Financial hit of jury service

[Pheasantsfeather]

I've just been summoned for jury service. Checked the terms and conditions and our company will grant special leave to attend but you are unpaid. You can claim £64 per day back in expenses. My take home per day is three times that.

I am fully supportive of why I need to do it, but I can't believe I'm expected to take such a financial hit. If it were to go on for the full 10 days, I will be over £1000 out of pocket. I can't afford that, we have nursery and holiday club fees for 3x children and a mortgage to pay.

How can you be duty bound to do something that costs you so much in lost earnings?

Yanbu x

That’s really offensive about being too stupid. I was called up, I work 5 shifts a week in a shop, I just accepted as my civic duty. I was put on the long case and as I said in a previous post, 15 of us were in full court including the three defendants where we had to approach the judge and say the reason why we couldn’t be on a three-month trial. My son’s graduation was in this period (but after the two weeks I’d expected) but I still wasn’t allowed to be moved onto a shorter one. Three were moved to shorter trials. We worked really hard, one of the defendants was at the station alongside me every day.

That’s interesting - we had the form for the long trial but still had to go into the court with everybody there and approach the judge to explain!

I did jury duty in December and I agree. My employer paid me as usual but lots of people were only getting that £65 a day. The jurors lounge once had a little canteen where I went but it had been closed down and there was just a shitty vending machine for tea/coffee you had to pay for and no fridge which I thought was poor given everyone has to take time out of their lives to be there. I took sandwiches with me as the nearest cafes to the court all charged well in excess of the £5.71 you’re allowed daily for food. I took my laptop the first day thinking I’d work while I was waiting but there were no power points you could use in the jury lounge so that wasn’t really an option either. One woman in my group lived quite a distance from the court and was out of pocket paying childcare and daily public transport to and from the court house with the stipend so she was excused by the judge so they are sympathetic to people’s circumstances. But it’s a pretty demanding experience that shouldn’t end up costing you money.

I'm not saying you are stupid or anything but it's easy to accept your civic duty when you aren't losing loads of your earnings in the process. Working in a shop, you aren't earning six figures, realistically, no offence . As a pp said, it will be mostly retiree's, unemployed and people in certain low paid jobs that would be unaffected by jury service.

I’ve always wanted to be called and my employer would be sympathetic but I couldn’t do a long stint as the business would not survive if I was off for a long period of time

My ds was called during his last term of college. He had a cash in hand job which he lost money from as he couldnt work. He couldnt claim any allowance, except food and hated every minute of it as he said it was just like school. He did 2 trials and got out of a longer one as said he had exams the following week.
Id love to do it but never been called. My employer would pay me full pay too

@Emmasblackboard sorry you missed the joke part (or that I too have done jury duty!) but thanks for noting the real issue.

Because he was working a lot and I wasn’t… we’re married at I not allowed to help my husband out?

I’m surprised they’d even talk to you about it tbh.

It’s not about being a snob, if private sector employees and self-employed people largely do all they can to get out of jury service, then that is a huge tranche of the population who are not represented on a jury. The point of a jury is that they have similar life experiences to the accused and can see things from their perspective.

If you are employed, you arent taxed on the loss of earnings payment. So if you are on a longer case, you receive £129 a day tax free. On top of that you can also claim some childcare costs, travel, & food expenses. Fpr most people, this should mean they aren't hugely out of pocket unless quite a high earner.

I do think its very difficult for self employed people though.

This.
My home insurance legal cover includes covering my salary if I ever have to do Jury service.

Your work are stingy for not paying you.

For context, to receive £129 a day net you need a salary over £40k.

Add in the value of the childcare, travel and meals expenses and for most people on up to about £60k you should not be too out of pocket.

You’d be happy to lose £hundreds in lost wages to do it?

But the daily rate is £64 for the first 10 days. Longer trials are more unusual, often people can do 2 or 3 in a 10 day stint.

The only thing I’d say on the comments about working while you’re there, is that there is a very limited number of plugs. I went for five days, didn’t get called, took my laptop with me but only got about two hours work done most days because my battery is terrible and I couldn’t get near a plug! On the 5th day they dismissed me entirely and said I didn’t need to do the second week.

People are misunderstanding. The form clearly says:

We can reimburse you up to £64.95 per day for loss of earnings
during the first 10 days of jury service. For longer trials, check the
^rates on the allowances sheet or at www.gov.uk/jury-service.^

So that is all you are getting if you are called for jury service and your employer will not pay you. £64.95 a day. You cannot claim any more than that, the court service will not pay your wages, if you earn more than that, you're stuffed.

I did jury service a couple of years ago in Scotland, luckily it was a Sheriff Court not the High Court so I was only there three days. I am self-employed so it meant was that I was at court 9am to 4pm ish and then had to come home and do all the work that I would have ordinarily done during the day. It is a massive disincentive to sitting on a jury and everyone who was there with me agreed that they had tried several times to get out of it and had run out of excuses. Most of the jurors were retired, others were from public sector occupations whereby their employer keeps paying them while on jury service. It does not make for a representative jury.

Scotland did suggest getting rid of trial by jury for less serious cases but that was thrown out. Idea was it would save both money and speed up the system.

To be fair on the Scottish jury experience, the room was very nice, there was a Nespresso machine and biscuits (free) and we gave our lunch order to the clerk the afternoon before and were delivered a very nice packed lunch to the jury room each day so didn't have to leave the court - I think they don't want to risk you crossing paths with defendants or their relatives.

And my last post (promise) I would agree with this. The case I sat on was a domestic violence/assault case. Both people involved as defendant and lead witness were 16 or 17 when it happened, one was a care leaver, they had had a baby who had also been taken into care, no jobs, chaotic lifestyles. The 15 of us on the jury were all aged 40 plus, around 9 or 10 were retired and the rest of us were teachers, self-employed professionals, council officials. Nothing in common AT ALL with either defendant or witness. That is not a "jury of your peers".

In the end the case was withdrawn by the prosecution after day 3 so we all went home, having cost the Scottish court service a lot of money.

In England you only get free drinks when you are locked in deliberation. When in deliberation you have to take your own lunch as you aren’t allowed to leave the room until you are dismissed for the day by the judge.

When I did mine they seemed to quite enjoy keeping us there all morning then dismissing us JUST before midday which just happened to be the cut off before having to pay us. I also couldn’t return to work that day as another member of staff was covering my absence, so no pay (other than covering my train fare) and no wages either.

The way jury service is handled in this country is poor, and it's no wonder people try and get out of it. I can't blame them in the circumstances.

A colleague of mine was away for two weeks recently. He had to report for court every day, hang around for hours, and then would always be dismissed. He never saw the inside of a court room and described the whole thing as a very expensive waste of his time.

It's not a respectful way to treat those who are giving up their time and money to perform this vital service.

I would like to see a similar scheme to that for enhanced maternity leave brought in, whereby your wages - up to a reasonable point - are paid for up to a certain period of time (e.g. 26 weeks). There would be legal protections for employees (i.e. the right to return to the same job). Employers could take out insurance against this as they do for other types of staff absence.

I'd like to see similar insurance available for those who are self-employed too.

I'd also incentivise jury service by ensuring that food is provided, and that there are crèches on site.

Yes, I do know this all costs money. But I think it's something which needs investing in.

Have not done jury service but know someone who has. And the facilities available for the Jury do need improving. The organisation of the Court eg, paperwork, needs improving.
And no, you don’t get enough money to cover your costs.
It is a civic duty to undertake regardless. And a much needed function. Many people to decide on the guilt of another.
Getting rid of juries means you leave it in the hands of one person to decide. I am not confident enough in such a system to support that.
Annoyances aside and financial impact aside it is an important function. Like much in this country it requires improving. But do not throw it away because it needs improving. Improve it.