Young Legal Aid Lawyers

Second COVID-19 Report

25 May 2020

1

Contents

1. About us 2 2. Background 2 3. The Survey 4 4. Respondents 5 5. Industry Sustainability 8 6. Findings on Technology and Practical Support for Remote Working 12 7. Findings on Flexible Working 15 8. Adaptations for Caring Responsibilities 17 9. Supervision and Support 20 10. Findings on Safeguarding in High Risk Environments 23

a. Court 23 b. Other Venues 26 c. Police Station Attendance 28

11. Job Security 30 a. Redundancies 31 b. Furlough 32 c. Adjournments 37 d. Training Contracts and Pupillages 40

12. Communication 42 13. Impact on Members’ Wellbeing 45

a. Financial Targets and Billing 46 b. Return to Normal 48

14. Conclusion 48 Annex A: Summary 50

2

1. About us

Young Legal Aid Lawyers (YLAL) is a group of aspiring and junior lawyers committed to practising

in those areas of law, both criminal and civil, that have traditionally been publicly funded. We

have around 3,500 members including students, paralegals, trainee solicitors, pupil barristers and

qualified junior lawyers throughout England and Wales.

We believe that the provision of good quality, publicly funded legal assistance is essential to

protecting the interests of the vulnerable in society and upholding the rule of law. As well as

campaigning for a sustainable legal aid system, our core objectives are to increase social mobility

and diversity within the legal aid sector, to promote the interests of new entrants and junior

lawyers and provide a network for people beginning their careers in the legal aid sector.

2. Background

As all readers of this report will be aware, COVID-19 has developed into a worldwide pandemic.

All aspects of society are affected, including all elements of the justice system and the

professionals who work in it.

In guidance released on Thursday 19 March 20201 key workers were defined to include ‘those

essential to the running of the justice system’. Many of our members and respondents to this

survey are key workers.

In order to stop the virus spreading between households, on 23 March 2020, citizens were

instructed not to leave their homes, save for very limited specific reasons.2

This was enshrined in The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations

20203, which prescribes in regulation 6 that ‘During the emergency period, no person may leave

the place where they are living without reasonable excuse.’

1https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-maintaining-educational-provision/guidance-for-schools-colleges-and-local-authorities-on-maintaining-educational-provision 2 https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-address-to-the-nation-on-coronavirus-23-march-2020 3 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/contents/made

3

A reasonable excuse included ‘to travel for the purposes of work or to provide voluntary or

charitable services, where it is not reasonably possible for that person to work, or to provide those

services, from the place where they are living.’

These regulations came into force at 1pm on Thursday 26 March 2020.

On Sunday 10 May 2020, Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced that the UK would be moving

into the second phase of the Covid-19 response. The Government has encouraged people who

can return to work to do so and recommended that schools begin to reopen to a limited group of

children from 1 June 2020.

On 11 May 2020, the Lord Chief Justice4 and the Lord Chancellor5 announced that jury trials would

resume on 18 May 2020 in some courts. In response, YLAL called for the Ministry of Justice to

guarantee the safety of our members and other court users6. Similar concerns were raised by the

Law Society7.

YLAL remains concerned that, with the apparent easing of lockdown, junior staff may be expected

to return to the office and/or attend in-person hearings without adequate safeguards in place.

HMCTS has published an organisational risk assessment and assessment tool which will enable

it to regularly review the safety of its buildings. YLAL is currently undertaking a research project8

to gather the assessment tools completed by magistrates’ courts to understand the measures

being taken to protect the safety of our members and court users generally. YLAL encourages its

members to read and familiarise themselves with the risk assessment tool Courts will be

completing, as it sets out the standards which should be met, as well as the circumstances in

which Courts should be closed. YLAL also encourages its members to register any concerns with

HMCTS via their online form9.

4 https://www.judiciary.uk/announcements/jury-trials-to-resume-this-month/ 5https://www.gov.uk/government/news/statement-from-the-lord-chancellor-on-the-resumption-of-jury-trials 6http://www.younglegalaidlawyers.org/sites/default/files/Putting%20Safety%20First%20-%20YLAL%20Statement%20on%20Re-starting%20Jury%20Trials-4.pdf 7 https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/news/press-releases/jury-trials-right-to-resume-if-safety-allows/ 8 http://www.younglegalaidlawyers.org/COVID19-magistrates-court-research 9 https://let-us-know.form.service.justice.gov.uk

4

The Coronavirus Act and Coronavirus-related Regulations make extensive changes to the

functions of the justice system and powers of those within it. YLAL is aware of this and the

potential long-term impact on access to justice.

As our previous COVID-19 report, this report is not intended to address all YLAL’s concerns about

the wider implications of the current crisis. Rather, it is limited to an analysis of the immediate

and current impact of COVID-19 on our members, their work, and their future; and

recommendations relating to these.

We intend to continue to monitor our members’ circumstances in order to inform our campaigning

work throughout the course of the pandemic.

3. The Survey

YLAL’s first COVID-19 survey gathered data between Thursday 26 March and Friday 3 April 2020.

The purpose of the survey was to gather evidence as to how COVID-19 was affecting young legal

aid lawyers’ professional lives, to understand best and worst practice, and to make

recommendations as to how best to protect the health and welfare of those working in legal aid.

All responses to the survey were provided anonymously. We produced our first COVID-19 report

on the pandemic’s impact on our members, which was published on 7 April 2020.

Given the speed with which circumstances continue to change, we surveyed our membership for

the second time one month on from the commencement of The Health Protection (Coronavirus,

Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020.

Our updated survey was open between 2 May 2020 and 13 May 2020. We received 104 responses

from those practitioners who would be eligible to be YLAL members (10 years’ post-qualification

experience or less).

5

4. Respondents

The respondents are YLAL members and other junior practitioners, including paralegals, CILEX

trainees, pupils and trainee solicitors, and qualified barristers and solicitors who are within 10

years’ post-qualification experience.

Respondents’ roles are broadly reflective of YLAL’s membership base; approximately 51% are

solicitors/trainee solicitors; 39% are barristers/pupil barristers; 26% paralegals/caseworkers; and

2% CILEX trainees.

Their place of work is also broadly reflective of our membership; ranging from large law firms

with 101 or more staff (25%), small law firms with up to 30 employees (18.3%) and law centres

(8.7%) and barristers’ chambers (19.2%).

6

The majority of respondents, 70.2%, are either not yet qualified or have been qualified for no

more than three years.

The areas of work undertaken by respondents is broad and covers most areas of work funded by

legal aid, or traditionally funded by legal aid.

The most frequent areas of work were crime (35.6%), public (23.1%) and family law (18.3%): Area of law %

Crime 35.6

Public 23.1

Family 18.3

Claims against public authorities 17.3

Asylum & Immigration 16.3

Housing 13.5

Community care 10.6

Personal injury 4.8

7

Employment & discrimination 3.8

Inquests & inquiries 2.9

Education 1.9

Welfare benefits 1.9

Prison 0.96

Debt 0.96

Court of Protection 0.96

Civil Litigation 0.96

Commercial and Finance 0.96

Almost half of our respondents work in London (49%); the next most represented areas are North

West England (13.5%) and Yorkshire and the Humber and the Midlands (both at 10.6%).

Changes in Job Circumstances since 3 April 2020

We asked respondents whether they had completed the original survey; 62 told us they had.

Of that number 53.2% told us that there had been no change to their job circumstances since the

last report closed on 3 April 2020. However, 45.2% told us that there had been a change.

8

Eight respondents said that their circumstances had improved but 17 told us that their

circumstances were now worse or much worse than they had been on 3 April 2020. Three said

they had stayed the same. The remaining 34 either said they were unsure or did not respond to

this question.

It is concerning, however, to see that of those completing our survey for the second time more

than a quarter feel that their circumstances have deteriorated.

13.5% of respondents have now been furloughed, up from 8.9% in the first report. This change

appears to account for much of the decrease in remote working as reflected in one member’s

response, ‘Have now been furloughed so am not working at present.’ In addition and perhaps more

concerningly, it appears that some members who had previously been working remotely have

been asked to return to work.

5. Industry Sustainability

YLAL has long-campaigned for legal aid providers to be adequately paid for the publicly funded

work they undertake. With low legal aid rates and no increase in rates in some areas in over 25

years (even to account for inflation, which means an effective real-terms cut), it is unsurprising

that legal aid providers are unable to keep afloat and keep their staff employed.

YLAL has undertaken extensive research and campaigning as to the sustainability of the

profession.

Our 2018 Social Mobility Report10 demonstrated that since YLAL’s previous Social Mobility Report

in 2013, the effects of the cuts introduced by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of

Offenders Act 2012 (‘LASPO’) had been felt.

LASPO profoundly affected access to and social mobility in the sector. Legal aid law firms and

other organisations are struggling to survive and often pay well below the living wage to their

employees.

10 http://www.younglegalaidlawyers.org/socialmobilityreport2018

9

Our report found that,

‘Significant obstacles to entering the profession remain. For those that do make it, many find

the reality of a career in legal aid unsustainable. The result is that the sector is losing out on

talented and experienced individuals.’

The system was already creaking. As is clear from the evidence of this survey, the current crisis

puts the viability and survival of the legal aid sector at significant risk. The longer the issues

highlighted in our report continue, the less likely it seems that our sector will be able to recover.

There are, however, glimmers of hope. In our initial survey, 67.5% of respondents told us that

their volume of work had been ‘decreased’, ‘significantly decreased’ or ‘decimated’ as a result of

COVID-19. Only 48.1% of respondents to this survey said the same. This may suggest that, as

organisations and systems begin to settle into the new normal, work is starting to pick up slowly.

YLAL believes that changes to workload will only exacerbate the difficulties legal aid providers

currently face.

With challenges to cashflow as a result of legal aid cuts and the stagnation of rates, any decrease

in work, let alone the significant decrease currently faced, will have a clear and catastrophic

impact on firms’ ability to continue their business and pay their staff. The same applies to

barristers’ ability to stay afloat with their self-employed income.

Organisations face a vicious circle in their attempts to weather the storm of COVID-19:

● Staff are being furloughed, having their hours reduced or being asked to take unpaid leave

in order to save salary costs.

● In turn, workload capacity is reduced.

● Organisations then have to decide whether to advertise their services in order to support

the community they serve and increase revenue yet risk not having capacity to meet the

new demand.

Without case workers and lawyers there can be no cases or income; without cases and income

there can be no case workers and lawyers.

10

This situation has arisen as a result of decades of underfunding with legal aid providers struggling

on ever tighter margins. When a system is pushed to breaking point it is unsurprising that, as crisis

hits, those cracks begin to widen.

On 27 March 2020, the Legal Aid Agency published its guide ‘Financial relief for legal aid

practitioners’11, most recently updated on 30 April 2020. This document reminds providers that

they are able to claim interim payments on account in civil cases and interim payments and

hardship claims in the Crown Court.

Although the guidance contains some helpful provisions, such as the provision that remote

criminal hearings may be charged in the same way as face to face hearings, YLAL believes it does

not go far enough.

Much of the provision for civil claims, for example, is not new. More is required to provide the

financial support that legal aid firms desperately need to keep afloat so that the vulnerable clients

for whom they act are still able to access advice and justice; both now and in the future.

The Legal Aid Agency states that it continues to work with the Ministry of Justice and

representative bodies to investigate other immediate action to support firms. This guidance

simply does not appear to recognise the urgency of the financial pressures on legal aid providers

who often have very small cash reserves.

Following his appointment as Shadow Legal Aid Minister on 11 April 2020, Karl Turner MP has

written twice to justice minister Alex Chalk MP and once to the Lord Chancellor, Robert Buckland

MP, to call for immediate support to the legal aid sector12.

On 4 May 2020, the Government announced that it would be providing £5.4 million directly to

the Law Centres Network (‘LCN’). This funding will then be distributed to individual law centres

by LCN.

The funding has come as a lifeline for many law centres, the majority of which rely entirely on

legal aid or grant funded work, and which were on the verge of considering permanent closures

as a result of chronic, long-term underfunding and the shock of the COVID-19 pandemic.

11 https://www.gov.uk/guidance/financial-relief-for-legal-aid-practitioners 12https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/labour-goes-to-lord-chancellor-for-legal-aid-help/5104340.article

11

YLAL welcomes this move by the Government which seems to recognise the important role that

law centres play in providing ordinary people, and often the most vulnerable members of our

society, with access to justice.

On 23 May 2020 the Government announced that £15 million of the fund made available to

frontline charities will also be ringfenced for Citizens Advice across the UK13. The funding does

not, however, extend to other organisations undertaking legal aid work.

Though many legal aid providers are profit-making businesses, some continue to draw the

entirety, or vast majority, of their income from legal aid work. Fewer of these organisations exist

now than in years pre-LASPO, however, as it has become increasingly difficult to operate given

the exclusionary contracting rules and inadequate fee schemes.

In the aftermath of this pandemic, we expect that there will be a significant increase in advice

needed relating to Family, Housing, Public, Welfare Benefits, Immigration and Employment Law,

both as a result of the backlog of cases but also the effects of the lockdown and the likely ensuing

financial crisis.

Given the importance of publicly funded work to the operation of the rule of law, we encourage

the Ministry of Justice and the Legal Aid Agency to ensure the continued operation of legal aid

providers in these desperate times.

13 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/up-to-15-million-to-support-the-citizens-advice-service-during-covid-19-pandemic

12

6. Findings on Technology and Practical Support for Remote Working

85.6% of respondents were working remotely at the time of the survey, 5% fewer than in our

initial survey. This change appears to be explained by an increase in furlough as well as a

potential increase in those having been asked to return to the office:

● NB, some staff have recently been asked to come in - unclear why.

● We were originally allowed to work remotely 2/3 days per week but has now [been] decided

we should all be back in the office.

● One administrator is being asked to go to the office every day and takes public transport.

As at 3 April 2020 nearly 85% of respondents felt that their employers had the required

technology in place to enable them to work from home effectively. This number had decreased

YLAL calls for:

• The Legal Aid Agency to make payments to legal aid providers in areas which are severely impacted by the current rules in place. We call for payments to be made to providers based on their usual legal aid income over a 3 month period.

• The Legal Aid Agency to make prompt payments to legal aid providers for all work

carried out, including in areas where there is currently no or insufficient provision for payments on account.

• YLAL calls on the Ministry of Justice and Treasury to consider the chilling effects of

the COVID-19 crisis on access to justice and the impact of the pandemic, lockdown and aftermath on the most vulnerable members of our society. We continue to call for the complete reform of the Legal Aid system in order to ensure that all those who need it are able to access legal advice, support and representation no matter their financial status.

13

to 68.3% by 13 May 2020. The percentage of respondents reporting that this had not been done

by their employer decreased from 15% at 3 April 2020 to 13.5% at 13 May 2020.

Although there appears to have been a slight improvement in the provision of equipment to

enable effective homeworking, it is concerning that, despite having had a further month and 10

days to deal with the issue, there has not been a significant improvement.

As junior lawyers, many of our members are on low incomes and living in environments which

are not set up for homeworking. Few have access to separate office space and many share

properties with other tenants, many of whom will also be remote-working under the current

circumstances. Notwithstanding the obvious difficulties for those with caring responsibilities, it

is important to recognise that homeworking can have a detrimental impact on any person’s

mental health and wellbeing.

Comments on remote / home working included:

● In the first two weeks I was really struggling because my personal laptop wasn’t capable of

running the case management system without crashing almost continuously. Every couple of

days a technician would remotely work on my laptop but ultimately the processor and age of

my laptop meant that it was never going to be able to work sufficiently. I constantly kept my

employer informed and they did not offer a suitable solution until after two weeks (which was

to collect a PC from the main office; I had previously requested this three or four days into

working remotely and was told that I could not because my allocated PC was in our secondary

office and only the Managing Partner had keys for that office).

● I’m finding it very difficult to work effectively and productively from home, in part because I

live in a shared house and primarily have to work in my bedroom, with no separate space just

for work.

● The motivation to work is harder as I work in my bedroom; I don’t have space elsewhere to set

up my desktop. My desk and chair are not adequate for working 8+ hours a day.

● [I am] working from home and being supported by colleagues in not attending the police

station physically, we are now attending remotely. I've been taking disclosure by email, having

14

a private consultation over a phone in the interview room, then attending the interview over

the phone.

● ...For the past 2 months I have been working from home at my kitchen table. I don’t have a

desk, or a desk chair or a footstool. I've had very bad back pain as a result. I work for a legal

aid firm and I'm not sure how comfortable I feel reaching out to ask HR for support, as I know

the firm is going through financial strain at the moment.

● I am in my second period of quarantine as my housemate is a key worker and still leaves the

house for work every day, so has come down with symptoms twice. This means I cannot leave

the house at all, and I’m finding it very difficult to work and exist in the same space without

any relief from it, even just a walk.

● I have furloughed, partly because they cannot use me remotely (they have not tried to set me

up at all for home working).

● Best practice is that my workplace was well set up for remote working anyway.

● [My firm had] good remote working systems in place pre-crisis, and test[ed] these just before

lockdown. And a good IT team to support these systems.

● There has not been a refusal as such, however resources are scarce and it is difficult for the

firm to upgrade IT within such restrictions.

● Due to funding, people weren't supplied with laptops etc for those that needed them. My back

was starting to hurt from using my laptop. However, we have now been given funding to cover

supplies (including laptop stands) so I am hoping it improves.

YLAL remains concerned at the numbers of respondents who have still not been supported with

appropriate technology to do their jobs. The use of personal devices, including members’ personal

mobile phones is inappropriate and is unlikely to comply with firms’ and organisations’ GDPR and

Data Protection Act 2018 obligations. YLAL accepts that firms had to move quickly for their staff

to be enabled to work from home when the lockdown initially began. However, we are now six

weeks further on, and it appears that very little has been done to improve our members’ remote-

15

working circumstances. Health and Safety obligations of employers to their employees remain,

including risk assessments of physical working environments.

7. Findings on Flexible Working

22.1% of respondents told us that their employer had not adopted flexible working arrangements

to accommodate disruption caused by the pandemic; up from 16.8% in our first report. 52% of

respondents, however, have been able to work flexibly during this time.

This apparent flexibility appears to be offset by the lack of flexibility offered by employers in

relation to chargeable hours. The vast majority of respondents (71.2%) reported being expected

to meet their usual chargeable hours target despite the current situation.

Respondents provided some concerning information about flexible working:

Recommendation:

• YLAL calls on all employers to ask their employees about their practical arrangements for working from home, assess the tools given to their staff/members, and provide them with adequate equipment (including technology and physical equipment) to enable them to work from home effectively.

16

● The only arrangement I have been offered is to either keep coming into the office or to take

unpaid leave.

● Pupils have been encouraged to 'relax' a little more than would ordinarily be the case.

● It’s still a no - must still meet chargeable targets so use evening and weekends to make up for

the time.

● We are required to keep to our usual working hours but are also expected to be available

outside of our working hours - so we are required to be flexible, but only when it benefits the

firm, the firm will not be flexible to accommodate our needs.

● As a pupil, still need to be available at every hour of the day.

● Once I confirmed that I had managed to set up the PC at home, my employer’s response was

‘moving forward there should not be any excuse for 6 billable hours not being recorded on a

daily basis’.

● [My] employer has caused more anxiety with continuous emails about the firm's profitability

and the daily monitoring of chargeable hours. She has also informed staff they will soon

consider redundancies. I am doing significantly more overtime during lockdown.

● My head of dept chasing me for work whilst I was off sick with COVID.

● Endless emails warning about chargeable hours, with no support for those struggling with

productivity due to COVID.

● We get weekly emails about billing and time recording, telling us that we will be furloughed if

we're not billing enough.

We also saw some excellent examples of what our respondents saw as ‘best practice’ with regards

to flexibility in their employer’s approach to work:

17

● They are so accommodating to people's needs. People are able to simply email in the morning

to say why they may not be able to work. For those who are now living with children 24/7,

they allow them to take random parts off throughout the day or accept total hour changes.

● Best practice - wellbeing zoom cups of tea, less pressure to be as productive as we would be

in the office.

● Employer totally flexible on when hours worked and have been attempting to accommodate

for lack of contact by organising events online etc.

● Can do up to 50% less per day due to caring commitments. All [COVID-19] related leave being

classed as special leave so paid and not down as sick leave.

YLAL welcomes the fact that many respondents’ employers and organisations have allowed their

teams to work flexibly and outside of ‘normal’ office hours. This is best practice and should be

acknowledged.

It is concerning, however, that so many respondents are being forced to maintain normal office

hours, complete with normal chargeable hours targets, irrespective of their workload and home

circumstances.

8. Adaptations for Caring Responsibilities

Our respondents with caring responsibilities faced additional challenges in relation to flexible or

remote working. 10.6% of respondents had childcare or other caring responsibilities which were

affected by COVID-19.

Recommendation:

• YLAL calls for all employers to review their flexible working arrangements and to ensure that flexible working is given automatically to every member of staff during the current COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath.

18

Respondents reported having to homeschool their children due to school and nursery closures

while balancing a full time job:

● The pressures of balancing client contact with difficult criminal clients in a home environment

whilst homeschooling and managing anxiety of the pandemic itself in a household where both

I and my partner are vulnerable to COVID-19 is difficult.

● Single mum of two. Prior to furlough was working full time and parenting/homeschooling full

time. Having to put in 18-20 hour days to do what was needed.

● Schools Closed, wife is frontline staff, thus I have full time care responsibility for 3 kids,

including 2 with autism

● This is a real issue. My child’s nursery is closed and my partner is also a legal aid lawyer. We

are both working in shifts over 12 hours a day to ensure that we are caring for our child and

both maintaining our chargeable hours. We are having to co-ordinate to ensure that our

hearings and my police stations don’t clash.

Respondents living with elderly, disabled or vulnerable people described the difficult

circumstances they face while continuing to work:

● I have a disabled sister who cannot go to college or respite so [I] am helping my parents care

for her at home. It impacts on my sleep and mental health

● I am staying with my parents to provide some care to an elderly relative nearby- this involves

about 5 visits a week, but with a small amount of flexibility I would have been able to work

around this with home working

● I have had 3 relatives/family friends who I helped who have now passed away due to COVID-

19

Another described how their employer did not initially allow remote working, which meant the

elderly relative with whom they lived was exposed to risk.

19

In contrast, a number of respondents described how their organisation has been offering

increased flexibility to those with caring responsibilities:

● I have not requested flexible hours but many of my colleagues with children are working

flexibly and the firm has accommodated that

● Flexible hours for parents.

● My employer is trusting us to get on with the job so I work my hours over an extended period

of time to accommodate homeschooling interruptions

One respondent described how a more understanding and flexible approach could benefit those

who need it:

• I don't find emails with links to mental health fact-sheets helpful - it feels token. A tangible

offer of support such as an afternoon off for mental health would mean more.

YLAL accepts that the current pandemic is unprecedented and that businesses, practitioners and

society as a whole have had to adapt considerably, and (at least initially) quickly. It appears,

however, that some employers are not making adequate adjustments or adaptations.

It is especially concerning that ‘teething problems’ of the early days of the pandemic still do not

appear to have been properly addressed.

YLAL has long campaigned for acknowledgment by the Government that sustainability of the

profession is at risk. Therefore YLAL continues to recognise that cash flow and future

sustainability are growing concerns for firms. However, our members’ experiences of the current

pandemic demonstrate the negative impact the lack of flexibility around targets and working

hours can have on employees, particularly in such difficult and unprecedented times.

20

9. Supervision and Support

Whilst 73.1% of respondents felt that the type of work they are required to undertake has been

unaffected, this is down from 84.7% in our initial report.

This time, 13.5% said they were undertaking work beyond their level of experience (up from 6.7%)

and 10.6% said that they are having to undertake work beneath their level of experience (up from

8.7%).

Recommendation:

• YLAL calls for employers to be better aware of the needs and caring responsibilities of individual employees, the impact of their personal circumstances on their working lives and be flexible in accommodating these needs. Individual discussions should take place with each employee, to assess these needs.

• YLAL calls on employers and supervisors to consider ways in which they can work with junior staff to ensure that they are working to their full potential and managing their caseload and the financial needs of the organisation, whilst also balancing the personal impact of the global pandemic and the wellbeing and individual circumstances of each employee.

21

This suggests that the type of work expected of members is beginning to change. Further findings

suggest this may be the result of a number of staff being furloughed leaving others to undertake

additional work, of varying levels of difficulty; suitable to be done by people above and below

our members’ level of qualification .

The percentage of respondents reporting that they were receiving less supervision as a result of

COVID-19 has also increased from 45% to 49%.

Pupil and trainee solicitor respondents were asked to provide details of how their supervisor is

ensuring that their training requirements are satisfied.

We were encouraged to find many examples of innovative approaches, particularly those

incorporating the use of technology. YLAL believes there are some excellent examples of best

practice for supervising solicitors and barristers:

● I shadow my supervisor in court virtually and receive papers etc.

● Attending online training, continuing remote case work (interviewing clients by phone, drafting

documents and receiving written feedback by email/phone from supervisor, regular training

reviews, completing weekly training record, participation in team meetings to plan contingency

responses, developing information tools for the public in cooperation with supervisors).

● Daily meetings, making sure there is training provided, giving me responsibility

● Mock hearings, working on cases for other barristers

● I am still attending court with my supervisor, but this is virtually. We have daily conferences.

● Online advocacy sessions, written tasks and shadowing on virtual hearings

● We are having twice weekly group zoom meetings doing advocacy or discussion work.

Others had far fewer positive experiences. Many of the respondents suggested they felt their

training and supervision needs had ‘gone completely out the window’. Others said:

22

● My own supervisor is doing very well to try and give me a variety of work but over half of my

fellow trainees have been furloughed

● They are doing the best they can, but I have spent the last month doing predominantly

administrative work. I am concerned that my training contract will need to be extended as I do

not know if this will count towards my period of recognised training.

● I have had one supervision in 2 months and we discussed my work and aims. I have been

keeping my training diary up to date. My supervisor has not done anything else.

● I am currently doing my PSC, but my seats have stopped and I am only doing my main fee

earning area so this is a concern.

● Sending me lots of research tasks and doing the marketing work for chambers since clerks have

been furloughed. Work-load is a bit too intense as still have very few hearings of my own once

in a while and in-house advocacy classes over zoom. Very busy weeks but not getting paid for

any of the work for other members of chambers.

As the most junior in the profession, often still going through training, young legal aid lawyers

should be supervised and supported in line with industry training standards; for the protection of

their clients, themselves, and their firms or chambers.

Regular phone, email, and video conferencing contact can be used to facilitate casework

supervision and training support. It appears from responses to the survey that when this is in

place, employees feel much more able to get on with their work productively, knowing that they

have someone to turn to if needed.

Though there remain concerns, it appears that the majority of trainees and pupils now feel that

their support and supervision needs are being met. This was not the case in our original report

and is a change which YLAL welcomes.

23

10. Findings on Safeguarding in High Risk Environments

Court

Of our respondents 80% have told us they are not currently required to attend court. 15.4% of

respondents say they are still required to attend court, down from 18.2%. None of the respondents

are attending court for more than three days a week.

In our previous report we noted that lawyers involved in ongoing and necessary litigation had

been designated ‘key workers’ by the Government. Since then, the Government has confirmed that

lawyers continuing to attend court or see clients as part of the essential running of the justice

system are ‘essential workers’ and are able to obtain COVID-19 testing.

YLAL continues to hope that this apparent recognition of the importance of legal advice and

representation to the effective functioning of society will influence future decision-making on

legal aid and access to justice.

In our first report, YLAL noted that there were ongoing difficulties when attending court in person;

in particular, issues of hygiene and social distancing:

‘On occasions I’ve visited courts / police stations there was no extra or noticeable cleaning nor

hand sanitizer etc. Business more or less as usual’; ‘The Courts are not set up to socially

distance, for example when you need a quiet word with the prosecutor or to take a couple of

extra instructions from your client.’

Recommendation:

• YLAL is encouraged by the improvement in this area. It calls for supervisors and employers to embrace e-contact with their teams and to ensure that adequate and appropriate supervision is given to all employees and colleagues.

• YLAL calls on employers and training principals to keep an honest and open

dialogue with their trainees and pupils in order to address concerns and questions, avoid worry regarding qualification and deal with potential problems in advance.

24

YLAL noted HMCTS guidance14 and protocols regarding safety and hygiene but suggested that

without proper enforcement these are toothless instruments.

We asked our members whether they felt safety at Court had improved since 3 April 2020 given

the guidance which has now been in place for over six weeks. 33% of respondents told us that

the situation had improved, 28% felt that things did not improve at first but have done more

recently. 38% said that there has been no improvement in conditions.

NB: This chart does not include those respondents who answered ‘N/A’.

We received a number of extremely concerning accounts of safety issues within the courts. These

are reproduced in full here due to the importance of the information contained within:

● The police and courts are offering remote video access but that is all. Some clients are very

vulnerable and need their solicitor present, no PPE or social distancing is being offered.

● Lack of PPE at police stations and courts still - colleagues have been put in very difficult

situations regarding this.

14 https://www.gov.uk/guidance/keeping-court-and-tribunal-buildings-safe-secure-and-clean

25

● [District Judges] need to be consistent in understanding of seriousness and aware of risks and

not demanding of unreasonable risk taking by solicitors and court staff.

● No hand gel not even in cells, court room still full of people and no social distancing although

practically impossible whilst at court. Phones not working to the cells so forced to see client

face to face as [District Judge] refused to allow lawyers to hold conference in closed court with

client in dock.

● Inadequate precautions for social distancing, inadequate hand sanitisation, inadequate

bathroom facilities, inadequate private meeting areas.

● Two weeks ago on a Monday there were 24 people in custody and one district judge to deal

with them all. I arrived at Court at 9am and the case was not heard until approx. 3:30. So I,

along with many others, were waiting outside court. It’s possible to social distance but it does

bring a lot of people together in small proximities.

● Security staff still touch my bag and my things. Far far too many staff in cells. Cell staff not

informing us when COVID cases in court. No hand sanitiser available for defence advocates -

in court or in the cells.

● Interviews with clients in prison are still required to take place in a courtroom (e.g. Magistrates

courts), which requires travel and numerous telephone calls to different courts.

In addition to current problems, respondents are starting to think about the near future as the

lockdown is eased:

● I am concerned that there seems to be a steer to get the court system back to ‘business as

usual’ when the court buildings are not fit for purpose when social distancing measures still

need to be implemented. Leeds County Court has 16 courtrooms - and 3 tiny interview rooms.

There is no possibility of social distancing being maintained in this scenario.

● Gravely concerned for all vulnerable court users when court resumes as there will be increased

pressure to ignore medical advice so as not to be difficult (go to cells, have a consultation, deal

with this, come to court, get case moving even if it means xyz that could put you at risk knowing

your own vulnerability or defendant’s)

26

● Best practice is giving us the option to say no to going to court although it still feels like we

are 'strongly' encouraged to 'get on with it.'

We note the HMCTS Assessment Tool, and how Court buildings will be fully risk-assessed as to

their safety. This is welcomed. YLAL calls for its members to ensure that non-compliance with the

Assessment Tool is reported to HMCTS, via email (HMCTS.COVID-19ResponseTeam@

justice.gov.uk) or its online form15.

YLAL believes that HMCTS should be fully transparent with the general public and court users as

to the buildings which are and are not safe, and why. Every Assessment Tool which has been

completed should be published on the individual court’s website, and on a centralised database

by HMCTS, so that court users can understand what is being done to ensure they are protected

and be assured that appropriate action is being taken where buildings are not safe.

Other Venues

15.4% of respondents said their job forced them to put themselves and their households at risk

of COVID-19 infection, for reasons excluding court attendance. Although this is a reduction of

almost 10 percent from the first report, the reasons for this appear to have changed.

15 https://let-us-know.form.service.justice.gov.uk

YLAL calls for:

• All court staff and court users to be provided with complete and up to dateinformation on safety and hygiene in the court setting.

• A consistent approach from all parties in relation to social distancing and hygiene.

• The HMCTS Assessment Tools to be published for each and every court.• All court users to report unsafe practices to HMCTS1.

• No junior member of the profession to be required to attend court when it isdeemed to be unsafe to do so.• All employers and senior members of the profession to support their junior

colleagues in any action required to ensure their safety.

27

The primary reason in the first survey and report was police station attendance. Although it is

clear from our second survey and report that police stations are still being attended, the primary

reason our members are being put at risk now appears to be office attendance, for example, to

collect paper files or to meet clients.

YLAL is concerned by the apparent increase in members attending offices and seeing clients and

other third parties in person. Although we recognise the challenge of working remotely with

clients who, for example, have increased vulnerability as a result of the pandemic and / or lack

access to suitable technology, we must promote the safety of our members.

Every single visit to the office and face to face meeting should be fully risk assessed before

agreed. This should specifically include why it is not possible to complete the task or appointment

remotely. We call on senior members of the profession to ensure that junior lawyers are not

required to undertake tasks (including having to travel on public transport to attend to those

tasks) which put their and their families’ health at risk. Face-to-face contact should take place

only in the most urgent and necessary circumstances and should continue to be avoided wherever

possible.

Where such meetings are required, we expect guidance to be provided to the staff member which

includes a requirement for adequate PPE and/or hygiene products and procedures, as well as

social distancing measures to be put in place.

Every office and workspace, including client-facing areas and staff areas, should be properly risk

assessed, and social distancing measures should be put in place to protect staff who are required

to be physically present.

One of the respondents described what they saw as being best practice from their employer:

[Best practice is] Employer not requiring attendance in environments which may be unsafe and

supporting staff in not putting ourselves at risk... Employer has been active in efforts to improve

protocols etc. and has kept us all updated on this.

It should be noted that the vast majority (85.6%) of these survey responses were submitted before

Boris Johnson’s announcement on 10 May 2020 of a phased end to the lockdown.

28

Police Station Attendance

On 2 April 2020, just before our last report, the Interview Protocol 16 between the Crown

Prosecution Service, National Police Chiefs’ Council, Law Society, Criminal Law Solicitors

Association and London Criminal Courts Solicitors Association was agreed.

It has now been in place for over six weeks. Though our survey responses seem to suggest that

police stations have become safer over time there is also evidence from our survey and elsewhere

that issues persist17.

Our respondents attending police stations describe the risks they face:

16 https://www.lccsa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/KH-National-Protocol-02.04.20.pdf 17https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/police-station-representative-issues-covid-19-warning-from-hospital/5103929.article

YLAL continues to call for:

• Employers to comply with The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020, such that people work from home as standard, save only where not reasonably practicable.

• Employers to ensure that junior members of staff are not required to attend the office unless absolutely necessary and only if a more senior member of staff is unable to do so. If junior members of staff are required to attend the office, expenses should be provided to ensure the staff member does not have to travel by public transport.

• Where it is necessary for junior lawyers to attend the office or conduct in-person meetings, full safety guidance (including social distancing) to be issued and adequate PPE and/or hygiene products provided.

29

● Lack of PPE at police stations and courts still - colleagues have been put in very difficult

situations regarding this.

● The police and courts are offering remote video access but that is all. Some clients are very

vulnerable and need their solicitor present, no PPE or social distancing is being offered

● Most police stations are being done as per the protocol, but I did (another) attempted murder

last week where I was asked to attend in person and again there was no PPE provided. I also

have a voluntary interview at a psychiatric hospital scheduled next week that the police have

insisted I attend in person. I have made representations that the offences are minor and there

is pressing urgency for the interview, but the police insist it should go ahead as planned.

YLAL notes that whilst justice requires that citizens are able to access legal advice at the police

station, it is clear that even now, months into the pandemic, insufficient protective measures have

been organised to protect police station representatives, clients, and police officers.

YLAL notes that some employers are exhibiting what respondents describe as best practice in

relation to police station work:

● [I am] working from home and being supported by colleagues in not attending the police

station physically, we are now attending remotely. I've been taking disclosure by email, having

a private consultation over a phone in the interview room, then attending the interview over

the phone.

YLAL supports the Protocol but again recommends its wider communication to police forces. YLAL

notes that the Law Society is collating data as to non-compliance18, and recommends that both

its members and the profession as a whole ensure that non-compliance is reported as quickly as

possible.

18 https://www.caseratio.co.uk/security/complaintform

30

11. Job Security

Almost 80% (78.8%) of our respondents said they were worried about their job security at present

with 51.9% saying they were ‘extremely’ or ‘quite’ worried.

Only 2.9% reported that they were ‘not at all worried’. One of the respondents who is not

personally worried, stated;

● At the moment the public law team is busier than ever so I’m not worried about my job for

now, but I am concerned about the long term implications of COVID on general employability

within the sector.

YLAL calls for:

• The National Police Chief’s Council and the College of Policing to ensure that all police officers are aware of, and adhere to, the Protocol. • Members of the profession to report all non-compliance with the Protocol to the

Law Society.

31

Redundancies

Many of the respondents have raised concerns regarding the fear of redundancy. Others are

concerned about the impact the crisis is having now, and will have in the future, on employment

opportunities and the possibility of finding a new role:

● Very unclear if there will be redundancies at the start of July after the furlough scheme which

has created added anxiety as this is when my due date is. There has been a real lack of

transparency around decisions taken and next steps, I imagine as the firm does not know.

● I am being overworked in my current position for very little pay. they are not recruiting because

of Coronavirus, despite there being around 4 vacancies that need filling. However, I don't have

any power to leave the job because no other firms are recruiting either. essentially very little

power to leave situations that aren't working.

● I am on a fixed term contract so I am worried about job security.

● I can’t apply for NQ roles despite qualifying.

● Generally really worried about job security / risk of furlough.

● I've felt depressed and anxious consistently and I worry about obtaining a pay rise or a nq

position when I qualify in November.

● [would like] more supervision of junior staff and providing some communication/transparency

about the extent to which our jobs will be affected (either in the short or long term) by

COVID19. We have heard nothing formal at all from management.

● Employer has caused more anxiety with continuous emails about the firm's profitability and

the daily monitoring of chargeable hours. She has also informed staff they will soon consider

redundancies.

● Constant stress and worry about whether I will be furloughed, whether I will be put into seats

that I have no interest in just to maximise profit for the firm, and whether there will be any NQ

jobs at the end.

32

YLAL again acknowledges that this is a difficult time for legal aid firms and organisations.

However, our members should not be left in the dark about their immediate or longer term

futures. YLAL encourages all employers to communicate with and be as honest and open with the

staff as possible. These communications, their wording and likely impact should be considered

properly before they are sent, with the audience in mind; including that many members of staff

are junior and currently faced with a lot less social support than they would usually have.

Communications should include updates and plans about the current circumstances, as well as

the steps being taken by the organisation to ensure the short, medium, and longer term

sustainability of job roles, and the profession more generally.

Furlough

16.3% of respondents have told us that they have been furloughed. Two respondents

have had their hours reduced.

63.5% of respondents told us that although they had not been furloughed others at the

organisation have been. In one of the organisations with no furloughing the respondent

stated, ‘No one has been furloughed but people who do not want to risk still working have

been offered to take unpaid leave.’

33

Just over 50% of respondents say that furloughed staff have not had their wages topped up by

the employer and are surviving on 80% of their salary. Many others said they had not been told

what the policy had been on top up. 30.6% of respondents said that they were losing other aspects

of working benefits by being furloughed; including the ability to earn overtime or time off in lieu

as a result of attending the police stations. Those affected are likely to have relied upon this extra

income to top up their low basic salary and therefore have lost much more than the official 20%

reduction.

Only 11.5% of respondents said that furloughed staff were being paid 100% of their salary. YLAL

commends those employers and organisations who have continued to pay 100% salaries to their

staff, who work for the most vulnerable in society.

We also asked who was being furloughed. Shockingly, four respondents told us it was ‘everyone’.

The majority (60.5%) said it was the lower paid staff who had been furloughed; under 2.5% said

it was higher paid staff and a third said it was a mixture of different levels.

These responses appear to show that our members, the more junior and therefore lower paid

lawyers, are at highest risk of furlough. It is also likely that they will be most negatively impacted

by decisions not to top up their salaries to 100%.

34

YLAL’s 2018 Social Mobility Report19 found that on average, 53% of respondents were earning

less than £25,000. 72% had, or anticipated having, debt over £15,000 as a result of their

education; 26.5% expected over £35,000 debt. Young legal aid lawyers are already on low salaries

and many will not be able to afford basic living costs on losing one fifth of their wages, as well

as the extra income they usually earn if working, as detailed above (overtime, police station

attendances).

A theme throughout the responses was one of a threat of furlough alongside the requirement to

continue hitting targets and keep billing. The findings go some way to demonstrate why members

are so concerned about these threats. As well as the potential loss of 20% of their salary, many

respondents described loss of access to overtime hours, flexi schemes, overtime pay for weekend

work, diminished pension contributions and pay rise freezes (which actually means a real-term

cut as salaries will not have increased in line with inflation [1.5%]).

Respondents’ comments on furlough included:

● Highly conscious of need to care for vulnerable clients (many have mental health which has

been impacted by the pandemic too) and possibilities of needing to take on greater case load

if colleagues are furloughed, or the possibility I will have to pass my clients onto a colleague

if I am furloughed is all worrying.

● Furlough was handled very poorly with no consultation and little transparency. I felt

expendable and as though my wellbeing, clients and previous/current work had been

completely ignored in decision-making process.... I feel that this break in work has given me

additional stresses as I will have to somehow catch up on what has been missed and will have

to adapt my family life again to fit. I am concerned about my clients whom I cannot help during

this time and have felt very helpless and upset about this at times.

● To a degree, while on furlough I have found that I’ve been ‘inside my own head’ a bit too much

which leads to irritability. The uncertainty about how workload will increase when lockdown

ends is also a worry as it is likely that my firm won’t have income coming in for my cases until

I get back.

19 http://www.younglegalaidlawyers.org/socialmobilityreport2018

35

● Now I am Furloughed, it is a break I desperately needed. I have had time to do [Continuing

Professional Development], and study for my police station accreditation. I was working late

and at weekends, and I was struggling with my workload. Furlough has given me time to reflect

on my work life.

● I, like many criminal solicitors/paralegals/trainees/legal executives depend on police station

overtime work to help make ends meet. Being furloughed means that I am no longer able to

carry out any overtime. For me, this means that I have lost around £300-400 a month after tax.

If I had been furloughed on 80% of my wages (as many of my peers at other firms have been)

I would be in serious financial hardship. I do not earn enough (after loan repayments, rent,

travel and general London living costs) to contribute to a savings pot and this situation has

really made me think again about how sustainable a career in criminal legal aid is.

Respondents who have not been furloughed are also facing difficulties of their own as a result of

the scheme, they made comments such as:

● [Wellbeing would be improved by] not furloughing people so I don’t have to do all their work

as well as mine.

● Work is so stressful and pressured as I’m having to deal with cases for more senior solicitors

who have been furloughed as well as my own case load. Secretaries have been furloughed so

we are having to do this work as well as fee earning work. Court deadlines still exist and I’m

finding myself working long hours to try and keep up with my own work, other cases and

admin.

● Number of staff furloughed, therefore bigger work demand on remaining staff.

● We have frequent meetings and emails thanking us for our efforts, but this does not compensate

for the increase in workload due to absent staff.

● At the present time unaffected but we have been put on notice that they are considering all

options including furloughing more staff, requesting we reduce our hours or cut our pay. So

changes impacting me are imminent.

36

● I am the only non-qualified staff member remaining at work in my department so I have lost a

lot of support and companionship as the people I would usually speak with have been

furloughed. It feels very lonely. It has also been very demoralising having an increased

workload because we have been reduced from four to one, especially when the rest of my team

are at home relaxing on 100% pay. I agree with continuing to pay people but it can be

frustrating when I’m trying to motivate myself.

● I am taking on caseloads for half of our department who are furloughed - there is simply too

much to do. Courts have not been at all understanding of this and are still chasing us for

deadlines, even though we are all aware these trials aren’t going ahead any time soon so

there’s no hurry! Management have not been understanding about the additional demands on

us - it’s got to the point where the remaining colleagues at my firm are wishing to be

furloughed so we can have a break.

● In relation to furlough, our chambers took the decision to furlough half our staff at 80% of their

current pay. This decision was not taken lightly but, as a predominantly publicly-funded set,

was deemed necessary because of the reduction in work and the need to make savings

wherever possible in order to sustain the business and secure staff employment in the medium

to long-term.

● I think my employer has behaved extremely responsibly in taking the decision to furlough staff

very early on. I realise that this will have no doubt caused stress and unhappiness to colleagues

who were furloughed. However, given the decline in work across the firm and the tight margins

we run on, it is clear that we wouldn’t have survived the crisis if it hadn’t acted decisively and

jobs would have been lost without furloughing.

● They haven't checked in on me once.

● The 20% top up to pay is never confirmed until the last minute and subject to change every

month. I have no idea who else is furloughed and how they are being treated- I'm pretty sure

I was furloughed early due because I'd been on compassionate leave while everyone else was

set up for home working. Things feel really uncertain.

37

See the section below for the wider impact of furlough on industry sustainability, and YLAL’s

recommendations in relation to these.

Adjournments

Barristers told us that ‘80%’ of their hearings and trials had been adjourned. Others presented an

even bleaker picture telling us that 100% of their hearings and trials had been taken out of their

diary and ‘nothing new is coming in anymore.’

One respondent described losing all hearings from their diary at a rate of 5-10 per week which

were now ‘starting to re-emerge as remote hearings, at a rate of no more than 1 per week.’

Approximately six weeks on from the first report, the situation regarding hearings does not appear

to have improved. Respondents told us of the financial impact of these changes and their concerns

about sustainability in the face of their decimated practices:

● Far less Court work but I also have Inquiry work which therefore supplements these hours on

a short term basis. Long term, however, my Court practice has been decimated.

● One hearing a week that is unlikely to be paid - therefore little or no income most weeks.

As a result, YLAL calls for:

• All legal aid employers to commit to paying their employees’ full salaries if furloughed.

• All legal aid employers to manage consultations on redundancy or furlough in a transparent and sensitive way providing timely and honest updates to all staff.

• All employers to take into account the needs and workload of those employees who

will not be furloughed before making any decision to furlough staff.

38

● I will receive very little financially in second six. My pupillage is in a different city to my family

home. I therefore rented a property with monthly payments higher than I would ordinarily have

allowed had I known that I would not be able to rely on an income in my second six

● I am fortunate that I have a spouse whose income can tide us over for a few months. Without

that, I would not be able to maintain my career as a barrister.

● I've made £100 in the last 2 months...

● It has reduced by income by around 95%

● All adjourned; 8 trials. 14 mentions taken out. No income.

● I have only been in court once since the last survey and that hearing was conducted remotely.

I now have three remote hearings in my diary for next week, which are all case management

hearings. I do not have any trials in my diary until July and do not expect that hearing to go

ahead unless it can be done in person, which seems unlikely at present due to the number of

people who will need to attend.

● My income will suffer in the months to come when I would have been receiving payments for

work done now. I don't have a fall back and I've only been a tenant for 6 months. I have left

London to try and save some money but this stops me attending court so I am only able to

undertake remote hearings.

Other respondents highlighted specific issues relating to pupils and unpaid work:

● Worst practice is not paying the pupils for all the work we are doing for other members of

chambers.

● Stressed about finances as chambers are keeping me and the other pupils very very busy but

not paying us for it. If we want we can take a loan from chambers but it seems unfair since we

have been working non-stop for the last two months.

39

● Sending me lots of research tasks and doing the marketing work for chambers since clerks have

been furloughed. Work-load is a bit too intense as still have very few hearings of my own once

in a while and in-house advocacy classes over zoom. Very busy weeks but not getting paid for

any of the work for other members of chambers.

Pupils are particularly concerned about gaining adequate experience during their ‘second six’ (the

second six months of their one year training when they begin to conduct their own advocacy at

court hearings):

● I feel worried about if I will get tenancy and my performance when I finally get a case and also

the impact of being stuck at home.

● Almost complete lack of paid work for 2nd 6 pupils.

● I am in my second six but have no work so am essentially acting as if in 1st six shadowing

remotely.

● I am a pupil barrister on my feet from 7th April and I have been in court only three times. This

compared to the experience and exposure I should have already had one month in on my feet

is terrible and presents huge worries for the future.

See the section below for the impact of adjournments and YLAL’s recommendations.

Significant impact will also be felt by barristers who have not yet practised for long enough to

have submitted a tax return, as they will fall outside the Government’s Coronavirus Self-

employment Income Support Scheme. This issue remains a grave concern despite representations

to the Treasury with one respondent providing a blunt assessment, ‘Zero income. Not eligible for

SEISS.’

40

Training Contracts and Pupillages

YLAL notes that there has been a distinct lack of certainty for a considerable period as to how

training contracts would be affected by a period of furlough. Law Society guidance20 simply states

that discussions remain ongoing with the Solicitors Regulation Authority. YLAL endorses Junior

Lawyers Division’s call for further clarity on the position of trainees.

We are pleased that the Solicitors Regulation Authority has now acknowledged Junior Lawyer

Division’s concerns and issued guidance21. However, whilst the guidance confirming flexibility in

supervision to include e-supervision is welcome, it does not go far enough.

The guidance confirms to trainees that:

‘If your firm decides to put you on furlough, you do not need to do anything. When you are

taken off furlough, your firm will discuss with you whether your period of recognised training

needs to be extended. This will depend on the length of time you have been on furlough. If

your period of recognised training needs to be extended, your firm will need to notify us of the

extension period and that this has been agreed with you.’

20https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/support-services/advice/articles/coronavirus-covid-19-advice-and-updates/ 21 https://www.sra.org.uk/sra/news/coronavirus-questions-answers/

YLAL recommends that:

• The Chancellor rethinks the eligibility criteria for the SEISS and ensures that junior barristers can access the Scheme.

• The Legal Aid Agency assess the work billed by barristers with publicly-funded practices and pay the same fees as those remitted in the three months prior to the crisis.

41

Although YLAL acknowledges that times are uncertain, employers and the SRA should be giving

trainees as much career certainty and job security as possible, while ensuring that qualifying

solicitors’ skills and experience are sufficient.

The guidance falls far short of giving any trainee peace of mind.

YLAL notes that the FAQs provided by the Bar Standards Board22 (BSB) to chambers and to pupils

as to the impact of COVID-19 on pupillages is clear. This includes pragmatic recommendations as

to being flexible on experience and training, and encouraging the use of remote supervision,

observation and support.

YLAL remains concerned to note, however, that the BSB has authorised chambers to reduce the

pupillage award advertised to their pupils. Although this is caveated by the requirement that no

award should fall below the minimum funding level, YLAL is concerned that pupillage awards

may be reduced to a level that will cause unacceptable hardship to our members.

The minimum award takes into consideration the Living Wage Foundation’s Real Living Wage and

for the period 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2020. This rate is £18,866 for 12-month pupillages

in London and £16,322 for 12-month pupillages outside London23.

YLAL believes that this is a retrograde step. We are concerned that pupils may have funding

reduced unilaterally in circumstances where it may not be truly necessary and/or without

consideration of the impact on pupils’ financial and mental health.

22https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/training-qualification/becoming-a-barrister/pupillage-component/covid-19-and-pupillage-faqs.html 23https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/training-qualification/bar-qualification-manual/part-2-for-students-pupils--transferring-lawyers/c2-responsibilities-of-aetos/c2-3-pupillage-funding.html

As a result, YLAL calls for:

• the Solicitors Regulation Authority to confirm that, upon a training principal confirming that the trainee has had sufficient experience otherwise, a training contract period will not be extended if trainees are furloughed for up to and including three months.

42

Every pupil and prospective pupil in the country will have made financial commitments based on

their pupillage award and are unlikely to be able to mitigate any loss of income resulting from

this change.

12. Communication

Many respondents expressed frustration at the content and method of communication about their

workplaces, livelihoods and the courts more generally.

There was significant concern across the pool of respondents, furloughed or not, about the lack

of transparency around decision-making and lack of openness during consultation on furlough:

● No contact at all from [graduate recruitment] after we learnt through the grapevine that half

of the trainees are being furloughed and being told that 'everything is absolutely fine and

nothing is changing' before then finding out about furlough / reduced hours / hiring freeze etc,

so no preparation for bad news.

● Vague emails sent to staff about possible measures the firm was considering saving money

(reduced hours, furlough, pay cut for all), with no timescales, coupled with endless emails

warning about chargeable hours, with no support for those struggling with productivity due to

COVID. Also, the firm furloughed people without telling their colleagues so we didn’t know they

were no longer working. And furloughing people with one days’ notice leaving no time to

handover or for colleagues to prepare to work without them. All of these create huge

uncertainty and concern.

Recommendation:

• YLAL calls on the Bar Standards Board to remove its agreement for chambers to vary pupillage awards already advertised.

43

● [Best practice would be] more transparency about the financial situation and the decision

making process so that there is not so much pressure and fear of being furloughed/laid off.

● I was told I would be furloughed a month ago but only received a letter confirming the terms

the day I left. Just adds to the uncertainty.

● Being furloughed on a few hours’ notice, very little communication about furlough, little

appreciation.

● Worst [practice] was definitely finding out about furlough by my out of office being on.

Respondents were also concerned about a lack of clarity as to the impact of the crisis on their

organisations as a whole and/or on them as individuals. Most of the responses focused on the

same concern; a complete dearth of communication around central issues such as the financial

health of their organisation and its impact on jobs.

The tone of communication was also mentioned. Alarmingly, respondents described ‘threats’ to

encourage increased billing and productivity:

● ...whilst encouraging openness, targets are still being pushed and we are being threatened

with furlough should we not meet our targets.

● Poor practice has been the regular emails about targets and the bad financial situation.

● Generally poor communications with staff since start of lockdown, including threatening/rude

emails to staff who have not met daily chargeable targets.

● All employees asked to sacrifice five days holiday. If anyone objects, ‘disaster clause’ in

employment contract invoked to alter the terms of employment to reduce holiday in any event.

Anyone objecting seen as not a team player.

● They threatened to postpone someone's training contract due to potential furlough. I am

concerned what happens to my training contract if I am furloughed.

44

● We get weekly emails about billing and time recording, telling us that we will be furloughed if

we're not billing enough.

● I have found there is pressure to work more as the firm [has] got strict on targets and billing.

They have been sending weekly emails about how bad the situation is and how

furlough/redundancy is being considered.

YLAL is extremely concerned that furlough is being deployed in this manner, particularly given

our findings on the number of responses about salaries not being topped up to 100%.

We encourage all those with responsibility for junior lawyers to consider the impact of every

communication on junior lawyers’ wellbeing. From a purely business perspective, negative or

threatening communications are likely to affect quality and standard of work to an unacceptable

degree.

We asked respondents to tell us what their employer could do to improve their wellbeing. The

vast majority told us they wanted more contact and better communication.

Unsurprisingly, when asked to describe best practice, the majority of those who felt supported by

their employers, colleagues and organisations described open and honest communications which

provided clarity where possible and allowed for questions and dialogue where necessary:

● I don't think the importance of regular video-calls should be understated, even if there isn't an

awful lot of work to discuss, but just as a way of checking-in in the usual way you would if you

were sat in an office together.

● [My]supervisor regularly checking in and being a genuine listening ear

● I think they are doing well. I have received regular 'check-ins' from members of chambers who

want to check everything is ok.

● We also have a weekly roundup of things that have been going on which is sent to all staff via

email. We have set up an opt in WhatsApp chat group to keep in touch. We also have a separate

work chat to keep us informed about purely work related things.

45

● Our director is very approachable and transparent about decisions taken, she also takes time

to listen to staff and develop solutions in cooperation with staff. As a trainee I participate in

staff meetings on an equal footing with other Law Centre employees.

● Best practice is team meetings where the prospect of furlough is discussed in a transparent

manner, and each caseworker has a great deal of say on whether they are furloughed. Also that

any furloughed staff would receive 100% of pay.

Employers and others should be providing clear information. A lack of transparency regarding

decision making and financial stability can and will lead to increased employee stress and a

decline in mental health and wellbeing if left unaddressed. It will also lead to less productivity

which in turn will affect income.

13. Impact on Members’ Wellbeing

We asked respondents ‘Has the way that lockdown has affected your work life negatively affected

your mental wellbeing?’. 75% of respondents told us that it had.

YLAL calls for:

• Employers to consider the way they communicate with their staff and specifically:

• be clear as to what is happening and who will be affected; • communicate within working hours wherever possible;

• name a point of contact for staff to discuss concerns; and

• consider whether information can be better disseminated over telephone or video conference, rather than by email.

46

Alongside the issues covered specifically in the detail of this report, respondents told us about

other ways their wellbeing was being affected. Issues included:

● the provision of training/guidance on mental health;

● insensitivity to the need to treat staff as individuals;

● an increased lack of work/life balance;

● loss of team support;

● concern for clients; and

● ‘empty gestures’ from organisations and/or representative bodies.

Financial Targets and Billing

A large number of respondents told us that the focus on targets and billing and a failure to adapt

targets to the current situation was causing great stress.

● I think there should be less pressure on the junior employees in the firm to generate work,

especially at this time. There is a renewed pressure to market and business develop (blogs).

Constant pressure to show your value in financial terms.

● Generally poor communications with staff since start of lockdown, including threatening/rude

emails to staff who have not met daily chargeable targets;

47

● We are a ABS so we have an executive team that just looks at chargeable targets and emails

sent out to confirm we are still making the targets. I think less pressure would help and

addressing the coronavirus and other matters on a personal basis (how it might affect the

employee) and the support available for our wellbeing not just looking at it from a national

perspective.

● Recognition of working parents and how hard it is to meet the firm’s expectations in terms of

billing in the current climate.

● I don’t think we should be expected to meet the same targets, as working from home is a lot

more stressful and it’s a lot harder to be as productive as being in the office.

● I am feeling a bit of a strain now owing to the number of unpaid hours I have to do to hit my

billing targets without secretarial support, but have coped so far

● Pressure from management to meet billing target which is not possible due to decrease in

work.

● I feel increased pressure to hit hourly targets, less support/increased workload as others in my

team have reduced productivity due to childcare issues, increased pressure to undertake

business development/marketing (incessant blogging),

● It’s not easy to meet the daily billable hours so I’m now spending more hours working than I

usually would. I rarely used to look forward to the end of the week but now it’s usual for me

by Tuesday or Wednesday.

● Employer has caused more anxiety with continuous emails about the firm's profitability and

the daily monitoring of chargeable hours.

● We get weekly emails about billing and time recording, telling us that we will be furloughed if

we're not billing enough.

When asked ‘What more do you think your organisation should be doing to help with wellbeing?’,

well over a third of those who responded to this question said they felt their targets should be

adjusted and/or less emphasised.

48

One respondent explained the problem succinctly:

‘I don't think it's just working from home in itself, it's trying to keep working at the same rate

of productivity (with the fear of losing my job if I don't) in a time of a global pandemic which

is anxiety inducing’

Return to Normal

A number of people expressed concern about the return to work after lockdown and a lack of

openness which has led to increased worry and had a negative impact on their wellbeing:

● The lack of certainty, concern about being made redundant and the lack of any clarity about

measures which will be put in place when we return- in the office and with public transport

etc.

● More communication about what measures will be put into place for the return to work.

● Requests for staff to start coming back into work with no consultation.

● Discuss our worries concerning reopening offices and travelling to the office and meeting

clients.

● Communications by the firm re next steps have been last minute and vague, so there is much

uncertainty.

14. Conclusion

YLAL concludes that whilst some employers and chambers have done their utmost to support the

junior members, there are noticeable examples of poor practice and there is significant scope for

improvement across the legal aid profession.

YLAL recognises the extreme difficulties faced by employers and senior members of the

profession at this time. However, we call for a transparent and collaborative approach to decision

49

making which also takes into account the specific concerns of the most junior members,

particularly those highlighted in this report.

YLAL calls for the Legal Aid Agency to engage with, and provide immediate financial assistance

to legal aid providers, in order to enable them to continue to provide the services their clients

desperately need to ensure access to justice.

YLAL calls for an extension of the Self Employed Income Support Scheme.

YLAL thanks all its members who took the time to contribute to this important survey.

25 May 2020

Young Legal Aid Lawyers

http://www.younglegalaidlawyers.org

ylalinfo@gmail.com

@YLALawyers

50

Annex A: Summary

These are the recommendations made in YLAL’s second COVID-19 Report, of May 2020, dealing

with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on its members:

● YLAL calls for a consistent approach from all parties in relation to social distancing and

hygiene.

The Ministry of Justice and Treasury

● YLAL calls on the Ministry of Justice and Treasury to consider the chilling effects of the

COVID-19 crisis on access to justice and the impact of the pandemic, lockdown and

aftermath on the most vulnerable members of our society. We continue to call for the

complete reform of the Legal Aid system in order to ensure that all those who need it are

able to access legal advice, support and representation no matter their financial status.

● YLAL calls on the Chancellor to rethink the eligibility criteria for the Self-employment

Income Support Scheme and ensure that junior barristers can access the Scheme.

HMCTS

● YLAL calls for all court staff and court users to be provided with complete and up to date

information on safety and hygiene in the court setting.

● The HMCTS Assessment Tools to be published for each and every court.

Members of YLAL and the wider profession

● YLAL calls on all court users to report unsafe practices to HMCTS24.

● YLAL calls on members of the profession to report all non-compliance with the Police

Stations Interview Protocol to the Law Society.

24https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-courts-and-tribunals-planning-and-preparation#assessing-and-managing-coronavirus-risk

51

Legal Aid Agency

● YLAL calls on the Legal Aid Agency to make payments to legal aid providers in areas which

are severely impacted by the current rules in place. We call for payments to be made to

providers based on their usual legal aid income over a 3 month period.

● YLAL calls on the Legal Aid Agency to make prompt payments to legal aid providers for

all work carried out, including in areas where there is currently no or insufficient provision

for payments on account.

● YLAL calls on the Legal Aid Agency to assess the work billed by barristers with publicly-

funded practices and pay the same fees as those remitted in the three months prior to the

crisis.

Representative Bodies

● YLAL calls on the National Police Chief’s Council and the College of Policing to ensure

that all police officers are aware of, and adhere to, the Police Stations Interview Protocol.

● YLAL calls on the Solicitors Regulation Authority to confirm that, upon a training principal

confirming that the trainee has had sufficient experience otherwise, a training contract

period will not be extended if trainees are furloughed for up to and including three

months.

● YLAL calls on the Bar Standards Board to remove its agreement for chambers to vary

pupillage awards already advertised.

Employers

● YLAL calls on all employers to ask their employees about their practical arrangements for

working from home, assess the tools given to their staff/members, and provide them with

adequate equipment (including technology and physical equipment) to enable them to

work from home effectively.

52

● YLAL calls for all employers to review their flexible working arrangements and to ensure

that flexible working is given automatically to every member of staff during the current

COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath.

● YLAL calls for employers to be better aware of the needs and caring responsibilities of

individual employees, the impact of their personal circumstances on their working lives

and be flexible in accommodating these needs. Individual discussions should take place

with each employee, to assess these needs.

● YLAL calls on employers and supervisors to consider ways in which they can work with

junior staff to ensure that they are working to their full potential and managing their

caseload and the financial needs of the organisation, whilst also balancing the personal

impact of the global pandemic and the wellbeing and individual circumstances of the

employee.

● YLAL calls for supervisors and employers to embrace e-contact with their teams and to

ensure that adequate and appropriate supervision is given to all employees and

colleagues.

● YLAL calls on employers and training principals to keep an honest and open dialogue with

their trainees and pupils in order to address concerns and questions, avoid worry

regarding qualification and deal with potential problems in advance.

● YLAL calls for no junior member of the profession to be required to attend court when it

is deemed to be unsafe to do so.

● YLAL calls on all employers and senior members of the profession to support their junior

colleagues in any action required to ensure their safety.

● YLAL calls on employers to comply with The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions)

(England) Regulations 2020, such that people work from home as standard, save only

where not reasonably practicable.

● YLAL calls on employers to ensure that junior members of staff are not required to attend

the office unless absolutely necessary and only if a more senior member of staff is unable

53

to do so. If junior members of staff are required to attend the office, expenses should be

provided to ensure the staff member does not have to travel by public transport.

● Where it is necessary for junior lawyers to attend the office or conduct in-person meetings,

YLAL calls on employers to ensure that full safety guidance (including social distancing)

is issued and adequate PPE and/or hygiene products provided.

● YLAL calls on all legal aid employers to commit to paying their employees’ full salaries if

furloughed.

● YLAL calls on all legal aid employers to manage consultations on redundancy or furlough

in a transparent and sensitive way providing timely and honest updates to all staff.

● YLAL calls on all employers to take into account the needs and workload of those

employees who will not be furloughed before making any decision to furlough staff.

● YLAL calls on employers to consider the way they communicate with their staff and

specifically:

○ be clear as to what is happening and who will be affected;

○ communicate within working hours wherever possible;

○ name a point of contact for staff to discuss concerns; and

○ consider whether information can be better disseminated over telephone or video

conference, rather than by email.