Salaries’ impasse - Putting pay ahead of all else is wrong

The issues raised by Chief Justice Susan Denham when she warned that some of the best candidates for the bench might not wish to become judges because High Court pay levels have become relatively unattractive, echoes a dilemma having an impact right across society.

Hospital managers and consultants’ representatives have warned it is difficult to fill positions because candidates — often people who moved abroad to widen their professional experience — can earn far more elsewhere.

Third-level education faces the same challenge. Those institutions compete daily with multinational corporations to recruit or retain high-calibre staff. Despite these warnings, and the all too obvious evidence that supports them, what can be done?

A High Court judge appointed before January 1, 2012, is paid €191,306 a year, those appointed after that get €172,710. The take-home pay of a judge appointed before 2012 is 38% less than it was in 2008. Newly appointed judges take home half of what they could have expected to earn in 2008. Nevertheless, the figures are still relatively enviable. Pay cuts of this magnitude are not uncommon and most of those who suffered them have no option but to grin and bear it. Most workers stoically recognise that a return to pre-crash pay levels is very unlikely in the short term.

Chief Justice Denham’s warning points to another issue — how prohibitively expensive legal services are and how very lucrative a busy practice can be. They are so expensive that, in reality, whole swathes of the population cannot go to court because of cost. It is also unlikely that salary levels in any other European court service could trump what is available in private practice here. This was recognised by the troika who encouraged a root-and-branch reform of our legal system and charges. It is to Justice Minister Alan Shatter’s credit that he is confronting these issues.

Revelations about pay in the charity sector, not to mention that it was reported in recent days that the country’s highest paid arts administrator — Gate Theatre’s artistic director Michael Colgan — was paid €230,000 in 2012, also contribute to the tensions — and the keeping-up-with-Jones’ envy — on this issue.

It is difficult to see how it can be resolved in purely monetary terms.

The answer may lie in an old fashioned, maybe even naive idea — vocation and service. Anyone worth considering for a place in our High Court has done well out of this country. It is more than likely that their children did not suffer too many disadvantages either. They have had a fine education without incurring the costs their international peers faced and presumably used that opportunity to make a very good living. This is true for all professions and most sectors. This debate confirms too that unless we can judge things in more ways than just financial rewards, then we have not shaken off the very questionable values that led us to this sorry point either. This seems another instance where we put the price of something well beyond its value.