Thomas: Looming crisis
Three-quarters of salaried judges and two-thirds of fee-paid judges report symptoms of stress, while a third of circuit judges are under “high or extreme stress”, the latest Judicial Attitude Survey has found.
Meanwhile, over the 10-year lifetime of the research, the proportion of salaried judges saying they want to leave the judiciary within the next five years if it was a “viable option” has increased from 23% to 39%.
The findings led to a warning of a “looming retention and recruitment crisis”.
The 2024 survey, which asked about stress levels for the first time, found that salaried judges and coroners had the highest; almost a half of senior coroners reported “high/extreme stress”, followed by a third (32%) of circuit and High Court family judges, 28% of King’s Bench judges and almost a quarter of district judges.
The most common symptoms of stress for salaried judges were sleep disturbances (77%), irritability (57%) and headaches (52%). These were followed by muscle tension, lack of concentration, burnout, increased sense of isolation, intolerance of others, altered socialising habits and stomach upsets.
They most commonly attributed stress to lack of personal time due to workload pressures, inability to achieve a reasonable work/life balance and the amount of screen time.
For almost a half of fee-paid judges, last-minute changes to their judicial work schedule were also a cause.
Those reporting the highest stress levels were more likely to have a workload which was “too high”, to have reported bullying, harassment or discrimination, to be female judges or those with disabilities.
By far the most popular method of support sought by salaried judges to deal with stress was a conversation with a leadership judge, followed by Judicial College e-learning services and counselling.
Over the 10 years since salaried judges took part in the first survey, trends relating to pay and pensions have improved.
The proportion of judges reporting a loss of net earnings fell from three-quarters to a half, the proportion saying their pay and pension did not adequately reflect the work they do dropped from 78% to 61% while the proportion saying the salary issue affected morale went from 64% to 43%.
However, the proportion of salaried judges wanting to leave the judiciary if it was a “viable option” increased from 23% to 39%, and to leave it early in the next five years, from 31% to 39%.
Along with high rates of stress, there was “a substantial increase” since 2022 in judges’ concern for their personal safety in court, rising from 27% to 39%, and out of court from 19% to 26%. Safety concerns were particularly high among district judges and coroners.
The proportion of judges saying they had experienced bullying, although much lower than in other parts of the profession, rose from 11% in 2022 to 14%. There was an increase in those reporting discrimination (5% to 6%) but fall in harassment (4% to 3%).
Most salaried judges felt valued by the public (57%) and the senior judiciary (53%), but very few by the media (10%) or government (9%).
Professor Cheryl Thomas, director of the UCL Judicial Institute, designed, carried out and analysed the survey, which had very high response rates, such as 94% of salaried judges and 90% of coroners.
She said there had been “little change” over the past 10 years in judges’ views on court buildings, with only a third or less rating the quality of them as excellent or good.
The proportion of salaried judges rating their IT equipment as excellent or good increased significantly though in that time, from 18% to 51%.
However, almost two thirds of fee-paid judges said the IT equipment provided to them was either poor or non-existent.
Professor Thomas warned of a “looming retention and recruitment crisis”, with an “increasing number of salaried judges intending to leave the judiciary in the next five years which outstrips the number of fee-paid judges considering applying for a salaried judicial post”.
The survey found that 588 fee-paid judges (16%) were currently considering applying for a salaried judicial post, 202 fewer than the number expected to leave in the next five years.
Professor Thomas added that while judges were “deeply committed” to providing an important service to society, many judges were “under extreme pressure with high workloads, in unacceptable building conditions, with little administrative support and growing concerns for their personal safety”.
What chance is there of a fair hearing if the Judge in the case is suffering from stress? Symptoms of which can include irritability, concentration burnout and intolerance of others?
Judges with these symptoms should be excluded from hearing cases until their stress is under control.
Those appearing before them, be they legal professionals, expert witnesses or defendants should not be put at risk of judicial spleen resulting from poorly managed mental health problems and driven, at least in part, by poor employment conditions.