Nonrevman From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1289 posts, RR: 1 Posted (10 years 9 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4082 times:
I was looking at the Human Resources manual the other day about jury duty. It states that an employee would be compensated for 14 days per year if they had to serve on a jury.
We all know that people are paid little to nothing for being on a jury, yet bills are still due and life goes on. So, what happens to people who have to serve on these really long trials that last for months? Do they simply go bankrupt in the end?
It would seem like they would have to pick 12 people who would not see a long absence as any kind of problem--emotionally or financially. Otherwise, the actions of the juror would be governed by the dire need to get the trial overwith as soon as possible. If I were in the jury selection process and found out it would be a long trial, then I would tell them I am biased or produce an unrefundable airline ticket or do something to try and avoid it. If it is a short trial, no problem.
Has anyone had to serve on a long trial or knows someone in that situation? Is there a "financial hardship" reason that could get someone dismissed? What kind of person could serve for months and not be effected by finances or separation from family?
Delta-flyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2676 posts, RR: 7 Reply 1, posted (10 years 9 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 4075 times:
When I still lived in Canada I was stuck on a 6-week trial. We didn't have to attend every day -- sometimes stuff would come up that did not require the jury and we were told to come back in a couple of days. We were told, of course, not to discuss the case with anyone. We were only sequestered for the two days of deliberation at the end.
My employer continued to pay my full salary, while I had to sign over the jury pay. I kept the reimbursement for incidental expenses, such as parking and meals while on jury duty.
I have no idea what my current employer's policy is on long trials.
Greg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (10 years 9 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4046 times:
I've never know an employer to deny compensation for extended trials.
Should it prove a true hardship, there are remedies for courts, employers, and jurors alike.
Sccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5092 posts, RR: 28 Reply 3, posted (10 years 9 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 4030 times:
What Greg said; in my experience, most judges will dismiss potential jurors for whom the extended absence would create a genuine (emphasis on genuine hardship).
No one wants a juror on the panel who is stressed with the threat of losing a job because of serving on the jury.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
Srbmod From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 16888 posts, RR: 51 Reply 4, posted (10 years 9 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 4033 times:
Thankfully, the only time I have been called for jury duty, I didn't have to suffer. The first day, I was put into the pool for a murder trial, and was one of the first people the defense used one of their strikes one. So I go back the next day, spend about 3 hours, and those of us waiting in the jury room were sent to lunch, and told to be back @ 1:00 p.m. Got back, and we sat around for about 15 minutes, and we were all sent home, and told to call back the next day to see if we needed to report on Thursday. I called, and they said my services were no longer needed. Meanwhile, a coworker of mine got jury duty the same time as me, and he got on a case that took about 2 weeks, and was pissed that I got off so easily. It should be time for me to get jury duty again, it's been about 4 years, so who knows how I will fare next time.
Nonrevman From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1289 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (10 years 9 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 4025 times:
I sometimes wonder how they pick the people for the really long trials. It seems to me that only the homeless, unemployed, or independantly wealthy people would be suitable for serving on such a jury. If the judge asked a jury pool of they had any hardships, wouldn't 90% of us come forward with something? Our hardships would probably be either based on the financial implications, planned business trips, or even nonrefundable vacations. Like I said, in my case, I stop getting paid beyond day 14. Unfortunately, the mortgage,cars, student loans, bills, etc. will continue. Somehow, they are going to have to determine who those 12 people are going to be. What criteria would the judge have in order to decide who goes and who stays?
Has anyone here had to serve in a long trial and suffered financially because of it? How did you manage to make ends meet (without emptying your life savings)?
Sccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5092 posts, RR: 28 Reply 6, posted (10 years 9 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4006 times:
I was once on a jury panel for a complicated medical malpractice case (before I was a lawyer) in Orange County, California; it was down to the nut cuttin'- the judge asked whether there was any reason why the people who remained could not serve on a lengthy trial; all objected, most said that they were irreplaceable at their places of emplyment, were big-shot execs, etc.; I felt pretty silly telling the judge that, if the trial went as long as he said it might, it would interfere with my vacation (for which I had already paid); one other person had the same situation, and after hearing everyone's excuses, he dismissed only me and the other vacation dude. The judge pointed out that we're all imortant at our jobs, but vacation is hard to come by.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1289 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
