CHARLESTON, W.Va. — The chairman of the West Virginia Judicial Association believes a commission appointed to make recommendations on salaries for judges is taking the right approach by taking another run through its final report.
Members of the commission voted last week to suspend their report, which was completed at the end of last month, and produce a new one.
MORE: Read the judicial compensation report.
Committee chairman Greg Bowman, who is dean of the West Virginia University College of Law, volunteered to produce the new report for the commission to consider.
“There has been some question about information that was or was not considered or was not sufficiently clear,” Bowman told the other committee members. “It was consensus that perhaps we should suspend the report submitted on the 31st and take another crack at it.”
“I have had very good conversations with some members of the judiciary about if we were to provide a report more details and a little more connecting the dots — certain factors such as salaries of attorneys at larger firms. I would ask that we entertain a motion to rescind the report and then reissue it.”
The president of the association that represents judges around West Virginia agrees that’s the right step.
“I think that’s exactly what Dean Bowman is doing by reconvening them,” said Judge Christopher Wilkes of Berkeley County.
“I think the meeting they held this week and some of the questions asked by members of the commission highlighted the fact that they weren’t fully aware of what their charge was or what they could or could not consider.”
The commission’s first final report recommended a 4.25 percent raise for West Virginia’s judges. Supreme Court justices currently earn $136,000 a year; circuit judges, $126,000; and family court judges, $94,500. The last time West Virginia judges got a pay raise was 2011, as part of incremental increases that were approved five years earlier.
The commission was asked via the statute that established it to compare judicial salaries to a variety of factors, including what lawyers make in the private sector. The commission wrote that it didn’t have enough data to fully consider the lawyer salary comparison.
The report was actually due by Sept. 1, but the commission is aiming to finish the new one in time for legislative interim meetings in November.
The commission — which includes the law school dean, two members of the public named by the state Senate president and two named by the House speaker — met just once, August 24, to discuss judicial salaries and then once more, Aug. 31, to adopt its report.
“It took a long time for the commission to be named. Actually I think we’ll find that some of the individuals named to the commission were done outside of the time frame set by the Legislature,” Wilkes said in a telephone interview. “They were up against a timeframe, and they wanted to get a report out.”
The first final report recommended that salaries of the justices, judges, and magistrates be increased by 4.25 percent during the next regular session of the Legislature.
“Given the state’s current budgetary constraints, the salary increases proposed are on a one-time basis,” the report states.
It goes on to conclude, “In the future, the Commission will recommend the Legislature adopt 3-5 year schedules
for salary increases.”
“I think it’s fair to say that when certain members of the judiciary and the association reviewed the initial report, we felt there were ambiguities that should be addressed because, as others stated along with us, we weren’t sure what that 4.25 meant,” Wilkes said.
“Does it mean a 1.4 percent raise over 3 years or 4.25 until the next time the commission meets? I did not have direct communication with the chairman or any other member of the commission. I think my job as president is to take a look at it and critique it and discuss it with our legislative committee.”
The commission was supposed to compare judicial salaries to what might be made in the private sector in careers such as arbitration or mediation, but the first final report said that information wasn’t immediately available: “Consequently, the Commission did not examine data for this factor.”
Similarly, the commission was supposed to examine compensation of attorneys in the private sector.
“The Commission attempted to locate information on the compensation of West Virginia attorneys, specifically those in the private sector. However, the Commission is unaware of any organization or entity that collects compensation information that distinguishes between public and private sector employment,” members wrote.
The commission did look at statistics provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. “This information shows that West Virginia’s justices and circuit court judges are in the top 25 percent of the attorney salaries in the state. However, this information averages all attorney salaries, regardless of experience level.”
Wilkes said that aspect of the report deservds another look.
“I’ve been a circuit judge for 25 years. Had I been in private practice, I’m sure I’d be making four to five times what I’m making now,” he said.
He added, “There is a reward of being in public service that can’t be recognized with money. The counter to it is, you don’t want to just have bodies who are willing to be there. You want people who have a desire to impact the community and take those duties on with the spirit of public service. But you have to make sure you’re compensating them adequately so you draw people of the caliber to make the weighty decisions that judges do.”
Senate President Mitch Carmichael, speaking Friday on MetroNews’ “Talkline,” said the 4.25 percent raises originally recommended by the commission were already generous.
“In this day and age, in this difficult economy, it was incredibly generous in my point of view,” Carmichael said.
“Four and a quarter percent to a judiciary that is well-compensated, and we have people throughout state government that desperately need payraises. We’re trying to get this economy going so we can provide the necessary pay and compensation. To complain about what’s happened, about a 4.25 percent payraise, in this environment is disappointing to me.”
Last year, Gov. Jim Justice proposed an average 2 percent raise for teachers across West Virginia, but legislators wound up saying the state couldn’t afford that. Some legislators have advocated for raises for corrections officers, where starting employees make about $22,500 and more experienced employees don’t make much more.
“We have that same scenario with every pay scale in West Virginia. We certainly realize our teachers need more money,” Carmichael said. “So a 4.25 percent payraise to the judiciary, if we just shifted that to the corrections officers, that amounts to a thousand dollars a year for corrections officers. They should be extremely grateful for a 4.25 payraise. I’m not even sure the legislature would accept that.”
Carmichael added, “I don’t think the Legislature would approve frankly. I don’t see how we can give to $136,000-a-year employees when we have people minding our prisons who are working less than the poverty level.”
The Legislature has the final decision on the payraises. Carmichael said he would like to compensate highly-qualified judges well, but not beyond what the state can afford.
“I think there’s a lot of work to be done with the judiciary. They have a retirement package that’s second to none. I want to compensate them well. I want great people in those positions. I think it has absolutely tweaked some lawmakers about this, and it should have.
“I hope we don’t make decisions based on somebody’s behavior in this regard. We’ll prioritize those who need payraises the most.”
.@SenCarmichaelWV joins @HoppyKercheval to talk about the judicial pay raise. WATCH: https://t.co/wkudfIAoe1 pic.twitter.com/X75saLWl8p
— MetroNews (@WVMetroNews) September 29, 2017
The Judicial Compensation Commission was formed during the 2016 legislative session, setting up the 5-member panel to study and recommend salaries for state Supreme Court justices, circuit court judges and family court judges.
The idea, advocates of the bill said, was to prevent judges themselves from having to ask legislators for raises. Some said creation of the commission would be another step toward taking politics out of the judicial branch.
“Regular, systematic increases make judicial compensation more predictable and are essential to ensure that judicial compensation remains at a level that is sufficient to attract a competent and well-qualified judiciary and helps to depoliticize the process of judicial compensation,” the commission wrote as a conclusion in its first final report.
Wilkes said advocates of the commission might have preferred a model where the Legislature would either accept the recommendation or vote it down, but it was clear that legislators wouldn’t go for that. He said the commission is a step in the right direction, though.
“I think the idea to have an independent body determine what they deem to be appropriate compensation is a great step forward into maintaining or decreasing the autonomy of our judicial officers,” Wilkes said.