ILNews

Low pay leads to high job turnover

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

When Chad Lewis went looking for a deputy prosecutor, he hired a “very sharp, competent person” who had no prosecutorial experience and had not yet passed the bar exam.

Lewis, prosecutor in Jefferson County, has three deputy prosecutors in his office, two are paid by the state and the other is paid by the county. The vacancy opened when the county-paid deputy left after five years to take a position in a private law firm that paid roughly $15,000 more.

“I don’t blame him for leaving,” Lewis said.
 

lewis-chad-wide-15col.jpg Chad Lewis, prosecutor in Jefferson County, had his request for another deputy prosecutor denied. (Photo courtesy of The Madison Courier)

Two-thirds of the résumés submitted for the position were from law students, and while he would have rather hired someone with five to six years of experience, the low salary coupled with having to live in a small community proved too unattractive.

Now, he may be wondering how long his new hire will stay.

“I would say salary has been an obstacle to retention here in the past,” Lewis said.

The situation in Jefferson County highlights the squeeze on today’s public sector attorneys. Paychecks, historically low compared to others in the legal profession, may be too small to support a family, and student loan debt is often too high to repay on a public salary.

A survey of public interest and public sector attorneys by NALP, the Association for Legal Career Professionals, found that salaries had grown little between 2004 and 2012. According to the “2012 Public Sector and Public Interest Attorney Salary Report,” the current median entry-level salary for public defenders is $50,500 and for prosecuting attorneys is $50,000. This is about 25 percent higher than the 2004 median entry-level salaries of $39,000 and $40,000, respectively.

Based on the findings, NALP concluded that at a time when salaries in the public sector have just kept pace with inflation, the cost of legal education and average law student loan debt are increasing at a much higher rate. The report questioned whether law students have economic incentive to enter the public sector.

However, interest in these careers remains high, prosecutors and public defenders in Indiana say. Many attorneys applying for these positions have a strong desire and dedication to be a public servant, but they often struggle to make the job a long-term career because of the salary.

The consequence is that after a few years, the attorneys are leaving the offices and counties are deprived of those lawyers’ experience and training.

Paycheck to paycheck

Victoria Bailey began working for the Marion County Public Defenders Agency in August 2008 and is an appellant public defender. It is a job she loves, a job she believes in, and a job, she admits, she did not take for the paycheck.

“I care very deeply about the Constitution and assuring people’s rights are protected,” Bailey said. “Being able to do something I am passionate about is more important than money.”

Still, the small compensation would not enable her to pay her student loans and raise a family. She does not blame her boss, Robert Hill, chief public defender, but rather believes her pay may reflect the public’s perception of her job. Bailey believes some people may not think a public defender is important because some of the clients can be unsavory individuals.

Bailey admits she lives a simple lifestyle, riding the bus instead of owning a car and spending many evenings at home instead of going out, but, still, the low pay makes her feel undervalued and underappreciated. She wants a raise.

“It’s fair. It’s the right thing to do. I earned it,” she said. “Just because I can do without doesn’t mean I should do without.”

The NALP survey charted the narrative of low pay in every location. For the past four years, many public sector attorneys have been living paycheck to paycheck and unable to save money, said Steve Grumm, director of public service initiatives at NALP. This, in turn, calls into question the viability of the public sector as a career path.

Hill is frustrated by the low salaries his attorneys receive. Currently, the starting salary is $45,000, and that does not compensate his lawyers adequately considering their level of education.

The Marion County Prosecutor’s Office shares Hill’s concerns. Salaries start at $45,619 and increase as a deputy prosecutor gets promoted from misdemeanors to D felonies to major felonies.

Both Hill and Laurel Judkins, chief counsel for the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office, said the attorneys who work in their offices are dedicated, quality attorneys who want to work in the public sector. However, their ability to serve is hindered when they get married and have children. They tend to move on, many going into private practice, because the public sector paychecks cannot cover all the things raising a family require.

“It’s not that you want the pay to be exorbitant,” Hill said, “but you do want it to be adequate pay so a young man coming out of law school can say, ‘I can have a family, pay for my kids going to college,’ or she can say, ‘I can get married, buy a house.’”

Access to justice

Paychecks have been crunched particularly in recent years as municipalities try to tighten budgets to match declining revenues. What has not gotten smaller is the workload.

During Jefferson County’s recent budget hearings, Lewis asked the county to pay for another deputy prosecutor. He underscored his request by breaking down the numbers. Considering criminal cases alone and not counting in the traffic infractions and child support proceedings, his deputy prosecutors each handle an average of 375 cases annually, translating into an average of 5.5 hours spent on each case. When child support and infractions are included, the average time spend on each case dropped to 1.46 hours.

The limited time gets upended if a murder case goes to trial. Preparation, investigation and courtroom work can eat 100 hours which means other cases are getting zero time and, in Lewis’ words, “victims are not getting justice.”

In the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office, the situation is much the same. About 65,000 charges are filed annually ranging from traffic violations to major felonies. No one, said Judkins, is sitting around the office with nothing to do.

Attorneys in both the prosecutor’s and the public defender offices regularly take work home and come in on the weekends to keep pace with the case load.

Salaries play a part in the workload dilemma. As the small paychecks push experienced prosecutors and public defense attorneys out, Grumm said the offices lose their institutional knowledge and work is done with less efficiency and effectiveness.

The whole criminal justice system suffers because the concern of paying a living wage to public sector attorneys is ultimately about providing access to justice, he said.

Hill has seen how turnover impacts his office. With less experienced attorneys, the office does not run as smoothly which can mean cases do not go to trial as soon and clients wait longer in jail.

The situation may not be improving any time soon. Jefferson County did not fund the additional deputy prosecutor and the request by the Marion County Prosectuor’s Office for a 3 percent cost of living raise in 2013 was not included in the city-county budget.

While their salaries have stagnated, the cost of living has increased to the point that, Judkins pointed out, deputy prosecutors are actually seeing smaller paychecks than in 2009.

“I think that when you don’t receive any sort of raise for over four years and the end result is you’re making less than what you were making four years ago, that’s very hard to swallow,” Judkins said.•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Starting salary is irrelevant
    Whether or not the starting salary is comparable is irrelevant. The point of the article is that, without salary growth, the counties loose attorneys with experience to better paying jobs. Inexperienced attorneys can't handle the large caseload as efficiently or effectively, so the state - and therefore the victims - are not represented as well as the criminals and their constitutional right to justice is jeopardized.
  • Unrealistic
    If those new attorneys entering public sector jobs with an entry level salary of $50,000 and tons of benefits think they can do better in the private sector, they're fooling themselves. The market is so saturated, many law firms don't even pay salaries, or hourly...they're commission only. The prosecutor, the public defender who can walk out the door and make $15,000 at a law firm is the exception, not the rule. $50,000 is actually an excellent starting salary for an attorney, especially considering the benefits you get in the public sector.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014. (page 13) Under the current system many local registering agencies are challenged just keeping up with registration paperwork. It takes an hour or more to process each registrant, the majority of whom are low risk offenders. As a result law enforcement cannot monitor higher risk offenders more intensively in the community due to the sheer numbers on the registry. Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the life’s of registrants and those -such as families- whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety. The full report is available online at. http://www.casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=231 National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America. The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx? ID=247350 The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business of the University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483 Conclusion. The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. The national panel data do not show a significant decrease in the rate of rape or the arrest rate for sexual abuse after implementation of a registry via the Internet. The BJS data that tracked individual sex offenders after their release in 1994 did not show that registration had a significantly negative effect on recidivism. And the D.C. crime data do not show that knowing the location of sex offenders by census block can help protect the locations of sexual abuse. This pattern of noneffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates. The full report is available online at. http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/658483 These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of conclusions and reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. People, including the media and other organizations should not rely on and reiterate the statements and opinions of the legislators or other people as to the need for these laws because of the high recidivism rates and the high risk offenders pose to the public which simply is not true and is pure hyperbole and fiction. They should rely on facts and data collected and submitted in reports from the leading authorities and credible experts in the fields such as the following. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 0.8% (page 30) The full report is available online at http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/2014_Outcome_Evaluation_Report_7-6-2015.pdf California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) (page 38) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 1.8% The full report is available online at. http://www.google.com/url?sa= t&source=web&cd=1&ved= 0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.cdcr.ca.gov%2FAdult_ Research_Branch%2FResearch_ documents%2FOutcome_ evaluation_Report_2013.pdf&ei= C9dSVePNF8HfoATX-IBo&usg=AFQjCNE9I6ueHz-o2mZUnuxLPTyiRdjDsQ Bureau of Justice Statistics 5 PERCENT OF SEX OFFENDERS REARRESTED FOR ANOTHER SEX CRIME WITHIN 3 YEARS OF PRISON RELEASE WASHINGTON, D.C. Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. The full report is available online at. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm Document title; A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Author: Robert J. McGrath, Michael P. Lasher, Georgia F. Cumming Document No.: 236217 Date Received: October 2011 Award Number: 2008-DD-BX-0013 Findings: Study of 759 adult male offenders under community supervision Re-arrest rate: 4.6% after 3-year follow-up The sexual re-offense rates for the 746 released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf Document Title: SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: RECIDIVISM RATES BY: Washington State Institute For Public Policy. A study of 4,091 sex offenders either released from prison or community supervision form 1994 to 1998 and examined for 5 years Findings: Sex Crime Recidivism Rate: 2.7% Link to Report: http://www.oncefallen.com/files/Washington_SO_Recid_2005.pdf Document Title: Indiana’s Recidivism Rates Decline for Third Consecutive Year BY: Indiana Department of Correction 2009. The recidivism rate for sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%, one of the lowest in the nation. In a time when sex offenders continue to face additional post-release requirements that often result in their return to prison for violating technical rules such as registration and residency restrictions, the instances of sex offenders returning to prison due to the commitment of a new sex crime is extremely low. Findings: sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05% Link to Report: http://www.in.gov/idoc/files/RecidivismRelease.pdf Once again, These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. No one can doubt that child sexual abuse is traumatic and devastating. The question is not whether the state has an interest in preventing such harm, but whether current laws are effective in doing so. Megan’s law is a failure and is destroying families and their children’s lives and is costing tax payers millions upon millions of dollars. The following is just one example of the estimated cost just to implement SORNA which many states refused to do. From Justice Policy Institute. Estimated cost to implement SORNA Here are some of the estimates made in 2009 expressed in 2014 current dollars: California, $66M; Florida, $34M; Illinois, $24M; New York, $35M; Pennsylvania, $22M; Texas, $44M. In 2014 dollars, Virginia’s estimate for implementation was $14M, and the annual operating cost after that would be $10M. For the US, the total is $547M. That’s over half a billion dollars – every year – for something that doesn’t work. http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNACosts_JJ.pdf. Attempting to use under-reporting to justify the existence of the registry is another myth, or a lie. This is another form of misinformation perpetrated by those who either have a fiduciary interest in continuing the unconstitutional treatment of a disfavored group or are seeking to justify their need for punishment for people who have already paid for their crime by loss of their freedom through incarceration and are now attempting to reenter society as honest citizens. When this information is placed into the public’s attention by naive media then you have to wonder if the media also falls into one of these two groups that are not truly interested in reporting the truth. Both of these groups of people that have that type of mentality can be classified as vigilantes, bullies, or sociopaths, and are responsible for the destruction of our constitutional values and the erosion of personal freedoms in this country. I think the media or other organizations need to do a in depth investigation into the false assumptions and false data that has been used to further these laws and to research all the collateral damages being caused by these laws and the unconstitutional injustices that are occurring across the country. They should include these injustices in their report so the public can be better informed on what is truly happening in this country on this subject. Thank you for your time.

  2. Freedom as granted in the Constitution cannot be summarily disallowed without Due Process. Unable to to to the gym, church, bowling alley? What is this 1984 level nonsense? Congrats to Brian for having the courage to say that this was enough! and Congrats to the ACLU on the win!

  3. America's hyper-phobia about convicted sex offenders must end! Politicians must stop pandering to knee-jerk public hysteria. And the public needs to learn the facts. Research by the California Sex Offender Management Board as shown a recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders of less than 1%. Less than 1%! Furthermore, research shows that by year 17 after their conviction, a convicted sex offender is no more likely to commit a new sex offense than any other member of the public. Put away your torches and pitchforks. Get the facts. Stop hysteria.

  4. He was convicted 23 years ago. How old was he then? He probably was a juvenile. People do stupid things, especially before their brain is fully developed. Why are we continuing to punish him in 2016? If he hasn't re-offended by now, it's very, very unlikely he ever will. He paid for his mistake sufficiently. Let him live his life in peace.

  5. This year, Notre Dame actually enrolled an equal amount of male and female students.

ADVERTISEMENT