How important is having a duty slot as a criminal barrister

I am a criminal barrister. I have never done a duty slot and am not even aware they exist for barristers! Maybe I have missed something in the 6 or so years I have been at the bar or maybe it is something that just doesn't happen on my circuit or in my chambers or we call it something else. The loss leader for lots of sets and individuals (albeit mine doesn't take it) is magistrates court work - a chance for junior members of chambers to get known by and introduced by solicitors with the intention that later on they will get the crown court briefs from that firm as they will have had the opportunity to develop a relationship. The same with covering prosecution lists in the lower court - gives pupils and early years practitioners a chance to practice trials without the pressure of a jury for example.
If you can explain what you mean by duty work a little more clearly I might be able to assist better with an answer!

I am not a criminal barrister, so if one happens to come along (or a criminal solicitor, for that matter) they would be better placed to answer this. However, my understanding is that duty slots are very much seen as loss leaders. So they're not something that sets or individual barristers do to make money (as you've rightly noted), but they are something that can lead to an increase in work, either for individual barristers or for the set generally. It is worth noting that things like this, namely doing lower paid in the hope of receiving better quality and better paying instructions further down the line, exist in lots of different areas of practice. It may be individual cases, such as a solicitor wanting a barrister to accept a lower fee than normal on one particular occasion, or it may be subject to an agreement with a particular firm or insurer. Sets may agree to handle insurance backed work for firms on low fixed fees, for example, on the expectation that they will also receive instructions on the better paid private paying work from the same firm. My understanding is that duty work is similar. I don't think it's right to say that it will lead to an increase in work, let alone a substantial one. But that is the idea behind it. Like every similar business decision, I expect it's something that is subject to review and part of the overall strategy put in place by clerks and more senior members.

Thank you. That analogy to the general principle really helps. Though, I do wonder how important loss ladders are in crime. From my experience at a law firm (and from what ive heard speaking to barristers), it's currently a Barrister's market and that has meant more junior barristers are moving from Mags work to Crown Court work quicker than may have happened before.

Despite the fact that my set has a criminal team and I have a lot of friends who do crime, my knowledge about how sets approach developing their criminal practice is fairly rudimentary. It's certainly right that not all sets do duty work. My current set does not as far as I am aware, and whilst my previous set did, I think it was introduced while I was therefore and it's perfectly possible that they don't do it anymore. In terms of loss leaders in crime, I entirely see where the poster above is coming from as regards Magistrates work. It is very poorly paid, but all junior barristers will do it. In reality it may be that it's more difficult to distinguish the pure loss leaders in crime because of the nature of legal aid work. Bluntly, there will always be poorly paid cases that need covering, and part of the ongoing relationship between Chambers and firms or the CPS will be that they will take on those cases when needed to keep the wheels turning, and always inevitably more often than individual barristers would like in many cases.
In terms of the current state of the market, it's common knowledge that attrition rates at the Criminal Bar are high. There is, on the face of it, a lot of work around because there aren't the practitioners to cover it at the higher levels. Yet that won't always translate into easy pickings for the more junior members, for a variety of practical reasons, some of which are unique to crime and some of which are not. For example, one key feature of any given set that will affect how quickly junior members get Crown Court work is how many barristers are head of them in the pecking order. Whilst I didn't do crime myself save for briefly at the start of my career as part of a mixed practice, it was well known in my previous set that there were a lot of barristers in the 'middle' when it came to the criminal team, which made it exceptionally difficult for those more junior practitioners to break through into the Crown Court work. A friend of mine really struggled to get a jury trial even several years into practice, moved sets, and has become much more successful not just because of his ability, but because the structure and approach of his new set allows it. Equally, at my current set the criminal team is smaller but doesn't over recruit, which means that most new pupils do jury trials very early on, if not in their second six. Those sorts of factors will always come into play regardless of practice area, so it shouldn't necessarily be seen as criminal barristers having an easier time at the moment. There are lots of variables that play into that, and there are still an awful lot of substantial challenges when it comes to sustaining a criminal practice as a barrister.

Hi, thank you for your response. I'll try and explain what I mean by having a duty slot.
In essence, for solicitors to become duty accredited, they need to compete their police station accreditation and their magistrates accreditation. This then gives then a duty slot which is valuable for their law firm - for legal aid criminal firms, it is mostly through picking up cases during police station duty slots that they bring work in.
Now, someone qualified as a barrister who has completed their police station accreditation and the Magistrates qualification can also obtain a duty slot. Following on from this, they can "give" their slot to a law firm for a set amount of money (say £1,000 or so per month), or for free. Where the real benefit may come from, however, and what I was attempting to get at, is that, in order for you to keep your slot with that firm, that firm will send instruct you on high quality work - bringing in better paid work quicker.
In essence, I was wondering how much being able to offer a duty slot actually affects that last bit about getting better instructions.
I hope that clears up what I meant! Thanks, again.

As was probably obvious from my response this is not a practice I have come across or from speaking to colleagues after reading your response they have either. This may be to do with the circuit that I practice on as things to vary circuit to circuit.
It isn't something I think would be of particular assistance in developing your career at the criminal bar. I have only ever been to the magistrates on privately paid work. There is so much Crown Court work which is simply not able to be covered due to a shortage of barristers willing to do it that my diary has always been full. In terms of practice development at the criminal bar there are ways to do it that seem more logical than having a duty slot. For example I have worked my way up through the CPS advocacy panels so I am now a grade 3 (of 4) prosecutor. This gives me access to prosecuting increasingly more complex work and enables me to be led (for example this year alone I have 6 led briefs spanning over 23 weeks of my diary). In terms of defence I started by covering other peoples short work in the Crown Court which gives you the opportunity to be in front of defence solicitors and proving yourself by getting on with the client, sending detailed attendance notes and being reliable. They then started to brief me directly and my defence practice has advanced accordingly.
I am happy to do a more detailed discussion about things via PM if it assists.