Federal government rejects $28,000 raise proposal for judges

OTTAWA — The federal government rejected a recommendation by an independent commission to increase judges’ salaries by $28,000, saying it can’t justify the raise in this economy.

In a statement posted online Monday , Justice Minister Sean Fraser said the government “respectfully disagrees” with all one-time salary increases advised by the quadrennial judicial compensation and benefits commission this summer.

“Current compensation for judges already includes annual indexation and strong pensions. This decision reflects today’s economic reality and current overall financial conditions,” Fraser’s director of communications Jeremy Bellefeuille said in a separate statement.

The decision comes on the eve of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s first budget which he described as “austerity and investment” in September .

In July, the commission recommended the government increase the “inadequate” salaries by $28,000 for most federally-appointed judges to $36,000 for the chief justice of the Supreme Court. It argued the raise was necessary to keep the bench attractive to “outstanding candidates”.

It also recommended increasing the compensation of associate judges to 95 per cent of a full-time judge, up from the currently 80 per cent. It would be the first lump-sum raise outside of indexing approved by the government since 2006.

In its response, the federal government argued that it would be uncouth to offer judges a raise as Canadians face increasing economic uncertainty and the government is preparing to cut public spending and the size of the bureaucracy.

“The Government is of the view that… judicial salaries are adequate and, in any event, cannot be the source of new fiscal expenditure at a time of comprehensive expenditure review, including possible public sector job losses,” reads a response to the commission posted Monday morning.

The government also argued that some of the commission’s findings were contradictory or relied on anecdotal evidence instead of data to prove that it was increasingly difficult to attract outstanding candidates.

The decision will almost certainly raise eyebrows among the judiciary, who argued to the commission that courts are increasingly struggling to attract “top” talent namely due to a growing divide between private lawyer salaries and judges’ compensation.

On Monday, new data showed judicial vacancies were once again on the rise after reaching a “crisis” point of over 90 in 2023 and then plummeting to under 20 earlier this year after a wave of appointments.

Statistics from the Federal Judicial Affairs Commissioner showed vacancies have risen to 50 across the country as of Nov. 1. The rise comes as courts across the country are asking the Liberals to increase the size of their complements to address rising case numbers and population increases, National Post reported last week .

Most of the 1,200 federally-appointed judges currently make $414,900 and Supreme Court justices earn nearly $500,000. Chief justices earn about $40,000 more than their peers.

They also have access to benefits and a pension described by the government as “one of the best retirement plans in Canada”.

Judges’ salaries are also increased yearly based on the Industrial Aggregate Index (IAI). Maintaining that increase is the only raise the government accepted in its response.

“Annual statutory indexing using IAI provides for increases to judicial salaries that in most years exceed increases to the cost of living,” the government said Monday. “In other words, in most years, IAI indexing provides for what can fairly be characterized as a raise.”

The government otherwise pooh-poohed other findings from the commission, including that the lump-sum increase was necessary to keep the bench attractive to outstanding candidates.

In its July report, the commission agreed with arguments by judicial associations that salaries were too low to continue attracting top talent. But it disagreed with judges’ request for a one-time $60,000 raise.

The key concern highlighted by both judges’ associations and the commission’s report is that too few “highly qualified” private-sector lawyers are applying to become judges, risking a dearth of expertise on the bench and challenges filling vacancies in the long term.

The commission cited affidavits from two chief justices saying they were repeatedly being told by candidates that they were not interested in applying for the bench because the compensation was too low vis-à-vis the workload.

“An increasing number of qualified private practitioners no longer view a judicial appointment, considering its attendant responsibilities and benefits, as attractive in light of the resulting significant reduction in income,” Ontario Superior Court Chief Justice Geoffrey Morawetz wrote in an affidavit to the commission.

On Monday, the government said that evidence was anecdotal and far from objective and unbiased. Instead, it argued that data showed there was no issue with the number of candidates and that private sector lawyers are still the majority of applicants.

“The Commission relied on subjective accounts from directly affected individuals, with no details such as the sources of information or statistical analyses,” reads the report.

The government also told the commission that its recommendation for a $28,000 raise contradicts its own finding that judges salaries should remain in line with the public service’s “DM-3” salary band. The raise, Ottawa said, would bring compensation closer to the “DM-4” band, “which the Commission expressly rejected as an appropriate comparator.”

Canadian Judicial Council spokesperson Krista Ferraro said Monday the organization representing judges was still reviewing the decision and declined to comment.

The Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association declined to comment.

National Post

cnardi@postmedia.com

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our politics newsletter, First Reading, here.