The Jury is Out on this one

[+ purplekow]

I went to jury duty today. I was lucky enough to be in the first group to be called to a case and I was one of the first called to the jury box. After explaining the details of the case, the judge said that the trial would likely last 4 to 6 weeks. Each of the jurors called to the box were initially asked if being on a jury for that time would be a hardship. Everyone said yes and when asked why, they said that they would not be paid from their job. The stipend for jury duty in NJ is a robust $5 a day. When my turn came, I told the judge that I was on temporary disability so the time commitment was not a problem. The case was a malpractice case and as a physician, I expected to be dismissed but I was not. The question continued and then I informed the judge that I personally knew some of the witnesses and that one of them had taken care of my wife. I still was kept. Finally, after a sidebar, I was dismissed. The dismissal from that juror pool led to my being dismissed from any further jury responsibilities during this round and so my entire time spent was a bit less than one hour. Luck of the draw.

 

This led me to consider whether there should be local laws that require businesses of a certain size to pay their employees who are on jury duty. At the very least, it seems that the stipend should be more than $5 a day. Minimum wage would suggest a figure closer to $50 a day. Still low, but better.

 

Does the jury selection system and reimbursement need to be revamped or should we continue to have juries populated by people who do not have anything to do for the next 6 weeks?

[Beancounter]

In Dallas County, Texas the vast majority of jury summons were being ignored prompting a change in juror compensation. I'm not sure it helped matters any but they changed juror compensation from $6.00 daily to $6.00 for the first day of service with all subsequent jury service days paid at $40.00. Of course, the juror was still responsible for his/her parking. Thankfully, jurors receive a reduced rate of $3.00 per day.

 

The things you can learn here at the Forum!

[nycguy]

In my opinion, most businesses should be required to pay an employee his regular earnings while on jury duty subject to a reasonable maximum or to pay 75% of the normal pay if that pay during jury duty is made non-taxable to the employee.

 

In my experience, most of the Fortune 1,000 companies will continue to pay their employees during jury duty time. It seems that most states and cities relay on a call in system. Call by 7am and find out if you are selected to come in for that day. Very, very often the answer is no and one can show up for work. This might continue for a few days and then the person is told he does not have to call in anymore.

 

I also think the mom and pop enterprises employing 5, 10, 20 people should continue to pay an employee while on jury duty. Over any 5 year period how much will this cost them? With the slim chances of one being selected for jury duty in the first place and with the call in systems, the cost to the employers would be minimal to zero.

 

As an aside, I live in NYC and used up my three postponements for one time I was selected. I was finally told that if I did not show up on the date they gave me, I was going to be sent to Gitmo or something quite threatening. I was chosen for Grand Jury duty which required showing up at the court house for either an entire morning or entire afternoon for 30 days - I also had to commute to NJ from NYC for my job. My company paid me and I got through it.

 

The last time I was called I could postpone it but give them a date I would be available. I believe it had to be a Tuesday or a Thursday. I chose Tuesday of Thanksgiving week knowing most of the judges and attorneys would not be scheduling anything that week. I arrived at 8am and entirely dismissed from coming back by noon.

[Kevin Slater]

This led me to consider whether there should be local laws that require businesses of a certain size to pay their employees who are on jury duty. At the very least, it seems that the stipend should be more than $5 a day. Minimum wage would suggest a figure closer to $50 a day. Still low, but better.

 

Speaking of, each of you can expect to see a timeslip from me in your mailbox in the coming weeks.

 

Kevin Slater

[gallahadesquire]

Massachusetts has a one day / one trial system. I've lived at the same address for 28 years, and I've been selected twice. The first time, I was about the sixth juror to be seated. A workmate was in the same jury pool, and as soon as she got into the box, gave a large, "Hello Dr. XXX!" I was sent home on preempt, of whatever the term is. She went on to be foreman for a five day trial.

 

Time two: In by 8, out by 10.

 

A woman I know was on a grand jury, that met every Wednesday for two years. I think they might have had a call in system. They worked on a certain, controversial work project in the Bay State and, over the course of two years, couldn't figure out who'd done what, and brought no indictments.

[MikeBiDude]

I also think the mom and pop enterprises employing 5, 10, 20 people should continue to pay an employee while on jury duty. Over any 5 year period how much will this cost them? With the slim chances of one being selected for jury duty in the first place and with the call in systems, the cost to the employers would be minimal to zero.

 

Have you ever run a small business? Trust me "minimal to zero" cost isn't realistic. ObamaCare, minimum wages, sick day pay, all adds up - and all have hit my state in the last 18 months. Many mom/pop businesses truly are penny profit, and minor change in the cost of goods sold percentages can be devastating -at least painful.

 

As I've stated in other posts, all these costs whether to Fortune 1000 or mom/pop biz ALL trickle down to you, the end consumer.

[rvwnsd]

...As I've stated in other posts, all these costs whether to Fortune 1000 or mom/pop biz ALL trickle down to you, the end consumer.

 

And many end consumers are choosing to take their business elsewhere when they learn a business does not pay its employees a living wage, provide health insurance, paid sick time, and so forth. When enough end customers vote with their business, businesses will either need to adapt or fail.

 

I'd like to see a registry of businesses that provide these things and a similar registry of businesses that do not. Would help make an educated decision as to which businesses I choose to patronize.

[+ purplekow]

Mike I agree with you that small businesses would have a hard time absorbing giving time to employees for jury duty.

As to larger companies, the cost would be minimal to them and us. Certainly a smaller price than the current price of juries made up of people who are not busy doing something else.

[MikeBiDude]

And many end consumers are choosing to take their business elsewhere when they learn a business does not pay its employees a living wage, provide health insurance, paid sick time, and so forth. When enough end customers vote with their business, businesses will either need to adapt or fail.

 

I'd like to see a registry of businesses that provide these things and a similar registry of businesses that do not. Would help make an educated decision as to which businesses I choose to patronize.

Just to be clear - I do provide all of above for my employees, and did before legislated or executive ordered to do so.

 

Many end customers do take there business where they want, it's all good. But don't be fooled into thinking all the expense doesn't factor into the cost of your gallon of gas, your hamburger, or your dry cleaning pickup.

[MikeBiDude]

Mike I agree with you that small businesses would have a hard time absorbing giving time to employees for jury duty.

As to larger companies, the cost would be minimal to them and us. Certainly a smaller price than the current price of juries made up of people who are not busy doing something else.

I do agree with the quality (or lack thereof) of jury pools today. Locally here it's retirees and civil servants. I would be happy to serve, and have been called to both state/federal juries. But when the time requirements vs. self employment begin popping up, I get dismissed or excused.

Some judges locally are trying to break smaller civil cases into neat little 3-4 day trials with success, and getting more people to serve.

[nycguy]

Have you ever run a small business? Trust me "minimal to zero" cost isn't realistic.

 

I am not naïve enough to believe that ALL costs of running a business do not get passed on to consumers nor is that what stated. I do firmly believe that providing jury pay to one's employees would be minimum to zero. But, you can provide some data proving or disproving my belief. Over the last five years how many of your employees were out on jury duty and of those who were on jury duty how many days were they out?

[+ purplekow]

I am not naïve enough to believe that ALL costs of running a business do not get passed on to consumers nor is that what stated. I do firmly believe that providing jury pay to one's employees would be minimum to zero. But, you can provide some data proving or disproving my belief. Over the last five years how many of your employees were out on jury duty and of those who were on jury duty how many days were they out?

Out of six employees I had, 4 were called to jury duty in the last 6 years. Since I run a medical office, they all was released after one day. I could have run the business without them, but it would have required overtime from the other employees or closing the office part time. So if I were paying my employee to be at jury duty, I would also be paying time and half for someone to cover them So that would be 2.5 times the salary to cover the one position. If they were gone for 6 weeks, which is what the trial I was seated and removed from was estimated to take, that would have been about $6000 to $10000 dollars. For a one man office, that is a considerable extra expense,

[nycguy]

Out of six employees I had, 4 were called to jury duty in the last 6 years. Since I run a medical office, they all was released after one day. I could have run the business without them, but it would have required overtime from the other employees or closing the office part time. So if I were paying my employee to be at jury duty, I would also be paying time and half for someone to cover them So that would be 2.5 times the salary to cover the one position. If they were gone for 6 weeks, which is what the trial I was seated and removed from was estimated to take, that would have been about $6000 to $10000 dollars. For a one man office, that is a considerable extra expense,

 

 

Thanks for your input and honest reply. I do appreciate it. But, in all fairness your actual cost was for 4 employees over 6 years all dismissed within one day. I would deem that to be minimal at best. Sometimes there is a cost for being a good corporate citizen. I will also say that you cannot extrapolate your isolated experience on being seated and then unseated on a 6 week trial as being typical - especially since your 4 employees called to jury duty over 6 years were all dismissed within one day.

[Irtwo]

Purplekow, when you said that you knew some of the witnesses, were they in the room with you? Or were their names given to you on a list?

[+ Phactor]

@purplekow I was also surprised that you weren't dismissed as soon as they learned of your profession. And no immediate dismissal when you acknowledged you knew some of the witnesses? They were probably desperate.

 

I've reported three times for petit jury. Never been selected, always been done by early afternoon. So far, all of my employers have paid me jury pay, which is regular pay minus stipend paid by the county. Locally we are paid $13 per day + parking garage voucher.

 

I wholeheartedly agree the jury system should be revamped, just like the electoral system, just for the simple point of view that participants should be informed and engaged. Just people watching the other potential jurors in the room before being called is scary. No way I would want some of those folks deciding my fate.

[mattr]

I have always worked for large corporations and they paid full salary during jury duty. Company policy at my current employer is that you owe them the daily stipend ($40 in NY) but I don't know of anyone who has complied.

[+ purplekow]

Purplekow, when you said that you knew some of the witnesses, were they in the room with you? Or were their names given to you on a list?

They gave a list of the people who were likely to testify

[+ purplekow]

Thanks for your input and honest reply. I do appreciate it. But, in all fairness your actual cost was for 4 employees over 6 years all dismissed within one day. I would deem that to be minimal at best. Sometimes there is a cost for being a good corporate citizen. I will also say that you cannot extrapolate your isolated experience on being seated and then unseated on a 6 week trial as being typical - especially since your 4 employees called to jury duty over 6 years were all dismissed within one day.

They were all dismissed because of the nature of their employment. Someone will be on this jury. If you make small companies pay, there is an expense. You asked how much and while it did only cost me 4 days pay, if the field had been something different and they would have had to be on the jury for weeks, I gave you an estimate of what it would have cost my company. You pooh poohed the cost to any individual company, but there are trials going on every day and it seems that if you have a job that does not cover the cost, you are exempted.

It does seem that some employees of larger corporations who have posted, are indeed compensated. I think that should be universal for corporations of a certain size and covered by the government for small corporations. There could still be hardship cases, one person companies, multiple child care providers etc.

[rvwnsd]

Just to be clear - I do provide all of above for my employees, and did before legislated or executive ordered to do so.

 

Many end customers do take there business where they want, it's all good. But don't be fooled into thinking all the expense doesn't factor into the cost of your gallon of gas, your hamburger, or your dry cleaning pickup.

I am glad to hear that you provide those things. More business owners should follow your example. Thank you for clarifying.

 

I expect that those benefits will be baked into the cost of goods and services and am happy to pay the price. Likewise, no one should be fooled into thinking the cost of providing unpaid-for emergency room care for the uninsured and food assistance for the working poor is not baked into the cost of healthcare and into taxes.

[+ purplekow]

I am glad to hear that you provide those things. More business owners should follow your example. Thank you for clarifying.

 

I expect that those benefits will be baked into the cost of goods and services and am happy to pay the price. Likewise, no one should be fooled into thinking the cost of providing unpaid-for emergency room care for the uninsured and food assistance for the working poor is not baked into the cost of healthcare and into taxes.

There is no free lunch, but at least if lunch is being paid for,there will be fewer starving children.

[rvwnsd]

As often occurs, I pressed the "Post" button too soon.

 

I've long thought that jury service ought to be voluntary. Regardless whether a juror can absorb the cost of losing pay or a business can absorb the cost of paying a juror and covering their work, there is still the break in continuity for both the juror and their employer. There is also the notion that the juror's mind is elsewhere (at work, at wondering how to make up for lost income, etc). My dad was a freelance artist. Never got called for jury duty. After he stopped painting and formally retired he still didn't get called for jury duty. He always wanted to serve on a jury and certainly had the schedule that could accommodate it, but he was never called. About six months before he died he was summoned. By that time, Parkinson's and old age had set in and he could no longer serve. He was able to be excused by submitting a doctor's statement. Nonetheless, he never got to serve on a jury.

[Frequentflier]

While my company does pay employees their regular pay while on jury duty I don't agree with that practice. We are a large company so not a big deal except that the person's work either doesn't get done or other employees have to pick it up. I definitely would push against any law requiring that practice as its particularly burdensome on small businesses.

[+ saminseattle]

Have you ever run a small business? Trust me "minimal to zero" cost isn't realistic. ObamaCare, minimum wages, sick day pay, all adds up - and all have hit my state in the last 18 months. Many mom/pop businesses truly are penny profit, and minor change in the cost of goods sold percentages can be devastating -at least painful.

 

My concern with government-mandated leave benefits, whether for maternity leave as discussed in this thread, http://www.companyofmen.org/threads/is-this-discriminatory-against-gays-and-non-parental-people.113246/#post-1080693, or jury duty as discussed here, is that you’re requiring private actors to provide a public benefit. It would probably be more fair and efficient to collect taxes from everyone to compensate people better for their time providing this public service rather than hide the cost by pawning it off on employers.

[+ Charlie]

By the way, don't forget that the daily payments you receive for serving on a jury are supposed to be reported on your income tax filings.

[+ purplekow]

My concern with government-mandated leave benefits, whether for maternity leave as discussed in this thread, http://www.companyofmen.org/threads/is-this-discriminatory-against-gays-and-non-parental-people.113246/#post-1080693, or jury duty as discussed here, is that you’re requiring private actors to provide a public benefit. It would probably be more fair and efficient to collect taxes from everyone to compensate people better for their time providing this public service rather than hide the cost by pawning it off on employers.

 

In my situation, there were already three people on the jury who had been called the previous day and who were sitting waiting for the other jurors to be selected. They sat and watched as potential juror after potential juror was dismissed because of economic hardship. Perhaps the whole system would be faster if economic hardship were a minimal concern in the selection process.

Parental leave is based on people needing time off to take care of private needs over which they had some control. After all, they opted for the children,

Jury duty is a requirement of the society in order to have a fully functioning judiciary. I would be all for a tax for jury duty. Sliding scale, starting with the highest rate for those earning the most money. Since corporations are people, or at least as far as donations to political campaigns are concerned, they should be taxed as an individual would be for the jury duty tax.