Editor’s note: Staffing shortages, burnout, low pay and declining morale are often discussed as separate challenges in corrections. In reality, they are symptoms of a deeper leadership crisis. In this excerpt from “The Crisis Behind the Walls,” veteran corrections leader Bob Bramblet examines the systemic issues driving turnover and disengagement in local detention facilities, from chronic understaffing and inadequate compensation to toxic leadership and neglected employee wellness. Drawing on decades of experience, Bramblet offers practical strategies for building trust, strengthening morale and creating healthier, more resilient correctional organizations. Order your copy here.
Adequate pay
Inadequate compensation for corrections officers is a pervasive and long-standing issue across many state and federal prison systems, which contributes significantly to severe understaffing, high turnover rates, increased mandatory overtime, and compromised safety for both officers and inmates. While there is a lack of solid research on local agencies compared to state prison systems, one could surmise the issue is comparable.
In many jurisdictions, the starting and average pay for correctional officers is not competitive with other law enforcement roles or even other industries, especially when considering the demanding and dangerous nature of the job. Low pay is consistently cited as a top reason for officers leaving the profession, leading to chronic staff shortages. This results in a cycle where remaining officers are forced to work excessive mandatory overtime to cover shifts.
| RELATED: Veteran corrections leader releases book series focused on officer development
Officers often rely on significant overtime pay to supplement their low base wages. However, demanding 16-hour or even 24-hour shifts, sometimes for several days in a row, lead to extreme exhaustion, burnout, and poor work-life balance, which further drives people to quit.
Corrections work often lacks the high status and public support that other law enforcement professionals receive, which can impact morale and make recruitment efforts more difficult. Some federal agencies, such as the Federal Bureau of Prisons, have faced budget shortfalls that resulted in the reduction or elimination of critical retention incentives, further exacerbating staffing issues.
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics lists the median annual salary in 2023 for Police and Sheriff’s Patrol Officers at $76,550. The median annual salary in 2023 for Correctional Officers and Jailers is $53,290. Police officers consistently earn a higher median salary, with a difference of over $20,000 annually at the national median level. This gap often exists despite similar basic training requirements and the high-risk nature of corrections work. While experience increases pay, the ceiling for correctional officers is often lower than for other law enforcement roles, which limits long-term earning potential.
Local agencies can offer better pay for corrections officers by securing targeted funding, implementing performance-based incentives, and restructuring their overall compensation and benefits packages to be more competitive. Sounds easy, right? Obviously, it’s much more complicated.
How can local agencies provide better compensation for corrections officers? It takes a lot of work and thinking outside the box. One solution can be state and federal grants. Local agencies can pursue federal assistance from sources like the Bureau of Justice Assistance to fund various programs, including those that may indirectly free up local funds for salaries or offer direct salary assistance for fiscally constrained counties.
Local leaders can go to the source. Agencies can work with state lawmakers to secure dedicated budget appropriations for salary increases, as seen in Utah and Florida, where state legislatures approved significant pay hikes and bonuses to combat staffing shortages.
Another possible source of revenue can come from an existing budget. Funds can sometimes be reallocated from other areas, such as using savings from closing underutilized facilities or dorms to fund pay raises, as the Florida Department of Corrections did in 2024.
Some local agencies may have the ability to leverage special taxes. The ability to offer competitive pay often depends on the local tax base. Agencies in areas with strong commerce and tourism often have more revenue available for better compensation packages.
There are non-monetary benefits that can go a long way to improve employee morale. Offering robust health insurance, strong retirement benefits (pension plans), and tuition assistance can enhance the total compensation package even if the base salary is constrained. Adequate compensation doesn’t always mean more money. Fringe benefits can help overcome much of any gaps in salaries, especially for frontline supervisors.
Offering clear career advancement opportunities and specialized training programs can improve morale and retention, making the job more of a career than a temporary stepping stone. Focusing on staff wellness, providing mental health support, and reducing mandatory overtime can create a more supportive and less grueling work environment, which is a strong predictor of staff retention, sometimes even more so than salary levels alone.
The hidden cost of fiscal conservatism
The argument for maintaining low wages in corrections often rests on a narrow definition of “fiscal responsibility.” However, this perspective ignores the staggering indirect costs associated with high turnover. Every time an officer quits, the agency loses the thousands of dollars invested in their background checks, academy training, and uniforms. When you multiply this by a 30% or 40% annual turnover rate — common in many underfunded facilities — the “savings” from low base salaries vanish, replaced by a constant, expensive cycle of recruitment and training that never yields a stable workforce.
Furthermore, the reliance on mandatory overtime as a “cheaper” alternative to hiring more staff is a dangerous mathematical fallacy. Overtime is typically paid at 1.5 times the base rate. When an agency is so short-staffed that it pays out millions in overtime annually, it is effectively paying for a full staff but receiving only a fraction of the performance. An exhausted officer working their 60th hour of the week is statistically more likely to make errors in judgment, fail to follow safety protocols, or require medical leave for stress-related illnesses — all of which generate further costs for the county or state.
The “step-child” of public safety
A significant hurdle in securing better compensation is the perception of corrections within the broader public safety hierarchy. While police officers are often viewed through a lens of heroism and community protection, correctional officers are frequently hidden from public view, their work misunderstood as mere “key-turning.” This lack of visibility translates into a lack of political capital. When local budgets are tight, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the police department or fire service typically has more public vocal support than the local jail.
This cultural disparity creates a “brain drain” where highly qualified candidates use corrections as a temporary stepping stone. They enter the system, gain basic law enforcement experience, and then immediately lateral to a police department the moment a higher-paying slot opens. To combat this, agencies must reframe corrections as a specialized field of human management and behavioral health. Compensation must reflect the fact that these officers are expected to be de facto mental health first responders, mediators, and crisis managers within a volatile environment.
The path forward: Beyond the base pay
While increasing the base salary is the most direct solution, true institutional stability requires a “Total Rewards” strategy. This means looking at the officer as a long-term asset rather than a shift-filler. Some innovative jurisdictions are experimenting with hazardous duty pay tiers or longevity bonuses that kick in at the 5-, 10-, and 15-year marks to incentivize those with the most experience to stay. Others are exploring housing stipends, particularly in high-cost-of-living areas where an officer’s salary might not even cover a local apartment.
Ultimately, the compensation crisis in corrections is a reflection of how much a society values the safety of its institutions. If we continue to underpay the people tasked with maintaining order in our most difficult environments, we shouldn’t be surprised when those environments become unmanageable. Competitive pay isn’t just a benefit for the officer; it is a foundational requirement for a humane and functional justice system.
Read more from Bob Bramblet: County jail morale is collapsing and leaders must act