor wrote: »

Not quite.

Most people who can afford to send their children to school, funded from their own pocket, actually want their children their children to be educated.

Most people availing of free schooling can't afford it - they tend to have low to middling incomes.

Most people who can afford a their own choice of lawyer(s) in a criminal case don't end up before the courts very often (whether normally law-abiding or are criminal masterminds). They don't want to be in court.

Most people availing of legal aid can't afford a lawyer - they have low incomes and/or high outgoings. They don't necessarily care about being in court. So if the courts and society prefer for the accused to have a lawyer, as they are loathe to convict in the absence of legal advice we then have the situation where lawyers have done work, but have impecunious clients.

I don't get your point. People want their children to be educated, and they want their children not to mess up their court appearances such as they are not sent to jail. If they can afford to pay privately they will, but if not there is a government system to provide these things to them.

To suggest that either of these things exists not for it's stated purpose but to enrich a professional class, as the other poster suggested was true of lawyers, is nonsense.

Wheelnut

Although I have my views (which I may come back to) I will confess to not knowing how much is paid in legal aid. I don't mean the over-all figure which is less than the Arts Council (who I consider to be a waste), but how much each time.

Just so we know what we are talking about can someone post up some figures for a typical case.

No need to be elaborate, take a district court case where the lawyer is probably a solicitor, how much is he paid? Is it per court appearance, or per client, or per hours worked on a file, or what?

Pro Hoc Vice

Wheelnut wrote: »

Although I have my views (which I may come back to) I will confess to not knowing how much is paid in legal aid. I don't mean the over-all figure which is less than the Arts Council (who I consider to be a waste), but how much each time.

Just so we know what we are talking about can someone post up some figures for a typical case.

No need to be elaborate, take a district court case where the lawyer is probably a solicitor, how much is he paid? Is it per court appearance, or per client, or per hours worked on a file, or what?

A typical District a Court case the solicitor will get on the first day €201.50 and on each day the matter is in court after that €50.39. A average of 3 days I would guess.


http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2011/en/si/0362.html

Jury trial the brief fee on the first day to cover all work upto and including the first day is €1144.00 each for solicitor and barrister, each day after that is €572 for barrister and its under €500 for solicitor, but solicitor can claim mileage which barrister can not.

Wheelnut

Thanks Infosys, so it looks like legal aid could be a nice little earner. I'm in the midlands and I would guess that most solicitor's offices are within striking distance of three district courts.

Of course I realise that some cases might require a lot of work, but the majority of cases I saw were the "regular clients" of the court with numerous previous convictions for things like fighting, stealing, drunkenness and drugs. The solicitors first job was to offer excuses such as he was abused as a child, his girlfriend is pregnant, he's doing a FAS course, he was drunk so he didn't know what he was doing etc. The solicitors second job then was to plead for leniency with submissions such as he hasn't been in trouble for six months or he's claustrophobic so jail would not suit him. Clearly this type of case would not require much preparation!

johnnyskeleton

Wheelnut wrote: »

Thanks Infosys, so it looks like legal aid could be a nice little earner. I'm in the midlands and I would guess that most solicitor's offices are within striking distance of three district courts.

Of course I realise that some cases might require a lot of work, but the majority of cases I saw were the "regular clients" of the court with numerous previous convictions for things like fighting, stealing, drunkenness and drugs. The solicitors first job was to offer excuses such as he was abused as a child, his girlfriend is pregnant, he's doing a FAS course, he was drunk so he didn't know what he was doing etc. The solicitors second job then was to plead for leniency with submissions such as he hasn't been in trouble for six months or he's claustrophobic so jail would not suit him. Clearly this type of case would not require much preparation!

No, the solicitors first job was to get disclosure, look through it, go through the event in detail with the client, advise them of the law, advise them as to possible defences, consider the best strategy to take and prepare to fight the case. If all you see is a plea in mitigation then you are just seeing the tail end of the process.

To put it in perspective, a solicitor on legal aid could spend a whole day on one case. By contrast, NAMA or the banks will pay a well connected dublin firm the same amount for an hour of their junior solicitors time or for an hour and a half of an apprentice's time, all day every day for as long as those firms want. Best of all, no one goes snooping around the tendering process for that work, because all attention is focused on criminal legal aid. Sure who cares about dem nasty criminals, so long as our insolvent banks are constantly propped up.

Pro Hoc Vice

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

No, the solicitors first job was to get disclosure, look through it, go through the event in detail with the client, advise them of the law, advise them as to possible defences, consider the best strategy to take and prepare to fight the case. If all you see is a plea in mitigation then you are just seeing the tail end of the process.

To put it in perspective, a solicitor on legal aid could spend a whole day on one case. By contrast, NAMA or the banks will pay a well connected dublin firm the same amount for an hour of their junior solicitors time or for an hour and a half of an apprentice's time, all day every day for as long as those firms want. Best of all, no one goes snooping around the tendering process for that work, because all attention is focused on criminal legal aid. Sure who cares about dem nasty criminals, so long as our insolvent banks are constantly propped up.

Yup its funny when people think €50 for a day in the DC is good money.

Bepolite

A friend of mine not, long qualified, describes a good day in the district court at €200-300. Bear in mind this is gross and evading tax on it is nigh on impossible due to the system. Also bear in mind a bad day is €0 + outlay of expenses.

My sparky charges €50 to wire in a hob. A plumber, if you can find one, is getting on for double that and I had a very small kitchen put in as a nixer (very well I might add) for €3,000.

Yeah the legal profession... greedy bastards expecting c.€40,000 a year after engaging in the best part of a decade of education.

Don't get me started on builders...

Wheelnut

I did acknowledge in my last post that some cases could take a lot of work, but many others are routine and no problem to a competent solicitor. In rural Ireland where a solicitor has a diversified practice it's very likely he will be in the court anyway on other business such as pub licensing, motoring offenses, TV licenses etc. so a nice little top-up for telling the judge that the client is sorry has to be welcome.

234

Wheelnut wrote: »

I did acknowledge in my last post that some cases could take a lot of work, but many others are routine and no problem to a competent solicitor. In rural Ireland where a solicitor has a diversified practice it's very likely he will be in the court anyway on other business such as pub licensing, motoring offenses, TV licenses etc. so a nice little top-up for telling the judge that the client is sorry has to be welcome.

And that's why country solicitors are all raking it in.

Oh wait, they're not. They are closing down.

Victor

Bepolite wrote: »

A friend of mine not, long qualified

Is the comma in the correct position there?

Bepolite

Victor wrote: »

Is the comma in the correct position there?

Probably lol.

Wheelnut

234 wrote: »

And that's why country solicitors are all raking it in.

Oh wait, they're not. They are closing down.

Like I said, a nice little top-up has to be welcome.

Pat Mustard

Wheelnut wrote: »

Like I said, a nice little top-up has to be welcome.

How much is that, now? How much is a 'nice little earner' or a 'nice little top-up'?

Pro Hoc Vice

Wheelnut wrote: »

Like I said, a nice little top-up has to be welcome.

Practicing cert €2,500 insurance €5-7,500 rates €2-10,000 secretary €18-30,000 rent €0-30,000 I could go on, but very few solicitors consider criminal legal aid a topup, for many its a service they must provide, yes some in the major cities can make a living out of it, but in the last 4 years cuts of 40% has even in the big firms made it not very profitable.

I know solicitors who remain on the panel but do not look for such work as its just not profitable, to remain out of the office for a full working day in the District Court can in many cases mean a solicitor earns far less money than he would had he remained in the office. The main issue is that for around €50 million a year the service provides value for money, solicitors and barristers during the past 4 years have accepted large cuts in pay, but the problem is that does not fit the mantra of super rich fat cat lawyers, yes some lawyers make a lot of money, but in reality most make a good living down to less than minimum wage.

impr0v

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

To put it in perspective, a solicitor on legal aid could spend a whole day on one case. By contrast, NAMA or the banks will pay a well connected dublin firm the same amount for an hour of their junior solicitors time or for an hour and a half of an apprentice's time, all day every day for as long as those firms want. Best of all, no one goes snooping around the tendering process for that work, because all attention is focused on criminal legal aid. Sure who cares about dem nasty criminals, so long as our insolvent banks are constantly propped up.

The thrust of your point holds up but I think it worth making the point that NAMA and the propped-up banks aren't nearly as benevolent as you seem to think. Tendering for that work has driven rates down significantly. Apprentice time is, for example, frequently quoted at a zero rate at present, and the banks certainly aren't willing to pay firms for spending "all day every day" on matters that don't justify that time. Invoices can only be issued to those institutions after time narratives have been poured over by them and pre-approved.

Despite that, yes, commercial firms are still paid well for the work that they do for NAMA and the banks, and there has been a lot of that work over the past few years. Difficult as those clients are, and they are difficult, they obviously do not compare with the majority of legal aid clients. I also agree that legal aid work is generally very poorly paid for solicitors and, perhaps moreso, barristers, especially at District Court level.

Victor

infosys wrote: »

Practicing cert €2,500 insurance €5-7,500 rates €2-10,000 secretary €18-30,000 rent €0-30,000 I could go on, but very few solicitors consider criminal legal aid a topup, for many its a service they must provide, yes some in the major cities can make a living out of it, but in the last 4 years cuts of 40% has even in the big firms made it not very profitable.

I know solicitors who remain on the panel but do not look for such work as its just not profitable, to remain out of the office for a full working day in the District Court can in many cases mean a solicitor earns far less money than he would had he remained in the office.

With some costs being largely fixed and other sectors not being very buoyant, some work is usually better than no work.