Recruiting and retaining young (under 40) magistrates continues to be a persistent challenge for the magistracy. My research at the University of Sheffield has examined the experiences of young magistrates through the lens of belonging. The Magistrates’ Association – specifically its young magistrates’ network – helped me find and contact participants.
About the research
The study was funded by the British Academy and Leverhulme Trust, and engaged with 23 magistrates under 40 years old to understand their experiences in a context in which they are perennially underrepresented.
During interviews, young magistrates reflected on how they experienced notions of belonging in the magistracy, both in positive and more challenging ways.
Young magistrates and belonging
Academic research across various disciplines, including psychology, sociology and political studies, has examined the concept of belonging. In my research, I consider belonging across three categories to examine young magistrates’ experiences: ideological, institutional and relational belonging.
Ideological belonging
Young magistrates in the research expressed views which align closely to the ideology of the magistracy more broadly. For instance, they repeatedly identified the importance of civic duty and volunteerism as a key part of their experience, often rejecting suggestions that the role of a magistrate should be salaried.
They also emphasised principles that run at the heart of the magistracy, such as procedural justice and magistrates being representative of their communities. In doing so, young magistrates recognised their own roles in delivering this, identifying this as a key attraction of the role.
“Hopefully, if [younger court users] see a younger face on the bench, maybe that will give them greater confidence that justice will be done.”
Young magistrates therefore feel a deep sense of ideological belonging, with their views aligning closely to the key principles of the magistracy. One way of interpreting this finding, is that the process of recruiting new magistrates is effective in identifying applicants whose values are well suited to those of the magistracy.
Institutional belonging
Young magistrates reported more challenging experiences with regard to procedural and other elements of the magistracy which impact their sense of belonging.
At a practical level, many young magistrates reported difficulties fitting their judicial duties around employment and caring responsibilities. They repeatedly expressed frustration that sitting schedules were inflexible and did not account for their needs.
“It’s just so frustrating sometimes… It just feels like a system that’s not built for people like me.”
Remuneration processes were described as inexorably slow and convoluted. The difficulty of claiming expenses was identified as a procedural issue which disproportionately impacts young magistrates who may have incurred financial losses including taking unpaid leave to attend court.
These experiences leave a lasting impression on young magistrates and some described feelings of ‘unbelonging,’ a sense that the magistracy’s systems and procedures are exclusionary and are not designed to account for their circumstances.
These procedural challenges were at times coupled with broader frustrations at the limitations of the criminal justice system, specifically financial restrictions. This at times left young magistrates feeling dismayed that their attempts to make a meaningful difference in people’s lives were limited.
“I do sit in court quite often and think, the court isn’t the right place for this person… And we know that they’re going to be back there because the underlying issues are not going to be resolved because there just isn’t enough money [for other disposals].”
Relational belonging
Young magistrates also reported mixed experiences with regard to relational belonging. This refers to their interactions with colleagues and the extent to which they felt a sense of belonging to the magistracy based on engaging with other (usually older) magistrates. In terms of good experiences, most participants reflected positively on their mentoring experiences.
“Luckily, I’ve got a very, very approachable mentor and [she] has been so amazing… She arranged for [our meeting] to be on a day when she was looking after her grandchildren. I could go over to her house, my [children] could play with her grandchildren, and we could actually have our session… Little things like that make such a difference.”
However, others described frustrating experiences in which their values clashed markedly against those of colleagues, frustrating their ambitions to have a meaningful impact on court users’ lives.
In some, thankfully rare, cases, young magistrates even described colleagues making negative comments about their age and raising doubts about their capacity to be magistrates due to being young.
“I’ve had people who won’t sit with me, refuse to talk to me, won’t take my opinion on board… You’re having to prove yourself.”
Encountering such attitudes from older and more experienced colleagues contributed not only to feelings of despondency but also damaged young magistrates’ sense of belonging. As a result, several young magistrates in the research described feeling constant pressure to ‘prove’ themselves to their colleagues, a sense that they needed to legitimise their presence on the bench.
Moving forward
Young magistrates offered several suggestions to overcome the issues discussed above. Though some of these may be more easily achievable than others, all suggestions were designed to improve the everyday experiences of magistrates and enhance the sense of belonging for young(er) magistrates.
- Offer half-day sittings to deliver flexibility to those with employment and caring responsibilities.
- Improve (and speed up) remuneration processes.
- Create ‘buddy’ systems for young magistrates of a similar age to connect with one another.
- Explore other ways of connecting young magistrates (for example: online communities).
Though some of the findings above may be challenging, a key message from all participants in the study was their close ideological alignment to the values and principles of the magistracy. This undoubtedly represents a strong foundation to build from.
