This pay dispute is turning into a public safety crisis
Indeed, what started as a pay dispute is now a real threat to public safety. People accused of crimes are entitled to a lawyer under the US Constitution. Most can't afford one, so the state provides them. Massachusetts is one of a handful of states that often contracts that work out to a bar advocate — a private attorney hired by the state to represent indigent defendants.
Get The Gavel
A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr.
Enter Email
Sign Up
But their pay is so low — $65 an hour, far lower than in neighboring states — that a large group of bar advocates have stopped taking new cases. If the state's rate were actually competitive, you might expect to see other lawyers hungry for work rushing to fill the void. Notably, they're not.
Advertisement
Now judges have no choice but to free some defendants. Earlier this month, a single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court
Legislative leaders have complained that the bar advocates didn't give them proper warning, and that they don't like being pressured by the work stoppage.
Representative Aaron Michlewitz (D-Boston), chair of the House Ways and Means Committee,
But legislative pique is not a good enough reason to let this dangerous situation drag on. And anyway, lawmakers knew or should have known that pay was a serious and legitimate issue for those court-appointed lawyers — and that the consequences for ignoring it could be grave. At a hearing last March before the House and Senate Ways and Means Committee, Anthony J. Benedetti, chief counsel for the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS) — which administers the appointment of attorneys — made the case for modest increases in their hourly wage.
Advertisement
And bar advocates said as early as
That should have been more than enough time to reach a deal. While the $35 per hour increase that bar advocates are said to be seeking may be too high, there should have been — should still be — some way to reach a compromise. After all, that's what lawyers do all the time. (Lawmakers have said meeting the demand would cost about
State Senator Lydia Edwards (D-Boston), who cochairs the Judiciary Committee, told the editorial board that bar advocates should go back to work with a commitment from the Legislature to work on an increase on their wages. 'Call it a win. Be better organized now. Set out a realistic increase that this Legislature can meet now,' she said.
But that would require bar advocates to give up leverage in the hope that lawmakers are acting in good faith — a tough sell, given the lack of respect shown for earlier pay raise requests.
Meanwhile, from the office of Governor Maura Healey comes this statement: 'Bar advocates do incredibly important work to make sure that everyone has their due process rights protected, and they deserve to be paid a fair wage. Governor Healey is concerned about the negative public safety impacts of this work stoppage. She urges all those impacted to work together to reach a resolution and ensure that all defendants receive the representation to which they are entitled.'
Advertisement
The governor has also said she'll do 'everything' she can to end the impasse. But there still appears to be no end in sight, and it's only a matter of time before the dispute leads to consequences much more dire than a broken cannon.
Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
2 hours ago
- Washington Post
Statehouses are the public's houses, but the fight for potty parity continues
For female state lawmakers in Kentucky, choosing when to go to the bathroom has long required careful calculation. There are only two bathroom stalls for women on the third floor of the Kentucky Statehouse, where the House and Senate chambers are located. Female legislators — 41 of the 138 member Legislature — needing a reprieve during a lengthy floor session have to weigh the risk of missing an important debate or a critical vote.
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Statehouses are the public's houses, but the fight for potty parity continues
For female state lawmakers in Kentucky, choosing when to go to the bathroom has long required careful calculation. There are only two bathroom stalls for women on the third floor of the Kentucky Statehouse, where the House and Senate chambers are located. Female legislators — 41 of the 138 member Legislature — needing a reprieve during a lengthy floor session have to weigh the risk of missing an important debate or a critical vote. None of their male colleagues face the same dilemma because, of course, multiple men's bathrooms are available. The Legislature even installed speakers in the men's bathrooms to broadcast the chamber's events so they don't miss anything important. In a pinch, House Speaker David Osborne allows women to use his single stall bathroom in the chamber, but even that attracts long lines. 'You get the message very quickly: This place was not really built for us,' said Rep. Lisa Willner, a Democrat from Louisville, reflecting on the photos of former lawmakers, predominantly male, that line her office. The issue of potty parity may seem comic, but its impact runs deeper than uncomfortably full bladders, said Kathryn Anthony, professor emerita at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's School of Architecture. 'It's absolutely critical because the built environment reflects our culture and reflects our population,' said Anthony, who has testified on the issue before Congress. 'And if you have an environment that is designed for half the population but forgets about the other half, you have a group of disenfranchised people and disadvantaged people.' There is hope for Kentucky's lady legislators seeking more chamber potties. A $300 million renovation of the 155-year-old Capitol — scheduled for completion by 2028 at the soonest — aims to create more women's restrooms and end Kentucky's bathroom disparity. The Bluegrass State is among the last to add bathrooms to aging statehouses that were built when female legislators were not a consideration. In the $392 million renovation of the Georgia Capitol, expanding bathroom access is a priority, said Gerald Pilgrim, chief of staff with the state's Building Authority. It will introduce female facilities on the building's fourth floor, where the public galleries are located, and will add more bathrooms throughout to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. 'We know there are not enough bathrooms,' he said. Evolving equality in statehouses There's no federal law requiring bathroom access for all genders in public buildings. Some 20 states have statutes prescribing how many washrooms buildings must have, but historical buildings — such as statehouses — are often exempt. Over the years, as the makeup of state governments has changed, statehouses have added bathrooms for women. When Tennessee's Capitol opened in 1859, the architects designed only one restroom — for men only — situated on the ground floor. According to legislative librarian Eddie Weeks, the toilet could only be 'flushed' when enough rainwater had been collected. 'The room was famously described as 'a stench in the nostrils of decency,'' Weeks said in an email. Today, Tennessee's Capitol has a female bathroom located between the Senate and House chambers. It's in a cramped hall under a staircase, sparking comparisons to Harry Potter's cupboard bedroom, and it contains just two stalls. The men also just have one bathroom on the same floor, but it has three urinals and three stalls. Democratic Rep. Aftyn Behn, who was elected in 2023, said she wasn't aware of the disparity in facilities until contacted by The Associated Press. 'I've apparently accepted that waiting in line for a two-stall closet under the Senate balcony is just part of the job,' she said. 'I had to fight to get elected to a legislature that ranks dead last for female representation, and now I get to squeeze into a space that feels like it was designed by someone who thought women didn't exist — or at least didn't have bladders,' Behn said. The Maryland State House is the country's oldest state capitol in continuous legislative use, operational since the late 1700s. Archivists say its bathroom facilities were initially intended for white men only because desegregation laws were still in place. Women's restrooms were added after 1922, but they were insufficient for the rising number of women elected to office. Delegate Pauline Menes complained about the issue so much that House Speaker Thomas Lowe appointed her chair of the 'Ladies Rest Room Committee,' and presented her with a fur covered toilet seat in front of her colleagues in 1972. She launched the women's caucus the following year. It wasn't until 2019 that House Speaker Adrienne A. Jones, the first woman to secure the top position, ordered the addition of more women's restrooms along with a gender-neutral bathroom and a nursing room for mothers in the Lowe House Office Building. 'No longer do we fret and squirm or cross our legs in panic' As more women were elected nationwide in the 20th century, some found creative workarounds. In Nebraska's unicameral Legislature, female senators didn't get a dedicated restroom until 1988, when a facility was added in the chamber's cloakroom. There had previously been a single restroom in the senate lounge, and Sen. Shirley Marsh, who served for some 16 years, would ask a State Patrol trooper to guard the door while she used it, said Brandon Metzler, the Legislature's clerk. In Colorado, female House representatives and staff were so happy to have a restroom added in the chamber's hallway in 1987 that they hung a plaque to honor then-state Rep. Arie Taylor, the state's first Black woman legislator, who pushed for the facility. The plaque, now inside a women's bathroom in the Capitol, reads: 'Once here beneath the golden dome if nature made a call, we'd have to scramble from our seats and dash across the hall ... Then Arie took the mike once more to push an urge organic, no longer do we fret and squirm or cross our legs in panic.' The poem concludes: 'In mem'ry of you, Arie (may you never be forgot), from this day forth we'll call that room the Taylor Chamber Pot.' New Mexico Democratic state Rep. Liz Thomson recalled missing votes in the House during her first year in office in 2013 because there was no women's restroom in the chamber's lounge. An increase in female lawmakers — New Mexico elected the largest female majority Legislature in U.S. history in 2024 — helped raise awareness of the issue, she said. 'It seems kind of like fluff, but it really isn't,' she said. 'To me, it really talks about respect and inclusion.' The issue is not exclusive to statehouses. In the U.S. Capitol, the first restroom for congresswomen didn't open until 1962. While a facility was made available for female U.S. Senators in 1992, it wasn't until 2011 that the House chamber opened a bathroom to women lawmakers. Jeannette Rankin of Montana was the first woman elected to a congressional seat. That happened in 1916. Willner insists that knowing the Kentucky Capitol wasn't designed for women gives her extra impetus to stand up and make herself heard. 'This building was not designed for me,' she said. 'Well, guess what? I'm here.' ___ Associated Press writer Brian Witte in Annapolis, Maryland, contributed. ____ The Associated Press' women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from Pivotal Ventures. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at . Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Washington Post
4 hours ago
- Washington Post
Taiwan votes to decide whether to oust lawmakers from China-friendly party in closely watched poll
HONG KONG — Taiwanese were voting Saturday to determine whether to oust about one-fifth of their lawmakers, all from the opposition Nationalist Party, in elections that could potentially reshape the power balance in the self-ruled island's legislature. The independence-leaning ruling Democratic Progressive Party won last year's presidential election , but the China-friendly Nationalists, also known as the KMT, and the smaller Taiwan People's Party have enough seats to form a majority bloc.
