When three old friends, Robin Steinberg, David Feige and Dan Arshack, started Bronx Defenders, there was a deliberate intention of providing their indigent clients “holistic” services. By this, they meant that their purpose wasn’t just to beat the case, as would be the scope of ordinary criminal defense, but to help their clients become happy, successful, law-abiding citizens.
While beating the rap was their primary goal, helping clients beyond their legal problems was their ethos. It was, at the time, a novel and very progressive approach for an indigent defense organization. None of the founders remain at Bronx Defenders for various reasons, but the ethos remains. And that, apparently, has given rise to a stumbling block that has caused Bronx Defenders to lose the tune, as its staff has now been on strike for a week and its union has rejected an eminently fair proposal to settle.
Today marks one week since unionized staff at The Bronx Defenders began a strike.
I want to explain plainly what we have offered, where the disagreement remains, and why we believe our proposal is necessary to protect both our staff and the people we represent.
At BxD, everyone is a public defender. Every role is essential to providing the best defense possible, and our proposal raises pay for everyone:
- Increasing first-year social worker salary from $85,600 to $90,000, with an average increase of approximately 6%, or $6,400, across the scale
- Increasing first-year attorney salary from $85,600 to $95,000, with larger increases, ranging from 12%-15%, across the attorney scale
- Adding pay for investigators, Homicide Practice advocates, and holiday arraignment shifts
- Expanding sabbatical and parental leave, leave pool access, student loan reimbursement, retirement benefits, and increasing the annual cost-of-living adjustment to 3%
Union representatives rejected this offer.
Nobody becomes a public defender to become rich, but that doesn’t mean they should starve or be homeless either. That’s true of the lawyers who defend their clients against criminal charges. That’s true of the social workers who seek to improve their clients lives so they don’t end up being back in the dock, if possible. But as Executive Director Juval Scott explains, the circumstances for lawyers and social workers aren’t quite the same.
The union’s representatives claim that creating separate attorney and social work salary scales undervalues social work. We disagree. Social work is foundational to our model. And, while our social workers are already paid above broad regional and public sector benchmarks, our proposal would raise their compensation further. The proposed $90,000 starting salary is well above the approximately $71,300 annualized mean wage for community and social service occupations in the New York metropolitan area.
At the same time, attorney compensation has fallen too far behind comparable legal work. Attorneys are leaving BxD after two to four years, just as they are gaining the courtroom experience our clients, teams, and newer staff rely on. And when we ask them why they are leaving, the answer is almost always money. We must pay our attorneys more.
The concept of indigent defenders going on strike is, in itself, controversial. While on a picket line, who is standing next to the defendants as the prosecution of their cases proceeds without them? Being a lawyer isn’t just a job, a financial proposition, but a duty owed to a defendant to protect them from the ravages of the state even if it comes at the financial expense of the lawyer. That’s what being a professional means. The client comes first, even if that means it comes at the lawyer’s expense. Scott says that they are still providing that representation, although it seems unlikely that they are doing so in the same manner as would happen if there were no strike.
Still, keeping experienced lawyers is critical to the zealous defense of the indigent. Lawyers leaving due to inadequate pay after two to four years means that the cadre of experienced lawyers falls short of that needed to fulfill the mission. If that’s what’s happening, then Bronx Defenders must pay their attorneys more. Not because there is some conceptual justification for parity with social workers to demonstrate that they value their services as much as lawyers, but to fulfill the basic function of an indigent defense organization. You can have all the social workers in the world on board, but without competent and experienced lawyers, you have no criminal defense. Like it or not, that remains the primary function of the Bronx Defenders.
Yes, it is ironic that we are fighting with our union representatives to pay our attorneys more. And it is frustrating that they seem to be prioritizing their own agenda over the very real day-to-day concerns of our workers, our clients, and our organization. Our goal remains an agreement that brings our staff back together and protects the quality of defense the people of the Bronx deserve. We remain hopeful that such an agreement is possible.
Would the union be happier if lawyers were paid the same as social workers, but at the social worker pay scale? Would that prove they were valued equally? Bear in mind that the social workers would be paid substantially more than the norm, while the lawyers are paid a fraction of what first year associate make at Biglaw. Lawyers have to endure three years of law school, including both the tedium as well as tuition. Social workers do not. One can fully appreciate the contribution social workers bring to the holistic ethos of Bronx Defenders services while still recognizing the reality that there are very real pragmatic reasons that the lawyers must be paid more.
The proposal by Bronx Defenders to the Union is fair and right. End the strike and fulfill the mission of winning cases and help defendants. Never forget the primary reason why Bronx Defenders exists, and if that’s not good enough for you, maybe indigent defense isn’t right for you and you should get that sweet social worker gig on Wall Street.
*Tuesday Talk rules apply.