Suspension should mean “No Pay”
There is a “judge” who is not allowed to sit on the bench, but is currently collecting wages. Guess who is paying for her “vacation”?
Why should someone who is not doing their job be given pay?
In the normal work force if someone is on “suspension” they do not get paid. If that suspension doesn’t hold and they get their job back they also get their back-pay. But in the beauracracy of government when an employee, (police officer, judge, councilperson, etc.) gets suspension they continue to receive pay. That might seem fair until you realize that the pay comes from our taxes, not a private company. We wind up paying people to “sit on their asses” while they get investigated. Is it fair for an officer to be penalized without pay while a board of review checks on the circumstances of a shooting? Probably not, but is it fair that we, the tax payer, must pay the wages of an abnormaly hugh woman with a terrible attitude who has done nothing positive in her position as judge (which lasted less than her campaign) and who is now challenging the same legal system that she promised to support?
Unfortunately, if people like her are allowed to receive pay while they wait out their term of office, then the system is wrong. If a police officer is under questioning for a shooting, the period of time that they undergo the procedure is, at the most several weeks, but in the case of this judge it has been many months.
I don’t feel that is fair to me and you, we are the taxpayer, not “Daddy Warbucks”