Court restructuring gets push back from court employees

Nearly a dozen unions representing court employees issued a letter to Assemblymember Charles Lavine in opposition to the proposed restructuring of the state’s court system. Eagle file photo by David Brand

By Rachel Vick

As the state court system begins to formulate plans on a statewide restructuring, some of the people most essential to the daily operations are pushing back.

The the Coalition of Court Unions, comprised of 11 New York unions representing court attorneys, officers, clerks and employees, recently sent a letter to Assembly Judiciary Committee Chair Charles Lavine, who introduced the bill detailing the court restructuring, expressing concern for the plan — and their lack of input.

“The Office of Court Administration has not, nor does it appear that they intend to open a dialogue with us to discuss ways to make the courts more efficient,” the unions wrote. “No one seems the least bit interested in meeting with the people who work in the courts, our members.”

“We do not oppose imaginative ideas to make the courts easier to traverse and more efficient,” the letter continues. “That being said, we do not believe that OCA’s proposal will achieve its intended result of efficiency and simplicity.”

Their criticisms include concern for job stability as the state works to finance the major changes. They also say that the problem with the court’s efficiency and backlog is not a result of its current structure but instead the lack of support staff.

According to the unions, the state lost about 2,000 non-judicial employees between 2010 and 2011 and hired back 20 percent in the years since.

“In the past, the OCA has reduced staffing through attrition in order to pay their bills, and we don’t believe that they would shy away from doing it again so that they can ensure that their proposal will be enacted,” they said.

“The moment the courts begin to view people as an object, a product, or simply a number, the court system will lose all of its integrity and credibility,” they wrote. “The court system will fail in its mission of administering justice. “

The plan to change the courts would see New York’s major trial courts absorbed into the State Supreme Court, turn the city’s courts into a new statewide Municipal Court and would permit the legislature to adjust the number and boundaries of appellate judicial departments every 10 years.

It would also add judges to the Supreme Court, require considerations for diversity in all judicial appointments, allow for the creation of new judicial departments and Appellate Divisions and repeal the mandatory retirement age for judges

Judiciary staff unions are also wary of the proposal — the Supreme Court Justices Association of both New York State and City sent a letter to OCA expressing similar opinions on the need to prioritize boosts to staff levels and worries about shifting power away from elected judges — but legal groups have issued broad support.

Court officials say the overhaul is long overdue and will support equitable access, cut costs and improve the system’s flexibility. If passed, the legislation would be the first such adjustment in 50 years.

“Who would oppose a multi-generational updating and streamlining of an antiquated, scoliotic, inefficient and frustrating to navigate court system? Either someone with a vested interest in keeping the status quo or no real understanding of the real benefits for both employees and litigants,” OCA spokesperson Lucian Chalfen told the Eagle. “The costs are incremental and the results can be transformational for all New Yorkers.“

When the constitutional amendment was introduced, Chief Judge Janet DiFiore said that “the state’s obsolete trial court structure has created barriers to justice that disparately impact our most vulnerable New Yorkers.”

“We must modernize our outdated trial court structure in remedying these inequities and transforming our court system into a model of efficiency,” she added.

Lavine was not able to comment before print time.