header-logo header-logo

Life at the employed Bar

15 February 2023
Issue: 8013 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Career focus
printer mail-detail
Employed barristers have higher levels of wellbeing, are more diverse and enjoy greater flexibility and work/life balance than the self-employed Bar, the Bar Council has found.

However, it also discovered the employed Bar experiences bullying and harassment at similar levels to the whole Bar, has far fewer King’s Counsel, and is concerned about career progression and income. 

Of the 17,000 barristers currently in practice, more than 3,000 (18%) are employed. The Bar Council report, ‘Life at the employed Bar’, published last week, is based on analysis of data on the demographics and working lives of employed barristers as well as focus group discussions, and makes nine recommendations.

Stuart Alford KC, chair of the Bar Council employed barristers’ committee, said: ‘The recommendations we’re adopting provide a clear steer on things we must improve: better information about the benefits of a career at the employed Bar, targeted support on career progression—particularly when it comes to judicial appointments for employed barristers, a greater focus on tackling bullying and harassment within the employed arm of profession, and support in developing networks for employed barristers throughout England & Wales.’

The report paints a picture of employed barristers’ working lives. More than half work in the public sector and nearly a quarter work in legal firms. The main areas are crime (34%), commercial and financial services (14%) and public law (13%).

The employed Bar is more diverse, with women making up 49% (compared to 37% of the self-employed Bar) and nearly one in five from an ethnic minority background (compared to 15% of the self-employed Bar).

Only 52 employed barristers (2.6%) are King’s Counsel.

The vast majority, 86%, report a sense of collaboration and co-operation in their workplace. However, 31% have personally experienced bullying, discrimination or harassment at work. Women, people from ethnic minority backgrounds, and those who work in solicitors’ firms are more likely to have been subjected to this.

Nick Vinneal KC, Bar Council chair, said: ‘This report provides a clear way forward for the Bar Council, working with others, to promote, champion, and support employed barristers as members of our One Bar.’

Issue: 8013 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Career focus
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll