Update on Extended Operating Hours + @HMCTSgovuk

HMCTS are proposing to extend the working hours of a courtroom in 65 Crown Court centres across Eng & Wales.

They ran pilots in a few court centres but have only provided a summary of the data from Liverpool so far.

They have renamed the scheme “Covid Operating Hours”.

The scheme involves 2 trials running in the *same room* each day, with different Judges, jurors and Counsel.

There is a clean at handover (lunch). The AM trial runs from 9-1 and PM 2-6. No PHE assessments

have been provided to inform whether this has been a safe way to use a Courtroom and whether or not there were issues with infection during any of the pilots.

All we know is that during the pilot Liverpool was generating a huge amount of Covid+ notification emails.

Those engaging with HMCTS from the various bodies have repeatedly asked for the equality assessment and the full data from the pilots so it can be independently scrutinised.

Looking at all the surveys undertaken, the crim bar has made it clear that there is a discriminatory

impact upon the profession and that members of the bar with caring responsibilities (predominantly female) are alarmed at the introduction of this scheme as it will potentially cost them work.

There was to be a meeting and those attending it from @thebarcouncil @TheCriminalBar @WomenInCrimLaw etc. expected to have the data and the equality impact assessment in advance of the meeting.

The meeting was moved twice to allow this but it was never provided.

During the meeting James Mulholland QC invited HMCTS to allow the Equality and Human Rights Commission to independently scrutinise the pilots to assess potential discriminatory impact.

HMCTS did not directly respond but said they would offer another meeting re. discrimination.

HMCTS plan for this scheme to be “time limited” but would not set out a timeframe, only that it would not last “for years” and that there would be a review in April if it is rolled out.

Importantly, Resident Judges can apparently refuse to have EOH/COH in their court centres.

I am deeply concerned about this scheme. Why am I concerned?

I am one of the Barristers completely excluded from participating in the scheme.

The scheme aims to bring short trials forward and work them either in morning or afternoon sessions. Sounds ideal! But wait...

With one (soon to be two) child under 3, starting Court at 8am or finishing after 6pm is just impossible for me logistically.

Because I am at the very junior end of the Bar, 3 day trials are my bread & butter, so it is my work that will be placed into the COH scheme.

It was plain from the proposal outlined in the meeting that the scheme places me in a position where I have to apply to be excused

from the COH trial court once my case has been identified and brought forward.

But it’s not about me. It’s about my Sols and clients too, so either CPS, victims & witnesses or a Solicitor and a defendant who may be waiting in prison. 2 Barristers & all those people are affected.

Suddenly my caring responsibilities and the need to earn money are less important than their collective needs and a balance will need to be struck. I would OBVIOUSLY lose work as my clients would *completely understandably* want to take advantage of the new date.

Why do I know this is true? Well it’s been happening to me lately. I’m pregnant and I’ve had to shield, so I’ve been working remotely.

Judges, the final arbiter of whether I can attend remotely, have been refusing my applications to appear over the link. This is despite my

clients expressly saying they want me to stay representing them even if I can’t physically come to Court.

This is despite the full backing of my Solicitor and counsel on the other side of the case.

I have lost work because of this - there has been a big hit to my income.

My clerks have been wonderful but I can’t help but quietly worry they have found me a burden to clerk, given the constant applications they have to make and then refusals they have had to appeal on my behalf.

Imagine knowing that a particular barrister you clerk can’t do COH?

Take yesterday for example. Today I have a sentence over the link. D is in prison so he is over the link. My remote attendance was agreed 2 weeks ago by the court & a Judge.

Last night, 4pm (2 hours after the cut off for clerking list reps to the court) the court called and

said that the prison didn’t have enough links today anymore, so the defendant will now be produced (brought to Court in the van) and my permission for remote attendance was now withdrawn.

I did the PTPH, had 2 meetings with him, had prepared written submissions, uploaded them & he was expecting me. He was happy with me being remote & the Court knew that.

He couldn’t be communicated with before the hearing now either.

All that work & I would now lose the case?!

I’m quite sure that this will be ironed out this morning but it placed my clerks in a horrendous position, fire-fighting at the last minute just to try to keep me instructed and able to attend.

This is just one in a series of similar incidents they have had to deal with for me.

There will be in some Barristers’ clerks who simply slip work to Barristers who are not problematic like I am.

The ones with no caring responsibilities, who are single, childless and can take anything on.

Those counsel will benefit from COH because they will pick up the cases

that the rest of us cannot do. And this WILL happen. Make no mistake.

It is a fallacy for HMCTS to present a summary of their equalities assessment that states they found COH to have..... a potentially positive impact.

Women like me will lose work.

Trials of mine will be brought forward and I will say I cannot undertake them because of the hours. The client will say they want the opportunity to have their trial early - who wouldn’t?

The Judge will say sorry but the trial will go into COH.

HMCTS will say that it was the Judge’s discretion being exercised and therefore it is not *the scheme* that was discriminatory. Their guidance is for Counsel to be accommodated.

***The mere existence of the scheme is discriminatory.***

I am just one voice.

I urge HMCTS to agree to JMQC’s request to provide pilot data and equality assessment to the Equality and Human Rights Commission for independent scrutiny.

I urge HMCTS to provide @thebarcouncil @TheCriminalBar @WomenInCrimLaw with the full data + EA.

I urge my professional colleagues to consider the following point:

COH might be attractive to you as it might offer you the ability to crack some of your cases. But please, consider your colleagues. Colleagues like me.

You may not be me yet, or you may have been me once.

You may hope to have children in the next few months or years, or you may be watching your parents grow old and you might consider that one day they may need your support before or after work.

You may have a child or relative joining the bar.

You may not be discriminated

against by this scheme and others like it personally, but if we stand together we can ensure that we protect the long term future of the Bar.

This will improve diversity, equality and retention and will make the bar stronger.

Thank you for reading.

NB- HMCTS said that there will be a wider meeting on EOH/COH for the profession/s to attend at the end next week.