It's a zero sum game. Some barristers (also football managers) being more successful must mean some others are less successful, no matter how hard you work or how smart you are. It's not the same, say in medicine or engineering, where in theory everyone can excel.
As I also say in another reply, being a barrister is playing a zero-sum game. Not every one can excel no matter how hard they work or how smart they are, someone must lose.
Given your attitude, almost certainly not, because you are going to spend your life holding yourself back and resenting well-meaning people for imaginary discrimination
So you try and manipulate the system to edge a bias towards quotas, and the net result impacts the system negatively. Perhaps historically top Q.C.'s were exceptional at their job whilst making less desirable husbands by today's standards - which in themselves aren't necessarily good. The traditional family dynamic didn't balance work and family life as is being sort today, but they placed work first and family second because it's so competitive. This doesn't mean today's desires for "balance" aren't worthy goals. Just that forcing the issue quickly should be questioned for the simple reason that forcing anything will have consequences.
So if for example I am Asian in origin but I become a Licensed UK Barrister so I need to wear a blonde wig? I think my wig must be on black because my hair originally is Black in respect of my roots while keeping the UK's barristers tradition of wearing wigs. If I am an Asian wearing a Blonde Barrister wig, I feel that I am cosplaying a Barrister Anime Character. 😆
Although trivial, those shoulder length wigs are only used for ceremony now. Judges and Barristers all wear short wigs instead which are slightly less pompous.
They “need” to, simply because of custom these days. Before the 13th century, both Lawyers and Barristers were expected to have short, clean hair and a large, well-maintained beard. Wigs became a popular part of English fashion and culture in around the 13th century. Many Lawyers and Barristers wore them for fashion, as that is what was worn outside of court too. Though in the reign of Charles II he made it essential to wear a wig. It has stuck since and is used today as a uniform that Barristers-at-law wear, much like me and you would a suit. But it depends on the court, in the Supreme Court, for instance, Barristers do not have to wear one, some of the divisions of the High Court you are only to wear it during the trial or appeal and the Administrative Court you have to wear the wig at all times.
Tony Balls then you my friend are incredibly stupid and blind to notice that “hard work” in this society doesn’t land you on top of you’re a person of colour
What absolute nonsense, can you evidence your claim? Have you got a solution to it if it is true? Should we appoint not on merit and experience but on gender and race? If anything there *are* affirmative actions in place to encourage BAME students and prospective lawyers/barristers to join the field. You need only look at one of the law schools in the UK and the huge amount of student representation they have for minority groups. I know this is the case for my university at least. If we were to appoint legal professionals on their physical attributes or ethnic origins in preference to their actual legal skills, I think the judiciary system itself would suffer massively. Nice ad hominem comment by the way, really brings out the logic and persuasiveness in your claim.
For many taking silk will be a death knell for their income, but a boost to their ego. There are some pretty mediocre silks around compared to those that took silk say 15-20 years ago. There are many senior juniors who deserve silk but don’t get it. There will always be some exceptional talent, but there are others who are frankly pretty average. You can now see silks doing relatively low level work because they welcome the income. I am not a barrister, but for those who aspire to take silk all I would say is “be careful what you wish for”.
Many people don’t become barristers for the money. Instead they become a barrister to fight for justice. If you’re at a top chambers (not necessarily a silk) you earn a lot of money and we are talking millions depending on how hard you work. I’m 16 and it’s my dream to become a barrister and I have not thought once about the money because I know I have the potential to reach the top. A life at the bar is like any career, if you’re very good at it, you make a lot of money. But a career like this is not really about money. Look at the tradition behind these sorts of events. It might just be me but I find it beyond appealing. Bear in mind we are only talking about barristers who are self-employed meaning they get paid depending on how much work they do unlike solicitors. Solicitors predominantly work at law firms and are on a basic pay structure. Once again, if you are at a global law firm who have clients worth billions, you make a lot of money
Good thing about Barristers, they still get paid even when the lose, Just Like Football Managers
It's a zero sum game. Some barristers (also football managers) being more successful must mean some others are less successful, no matter how hard you work or how smart you are. It's not the same, say in medicine or engineering, where in theory everyone can excel.
I quite like this system , why not reconise people for their hard work and effort .
@@imnotgayyy8489 you're nuts.
As I also say in another reply, being a barrister is playing a zero-sum game. Not every one can excel no matter how hard they work or how smart they are, someone must lose.
I’m all for hard work and effort, but one must start with orthography.
Can a brown guy like myself become a Barrister and reach that top?
Tyranitar yes you can only if you try hard
Choose life
Choose integrity
Choose
⚖️🙏🕊️
Given your attitude, almost certainly not, because you are going to spend your life holding yourself back and resenting well-meaning people for imaginary discrimination
So you try and manipulate the system to edge a bias towards quotas, and the net result impacts the system negatively.
Perhaps historically top Q.C.'s were exceptional at their job whilst making less desirable husbands by today's standards - which in themselves aren't necessarily good.
The traditional family dynamic didn't balance work and family life as is being sort today, but they placed work first and family second because it's so competitive.
This doesn't mean today's desires for "balance" aren't worthy goals. Just that forcing the issue quickly should be questioned for the simple reason that forcing anything will have consequences.
song at 2:07?
BBC iplayer has moved it from drama list and sold the right to Amazon ! That is really disappointing!
So if for example I am Asian in origin but I become a Licensed UK Barrister so I need to wear a blonde wig? I think my wig must be on black because my hair originally is Black in respect of my roots while keeping the UK's barristers tradition of wearing wigs.
If I am an Asian wearing a Blonde Barrister wig, I feel that I am cosplaying a Barrister Anime Character. 😆
You have to wear a horse hair wig.
The courts do not care about your gender or supposed ethnicity, only of your legal skills. ⚖️
It's grey and doesn't reflect values
I dont like judges ...they have far too many doubts standards...👑
God is the only real Judge
Corrie Meat suits pretend
question....why does barristers need to wear wigs?
Rosanne Hernandez Tradition which started from the 13th century
It used to be used to hide their identity from the defendant
Although trivial, those shoulder length wigs are only used for ceremony now. Judges and Barristers all wear short wigs instead which are slightly less pompous.
They “need” to, simply because of custom these days. Before the 13th century, both Lawyers and Barristers were expected to have short, clean hair and a large, well-maintained beard. Wigs became a popular part of English fashion and culture in around the 13th century.
Many Lawyers and Barristers wore them for fashion, as that is what was worn outside of court too. Though in the reign of Charles II he made it essential to wear a wig. It has stuck since and is used today as a uniform that Barristers-at-law wear, much like me and you would a suit. But it depends on the court, in the Supreme Court, for instance, Barristers do not have to wear one, some of the divisions of the High Court you are only to wear it during the trial or appeal and the Administrative Court you have to wear the wig at all times.
They’re all white
So what? Barristers are given silk based on their skills in advocacy and their experience in the legal field, not on the colour of their skin.
Tony Balls then you my friend are incredibly stupid and blind to notice that “hard work” in this society doesn’t land you on top of you’re a person of colour
What absolute nonsense, can you evidence your claim?
Have you got a solution to it if it is true?
Should we appoint not on merit and experience but on gender and race?
If anything there *are* affirmative actions in place to encourage BAME students and prospective lawyers/barristers to join the field. You need only look at one of the law schools in the UK and the huge amount of student representation they have for minority groups.
I know this is the case for my university at least.
If we were to appoint legal professionals on their physical attributes or ethnic origins in preference to their actual legal skills, I think the judiciary system itself would suffer massively.
Nice ad hominem comment by the way, really brings out the logic and persuasiveness in your claim.
Ellie Balopi Yeah... it sure held Obama back 🤔😂
Not always as my great grandfather was one and many of my friends also so not all white.
For many taking silk will be a death knell for their income, but a boost to their ego. There are some pretty mediocre silks around compared to those that took silk say 15-20 years ago. There are many senior juniors who deserve silk but don’t get it.
There will always be some exceptional talent, but there are others who are frankly pretty average.
You can now see silks doing relatively low level work because they welcome the income.
I am not a barrister, but for those who aspire to take silk all I would say is “be careful what you wish for”.
“They welcome the income.” is such a posh way to say they need money.
When will they get rid of these stupid wigs?
It's not what you know ...
Prestige is all they care about not Justice! Is it not time in in 21st century to get rid of this fancy dresses.
Sold
Cah
To the Victorian Bar: Please do the public interest a big favor by abolishing the pompous and anachronistic QC titles you recently "reintroduced"!
Law pay is crap. Far more lucrative careers.
2:36 to 2:46 gives the answer right there. Life now is purely based on money & how much of it you have & how you spend it.
Many people don’t become barristers for the money. Instead they become a barrister to fight for justice. If you’re at a top chambers (not necessarily a silk) you earn a lot of money and we are talking millions depending on how hard you work. I’m 16 and it’s my dream to become a barrister and I have not thought once about the money because I know I have the potential to reach the top. A life at the bar is like any career, if you’re very good at it, you make a lot of money. But a career like this is not really about money. Look at the tradition behind these sorts of events. It might just be me but I find it beyond appealing. Bear in mind we are only talking about barristers who are self-employed meaning they get paid depending on how much work they do unlike solicitors. Solicitors predominantly work at law firms and are on a basic pay structure. Once again, if you are at a global law firm who have clients worth billions, you make a lot of money
Not as crap as an engineer's.
@@joshuagreen1074you're a kid, it's normal for you to not think of money.
Most Barristers, soon after bar school, are only concerned with the money