Council approves one day off for every three working days for federal judges

The Federal Justice Council (CJF) confirmed this week the measure approved at the beginning of November that grants federal judges of the 1st and 2nd degree one day off for every three days of work. The measure is the first approved by Minister Luís Roberto Barroso in the management of the collegiate and is valid for magistrates who accumulate extraordinary administrative or procedural functions.

The resolution allows judges to receive a bonus for accumulating duties when performing additional administrative or procedural activities. Alternatively, judges can opt for proportional payment without hitting the salary cap for prosecutors and prosecutors.

These concessions apply even during the judiciary’s vacation period, which totals 60 days per year. The concession is limited to 10 days per month.

The resolution defines that the accumulation of extraordinary functions occurs in situations such as the coordination of conciliation and federal special courts in the 2nd instance, school management and judiciary and participation in court management councils.

Also planned are the activities of directing a judicial subsection or federal forum, coordinating conciliation and special courts in the judicial section and subsection, in addition to coordinating the Innovation Laboratory and the Local Intelligence Center.

Payments will be retroactive to October 23, the date on which the National Council of Justice (CNJ) approved a resolution that served as the basis for this decision. The measure, he says, seeks to equate the careers of the judiciary with the Union Public Ministry.

The CJF argues that the CNJ approved similar payments for prosecutors and prosecutors since the beginning of the year, justifying the approval for the judiciary. To date, no studies have been presented on the impact of these payments on the budget.

Regarding the resolution that ensures equality between the rights and duties of judges and members of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the CNJ explains that the 2011 measure, in force for 12 years, was unable to achieve equality in all courts, motivating the need to republish a new text.

Regarding the budgetary impact, the CNJ highlights that it is up to each court to analyze the local reality, without increasing the budget, as any comparison must be made with existing resources.