Jury Duty Pay

[GingerRose]

Jury Duty participants receive $6-$12 a day for each day they serve. If the participant has a job, the job is not required to pay them while they are serving.

[uhtred]

I think the requirement to serve on a jury without pay, causes many people to try to find excuses not to serve and undermines the process.

[fuzzipueo]

4 hours ago, GingerRose said:

Jury Duty participants receive $6-$12 a day for each day they serve. If the participant has a job, the job is not required to pay them while they are serving.

Depends on the job too. Sometimes you can give up your JD check to your employer and get paid for your job. At others, like the job I work for, I get paid for JD and I still get paid by my employer (I suspect this is rare though [we work in a legal field]).

 

Minimum hourly wage could be a great thing or it could become a real problem. Not sure. I think it would also depend on the amount of time spent on a case, which can last from an hour or so to several days or weeks, depending on the what kind of case we're talking about.

 

2 hours ago, uhtred said:

I think the requirement to serve on a jury without pay, causes many people to try to find excuses not to serve and undermines the process.

There are a number of reasons which stop people from showing up to serve: 1] the employer they work for may have a policy about miss work - loose job regardless of what the court system says. For most people, having steady employment matters more than participating in the judicial process; 2] the amount the court's willing pay may not be enough to cover gas, much less other important bills; 3] childcare can be an issue; 4] finding transportation can be an issue; 5] complete lack of interest and they just don't bother to show up; etc.

Alternatively, some older folks actually make a bit of extra cash by volunteering their time to sit on juries because they're genuinely interested in the process.

[Blaiddmelyn]

7 hours ago, Moonman said:

I don't think you get paid at all in the UK, though I do believe you get your expenses covered.

You can claim loss of earnings but it's not a big amount. IIRC the amount increases, the more time you spend on jury service (most people don't go beyond 2 weeks). I think when I did it, on my jury (I only sat on the one case - it took 1.5 weeks), most people's employers covered them but not everyone's. It's not surprising that most people also didn't want to be there...

[gisiebob]

how would a jury duty tax credit sound?

[GingerRose]

11 hours ago, Moonman said:

I don't think you get paid at all in the UK, though I do believe you get your expenses covered.

Expenses like for petrol?

[GingerRose]

58 minutes ago, gisiebob said:

how would a jury duty tax credit sound?

Good but not enough I think, I think it would need to be minimum wage plus that. What kind of tax credit?

[GingerRose]

6 hours ago, fuzzipueo said:

job too

Yes, it's left up to the job to decide.

[GingerRose]

6 hours ago, fuzzipueo said:

Minimum hourly wage could be a great thing or it could become a real problem. Not sure. I think it would also depend on the amount of time spent on a case,

You mean, like if people started taking advantage of the minimum wage by stretching out the length of reaching a decision on the case?

[GingerRose]

6 hours ago, fuzzipueo said:

loose job

I think this is actually illegal.

The statute states in part, that "no employer shall discharge, threaten to discharge, intimidate, or coerce any permanent employee by reason of such employee's jury service, or the attendance or scheduled attendance in connection with such service, in any court of the United States.

[GingerRose]

9 hours ago, uhtred said:

causes many people to try to find excuses not to serve and undermines the process.

I think it does too. But has it issues both ways. They pay so little, that people desperate for any money will serve and those who can't live off of it, will see it as not worth all the trouble.

[daveb]

On 3/8/2021 at 12:48 PM, fuzzipueo said:

folks actually make a bit of extra cash by volunteering their time to sit on juries

Maybe (probably?) it depends on the jurisdiction, but the extra cash is so minimal they could probably make more in less time just by asking for handouts or something. Places I have served didn't pay anything for the first day. As far as I know none of the places I served took volunteers either. But I have heard of places going out and getting people off of the street to serve.

 

I served a few times, back in the days when I worked for employers who paid full pay for the entire length of your jury service (it was a government agency sort of thing). The courts loved calling us in knowing we wouldn't have the excuse/issue of not getting paid. And I enjoyed the break from work (although the commute was worse). It was interesting to serve (when I didn't have to worry about my job or pay).

 

Without knowing a whole lot about it paying people minimum wage seems like a good idea and the minimum they should do. Might get more people willing to serve.

[Blaiddmelyn]

20 hours ago, GingerRose said:

Expenses like for petrol?

Loss of earnings, care/childcare costs, transport and £5.71 per day for lunch (alternatively, you can let the court give you a lunch worth £5.71. I did that a few times and I don't think I've ever had a chicken baguette quite so big!)

[GingerRose]

4 hours ago, Blaiddmelyn said:

you can let the court give you a lunch worth £5.71

Skip the minimum wage and give the participants a full buffet.  

[Ortac]

If I had my way, jury duty would not exist at all, at least not in the same form that it currently does in many jurisdictions. I think the system is outrageous.

[J. van Deijck]

On 3/8/2021 at 4:32 PM, GingerRose said:

$6-$12 a day

...that's not very much  that definitely doesn't sound like a fulltime job option. I earn more in one hour of working in my profession.

[GingerRose]

2 minutes ago, Jelle van der Lee said:

...that's not very much  that definitely doesn't sound like a fulltime job option. I earn more in one hour of working in my profession.

No  Since the government is basically forcing people to serve then they should cover all the expenses, hourly. People may argue that you don't have to serve if you just don't register to vote, but eh, the system.

[GingerRose]

10 hours ago, Ortac said:

If I had my way, jury duty would not exist at all, at least not in the same form that it currently does in many jurisdictions. I think the system is outrageous.

What's your back up plan?

[daveb]

3 hours ago, GingerRose said:

People may argue that you don't have to serve if you just don't register to vote, but eh, the system.

I think some (most?) places also use DMV registration (or equivalent) as one of the places they get potential jurors from. And some states combine getting a driver's license (or state ID?) with voter registration (in other words, you are automatically registered to vote when you get your driver's license or ID). Basically, it adds up to having to avoid both the DMV and voting. Yeah, not a good argument for people who don't want to serve on jury duty.

[Blaiddmelyn]

On 3/10/2021 at 7:16 PM, GingerRose said:

What's your back up plan?

Some jurisdictions - especially civil law ones - don't have an adversarial legal system and basically have the judge make the decision. There are pros and cons to both systems. Juries have major weaknesses but the adversarial system combined with juries also have some major strengths.

 

Edit: it's worth noting that studies find that in themajority of cases, at least in the UK, juries have been found to have come to what turns out to be the right decision.

[Guest]

Jury duty is compulsory labor, and I believe that all labor should be paid. We should both require employers to facilitate jury duty and compensate employees for their time. It is a civic duty, but it should not be imposed without compensation. 

[Ortac]

On 3/10/2021 at 7:16 PM, GingerRose said:

What's your back up plan?

I believe that just like the judges who preside over courts, and like the lawyers who question witnesses and present evidence, being a juror should be a skilled and paid profession. And just like any profession or job, it should be made up of people who are suitably qualified for it, people who are of suitable character for it, people who have passed rigorous tests and interviews to be accepted into the position, but most of all, people who have willingly put themselves forward or have been invited (rather than summoned) to apply for the position – it should definitely NOT be people who have been randomly snatched away from their daily lives and routines whether they like it or not,  with all the stress and upheaval that brings

.

[daveb]

Trouble is a "jury of one's peers" is deeply rooted in the common law systems of the English-speaking world (I don't about other places, like those where the Napoleonic code is more prevalent). I don't know how that could/would ever be changed looking at it from a realism standpoint (as opposed to idealistic). 

[Anthracite_Impreza]

I had no idea you didn't even get paid, even more reason for me to play the "I can't I'm autistic, soz" card. The jury system is completely ridiculous.