Judicial pay and pension cuts could cause recruitment problems, LCJ warns
Pay freeze has reduced judges' salaries by up to 18 per cent
The combination of a three-year pay freeze and pension cuts “is likely to cause judicial retention and recruitment problems,” the Lord Chief Justice has warned.
The LCJ said in his report for the period January 2010 to June 2012 that the Senior Salaries Review Body (SSRB) had calculated that the pay of circuit judges had been cut by 15.9 per cent.
The salaries of district judges had fallen by 16.5 per cent, the report found, High Court judges by 17.1 per cent and lord justices of appeal by 18.4 per cent.
Judges’ pensions were assessed by the SSRB as amounting to 34 per cent of their total reward.
“In relation to pensions, as elsewhere in the public sector, a contribution liability has been imposed, further reducing take-home pay,” Lord Judge said.
“The extent to which the government seeks to reduce the annual accrual value of benefits under the judicial pension schemes is unknown. Whatever it is, it will reduce the total reward of a judge still further.”
Lord Judge said in the report, published last week, that the “morale, recruitment and retention of judges of the highest calibre depends in part on the adequacy of their financial reward.”
He said the SSRB had said it was increasingly concerned about the morale and motivation of its ‘remit groups’ because of the deterioration in their terms and conditions.
“This observation is self-explanatory,” Lord Judge said. “The cumulative effect is likely to cause judicial recruitment and retention problems.”
In his introduction to the report, the LCJ acknowledged that the period from 2010 to 2012 had been a time of “exceptional national difficulty”.
He went on: “Consequent constraints have affected and will continue to affect every aspect of national life, and the administration of justice is not, and has not, been immunised from the economic crisis.”
Lord Judge said many aspects of the administration of justice were under review and reform, whether it was criminal justice, civil justice, family justice or the workings of the tribunal system.
“The perceptive reader will appreciate that these changes, all intended to improve the efficiency of the administration of justice without any diminution in its quality, add considerably to the burdens on the judiciary.”