Dutch Judges Fight Gender Pay Gap After Discriminatory Salary Rulings

The College for Human Rights has ruled that the Dutch state discriminated against judge Achouak el Idrissi and three other judicial colleagues on the basis of gender regarding their salaries. El Idrissi discovered that two male colleagues were hired at a monthly salary 3,061 euros higher than her own, despite performing identical duties. While the board of the Amsterdam District Court previously stated they saw no problem with the pay gap, the College for Human Rights found the state’s reliance on flexible salary-setting powers within the law resulted in discriminatory outcomes.

How the Pay Gap Persists

The discrepancy originated from an older inschalingsmethodiek (salary-setting method) that based new hires’ pay on their previous earnings. According to the College for Human Rights, while judicial salaries are legally defined, the latitude allowed for deviations—often justified by a candidate’s background as a high-earning private sector attorney—created significant disparities. El Idrissi notes that this system penalizes judges who previously worked in lower-paid sectors like social advocacy, regardless of their experience. Although the system for new judges in training was modified as of July 1, 2023, these changes do not retroactively address the gaps experienced by current judges.

Did You Know? The salary-setting method based on previously earned income was a collective agreement between the Minister of Justice and Security and the Dutch Association for the Judiciary (NVvR) that remained in place from the 1990s until recently.

Stakes and Potential Consequences

The state and the Judiciary do not currently recognize the binding nature of the College for Human Rights’ rulings, as the body issues non-binding decisions. Consequently, the affected judges are seeking full compensation for the income they missed, which some estimate could reach up to 150,000 euros over a career. The government has made 5 million euros available for compensation, though judges involved in the case, including Linde Dolfing, have characterized this amount as insufficient given the scale of the lifetime losses reported by staff.

Expert Insight: The conflict highlights a systemic tension between the desire to recruit diverse professional backgrounds into the judiciary and the principle of equal pay for equal work. The refusal to implement a standardized, transparent pay scale for existing staff risks prolonged legal friction and potential morale issues within the court system.

What Happens Next

A possible next step involves ongoing discussions between the affected judges and the State Secretary of Justice, Claudia van Bruggen. The state has invited the judges to discuss the College for Human Rights’ findings and potential compensation strategies. However, El Idrissi and her colleagues remain skeptical of a swift resolution, noting that the court board, the Council for the Judiciary, and the Ministry of Justice have repeatedly referred to each other when asked to take responsibility for the issue. If these negotiations fail to provide a clear path to full compensation, further legal proceedings remain a likely path forward for the judges.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did the College for Human Rights rule this was discrimination?
The College determined that the state, which pays judicial salaries, allowed too much flexibility in how salaries were set. This flexibility resulted in female judges earning significantly less than male colleagues performing the same work.

Has the salary system changed?
Yes, the system for judges in training was adjusted on July 1, 2023, to align with new scientific insights and European directives on wage transparency. However, these adjustments do not apply to judges already employed under the previous system.

Is there a compensation package available?
The government has allocated 5 million euros for compensation. However, some involved judges have stated this amount is inadequate to cover the full extent of the financial losses incurred over their careers.

Do you believe that professional experience gained in lower-paid legal sectors should be weighted differently when determining judicial salaries?