First, to get all readers up to speed, New York’s judges are clamoring for a raise. LexMetrics already looked at this issue from the federal bench’s perspective (click here), and by comparing New York to the other 50 states (click here). Now it’s time to compare the bar and the bench vis-a-vis compensation.

New York’s trial judges earn on average $136,700. Among the states, they’re ranked 11th. When adjusted for the cost of living, they fall to 37th. Furthermore, they have not received a raise since 1999. Taken together, there’s a case to be made for a pay increase.

 
However, Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye has also included another argument. In her 2006 State of the Judiciary address, she noted that New York judges earned “considerably less than many first-year lawyers in New York City firms.” By 2007, after the gap further increased, she sardonically quipped that “there’s no point even mentioning starting associate salaries in New York City law firms.”

I agree, for other reasons.

 
Comparing a judge’s compensation to a top firm’s first-year associate’s is dubious. First-year associates can’t be judges – you need 10 years as a member of the bar. Judges would never leave the bench to become a first-year associate – a partner, maybe. Kaye doesn’t compare judges to what top partners make because it wouldn’t help her cause. Judges, as public officials, know they’ll never earn a salary in the millions.

 
The comparison also fails in this regard – she’s comparing all judges to the cream of the crop of attorneys, even if they are only first-years. Nationwide, only 10 percent of all attorneys work at a firm with more than 100 lawyers. If one accepts that definition as a “top firm”, very few attorneys practice for one.

 
This is not to say that all the best attorneys work for top firms. Plenty of our brightest legal minds choose other career paths. But, very few mediocare attorneys work for top firms. There is a merit-based system at work here. The top 10 percent of attorneys are not all at the top firms, but the top firms typically employ very good attorneys. Hence, those attorneys are paid better than the average attorney.

 
A government employee’s pay is less likely to be determined by performance or merit. Good judges don’t earn more than poor ones. For example, all Civil Court judges receive the same amount – regardless, even, of length of service, much less reversal rate, docket management, or history of discipline by the conduct commission, etc.

 
Advocates for a judicial raise use the pay figures of top first-year associates because they earn in the ballpark of what judges might plausibly be able to make ($160,000+). It’s an apples-to-oranges analogy, but it crudely advances their argument (unless you look at their respective hourly wages – who thinks first-year attorneys work the same hours as a judge?).

 
The average lawyer in the United States earned $110,520 in 2005. Locally, they earn more: $125,390, which is still less than New York’s trial court judges. Although LexMetrics believes judges should earn more than an average lawyer, it is instructive to note that advocates for a raise don’t mention these figures.

Sources:

New York Judicial Pay Data: The National Center for State Courts

Attorneys and Law Firm Size: American Bar Association

Average attorney's salary in the U.S.: United States Department of Labor

Average attorney salary data for New York-Northern NJ-Long Island: United Sates Department of Labor