Final ruling: Schwarzenegger can order two furlough days a month

[shanti]

Source: Sacramento Bee

A Sacramento Superior Court Judge today ordered state Controller John Chiang to implement a Schwarzenegger administration plan to furlough state workers two days a month, resulting in a 10 percent pay cut.

Judge Patrick Marlette issued the ruling this morning, rejecting arguments by several state workers' unions that the governor's plan to save $1.3 billion with unpaid time off was illegal and unconstitutional.

*snip*

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/1583434.html?commentSort=TimeStampAscending&pageNum=3&&mi_pluck_action=page_nav#Comments_Container

[David Dunham]

1. Pretty fair compromise.

[montanto]

12. A compromise is something reached between parties

in dialog. I don't remember taking part in that discussion in any way. Arnold came to office with the promise that not only would all Californians have a "fantastic job" when he was in office, but that he would take care of the then budget crisis / deficit. He swept the crisis under the rug by refinancing the deficit. People not only didn't get their fantastic jobs but are now losing jobs quicker than ever. Now he is dictating that we take unpaid days per month. Now that's fantastic. When I come back from my days off the work will still be there.

My household relies on its two "state employee" wages at full strength. A ten percent cut means I can't pay something else and so the crisis continues to spread.

[Garbo 2004]

21. It's PR and politics...imagery. Savings not that great, and not in time for present issue....

which is a General Fund cash/flow problem.

Also, not all state employees are paid out of General Fund. Nevertheless those employees paid out of special fund revenues also will be furloughed.

Additionally, employees of elected constitutional officers such as the attorney general, treasurer, state controller, etc. will not be furloughed since their bosses said they wouldn't cut their pay. Gov's office admits he doesn't have that authority over employees of other constitutional officers. An analyst for EDD will be furloughed, an analyst for the DOJ will not be furloughed.

It's primarily a gesture for the public much more than a substantive step to remedying a current General Fund cash/flow problem and the savings to the General Fund will be a drop in the bucket compared to the magnitude of the General Fund deficit.

[Mz Pip]

2. I just hope this

includes our damn legislature. This damn stalemate has been going on for years. 2/3 majority needed to pass any budget and neither side seem to be willing to compromise.

Our state has been gerrymandered to the point that districts never change hands. Republicans can hold the state hostage and not have to worry about losing their seats.

California has become ungovernable.

[JDPriestly]

6. Neither side --- I think Democrats have already compromised

over and over. The problem is that we have to raise taxes here in California, and the Republican's winning election issue is that they have not raised them. Republicans know they will lose elections if they agree to tax hikes. There have been increases in fees, but the word "tax" is considered to be obscene in Republican circles.

You can only compromise on wages and health care for the poor and basic government services like public education to a certain extent. When it comes down to cutting the pay of state workers and making them cut services two days a week, we are well beyond compromise. I think there will have to be a stalemate and possibly a complete breakdown of government before Republicans get the reaction from voters that gives them the courage to raise taxes and move toward real compromise.

[Garbo 2004]

23. No it doesn't include the Legislature. n/t

[Piewhacket]

3. Troubling problem... not so clear legality..

its not so much the 10% across the board pay cut... although
high paid state executives, having ridden high on the recent bubble,
should lose a lot more than that... some positions should be cut.

Maybe it should have been a "rollback" rather than a straight cut.

But this is a civil service system, and some low level employees might
lose health care or pension benefits unless care is taken and
exceptions are made available.

[CountAllVotes]

5. this sucks!

I had a part-time job working for the State - my net paychecks were ~$700.00 a month after deductions which INCLUDED UNION DUES!

:argh:

[JDPriestly]

7. They should stop paying members of state commissions

that meet only once a month or so. The people on those commissions should work as volunteers. I hope Schwarzenegger is cutting the pay of his own staff first.

[Garbo 2004]

19. Should be no impact on health care benes or retirement for state civil svs employees.

Svs credit remains the same as before, not reduced by furlough. Salary rate is not changed & retirement calculated on salary before furlough pay reduction. Health care based on qualifying pay period which will not be impacted by furlough pay reduction.

[Piewhacket]

25. Who knows?

Its an emergency order from the Gov... yet he has
NO authority to change the civil service rules.

Judge Marlette signed the temporary order authorizing
furloughs on Thu on the basis of extraordinary circumstances,
a fiscal emergency, which might still be reviewed,
but where is the authoritative statement about how service
credit, health benefits, or pension benefits are affected?
do you have such knowledge/citations?

Swartznegger is becoming rather well known for his outrageous
political stunts and bullying, and more than a few regard the furlough plan
as another of these, unnecessary and not the proper focus of budget restraint.
Why should state workers ALONE bear the burden of a budget
shortfall.

Remember, State workers are still fuming over a Schwarzenegger
order last summer that sought to temporarily cut pay to the $6.55
federal minimum while lawmakers haggled over a budget.

Superintendent Jim Rex now wants districts to be able to lower some
salaries…and furlough teachers. K-12 education has lost more
than $334 million this past year. He wants lawmakers to give
districts more flexibility in how they spend state money.

Its about what it has always been about, the war on unions and schools.
Personally, I can thing of several excellent ways to acquire 15 billion
dollars for CA without touching state employees or teachers.
Alas, indiscriminate hanging of repukliens is probably against the law.
Alas.

[shanti]

27. btw, did you know

that marlette was appointed to this case AFTER the gropenfuhrer removed the original judge? there was never a chance that it was going to fail, he made sure of that! :grr: :mad:

[Garbo 2004]

29. Perhaps a technical point, but relevant: Gov didn't change civil svs rules.

Salaries for state civil service classifications have not changed. Furlough reduction in pay will be treated as a differential. Just as some civil service classifications get differential pay in addition to their regular base salary: salary for the class/individual remains the same, then the differential is added or in this case subtracted from the salary.

CA State employees have had temporary pay reductions before without furloughs, although in the past in exchange for a reduction in pay, employees were credited with leave time which could be used later. Again, svs credit, retirement, benes were not impacted. Health benefits are not based on pay so remained as before.

http://www.dpa.ca.gov/personnel-policies/furloughs/main.htm

I understand SEIU is trying to negotiate with the Administration to go back to something like the previous personal leave program...no furlough, 5% pay reduction with 1 day personal leave credit accrued in exchange. We'll see how that goes. I'm not particularly optimistic though.

As I said previously, this is more about public PR than something that will substantively address current cash/flow issues or the massive General Fund deficit. And of course in downtown Sacramento, for example, this will have an impact on local economy. Downtown Sacramento businesses will lose customers two days a month and some will just shut down on furlough days. And their employees also will lose income. Also, a resulting loss in local sales tax.

And while state employees are of course not happy about the furloughs and loss in income, typically the people who really get hit the hardest when the budget is cut (the budget is a political document of course, not just a state spending plan) are the most vulnerable in society and the programs that help them. It's happening right now with the cash/flow issue. IIRC a DUer recently posted about her(?) disability check being delayed, probably indefinitely. What the hell are these people supposed to do?

[Piewhacket]

36. Nice post and clarification.

The method of reductions must be carefully constructed. Are they?
We know one judge thinks so. we also know employees are not quite giving up
their general objections.

Yet whether part time employees might also have their benefits disproportionally, or
catastrophically (complete loss of health care) reduced is not entirely clear to outsiders.
It is the latter scenario that could produce the most serious controversy.

I suppose we must await further legal challenge. Meanwhile it goes into effect.
Yet if I hear of one employee losing health care because of the reduction,
I think I'm going to be politically very pissed off. I might even call the
governor a bad name.

[Garbo 2004]

40. Again, benes will not be reduced. They weren't reduced when state employees had a 5% temp cut yrs

ago. Base salary remains the same. Employer's retirement contribution for example is based on salary before furlough reduction. Health benes: An employee who has a half time or more time base receives health benefits. The furloughs aren't changing an employee's time base or the employer's contribution for health benes.

[Piewhacket]

41. Thanks.That seems to resolve some concerns.

I'm not really a fanatic about social justice.
I just prefer a society that has some concern for it.

But this economic crisis has shredded the social compact and
is dripping with its gore and blood. We are an inch
away from seeing some real gore and blood spilt. But for the
election of obama, the streets might already be running red.
People are touchy. And extra care must be taken as we
work out way forward.

There are various categories of employees. The higher paid employees
can more easily bear reductions, thus a uniform reduction, like a flat
tax, already disproportionately impacts the lower income folks.

If the reductions were to ADDITIONALLY cause disproportionate
effects on the most vulnerable employees , in the present
circumstances, and notwithstanding an emergency, that might
prove unacceptable to the point of a lynching.
Glad to hear that is sorted out it will not have such effect.

The governor and the state is in a tough spot. More difficulties ahead.
But I think most people have had enough of republican philosophy in
"solving" these problems and the situation is ripe for a more
progressive philosophy. Or perhaps we need the guillotine?
We might use it to reduce our dependence on the criminal class.

[roody]

37. There is plenty of money for anything to do with testing at schools.

[happygoluckytoyou]

4. how about ARNOLD throwing in 10% of all his MOVIE MONEY ? ? 'cause i know he feels our pain!!!!

[cobalt1999]

8. Better than laying a bunch of people off.

Everyone taking a little pain to avoid a layoffs is a good compromise.

[shanti]

9. yeah right

there will be layoffs too! all he said was that if there WEREN'T furloughs, there WOULD be layoffs. watch and see...:grr:

[Garbo 2004]

32. Individual state agencies aready have been reducing costs & positions, regardless

of the recent furlough issue.

To briefly elaborate but still boring you senseless no doubt ;) , CA state agencies have been called upon to reduce costs for some time and have done so. It's not just an issue that's just popped up now. Cutting positions/jobs is one way. Reducing general operating costs are another. Or a combination of the two. Those permanent employees who are in risk of lay off are put on lists and given preference for other state jobs. The idea is that rather than getting laid off perhaps you can get a job in another state agency. If there is an actual lay off of permanent staff in a state agency, people who get laid off get put on re-employment lists and have priority for other state service jobs. This has been an ongoing process and is not new.

Of course, there hasn't been a massive flood of state employees in such circumstances in recent memory. I recall, for example, when Deukmejian did away with Cal OSHA by cutting all funding for the program. (The laws remained on the books, but without funding and staff they could not be implemented.) Funding was eventually later restored for the program. But when the budget for the program was eliminated it was a matter of senority and scrambling for other jobs in state service to avoid being laid off. That's when I became interested in state funding and the state budget process. And I figured if the Personnel folks were among the last to go, it would be the Budget folks who would be the ones to turn off the lights if it came to that. If they were any good, that is. (It's a joke from experience. Sort of.)

Of course the Gov's threat is at this point IMO largely blustering for PR impact. (Not that I'd doubt that he'd do it.) But it's all been about PR. Since the Gov could cut funds resulting in a lay off of all state employees and that still wouldn't put that much of a dent in the General Fund deficit. And a considerable number of state employees are in a) revenue generating jobs and/or b) not general fund programs.

For one example, recently the CA Conservation Corps has been put on the chopping block as I understand. The CCC provides jobs for young folks and they help out, among other things, during fire season. Eliminating the CCC likely would result in increased costs for the state in the long run. And any savings from eliminating the CCC would be marginal. "Budget dust" as I recall one Dept of Finance person saying in another context in another long ago era. The system I mentioned above likely would result in placement of CCC permanent state employees within state service if there were a layoff situation, but the loss of the program would not benefit the state, the public, or local jurisdictions who avail themselves of the CCC's services. Not to mention the young folks who get to work for a few bucks while providing a public service.

It's a fucking mess. The Gov and the Legislature have dicked about for years. This was not unforeseen. And some (many) state employees really care about the services they provide, despite what the general public may think.

[Piewhacket]

10. Logic error: False dilemma.

1) this is a "let them eat cake" response.
this plan is like a sales tax, a "regressive" solution in which the low
level employees who can afford it least will bear greater, possibly catestrophic,
burdens that the high level decision makers only feel as a "little pain".

2) the logic error arises from imposing the false dilemma there are
no other alternatives. Such error approaches "blind repuklien stupidity"
when much fairer alternatives are in plain view.
Beware this trap, my DU friend.

Crisis should not be an excuse to push through simplistic solutions
to difficult problems. A leader who does so loses the moral and
leadership "high ground".

Arnold's solution will be implimented (unless a higher court intervenes).
The crisis is imminent, out of time. A budget compromise will be worked out.
Yet I smell traces of blood in the water on this, and if compromise is
not worked out and this simplistic plan continues for any time, the
political blood will start flowing very freely indeed.

[RobinA]

11. As a State Worker

in another state, I would prefer this than an actual pay cut or not getting a raise. A pay cut will be with you until the end of time. This way you get your full salary back as soon as the crisis passes. Plus days off for less money. Illegal? May be.

[marshall]

13. Will this include teachers?

Will it be the same two days for all state workers?

It's harsh, and I'm sure the governor has his fair share of the blame. But when the money isn't there it just isn't there. Regardless of whatever the reason is, something has to be cut.

[Garbo 2004]

20. No. Not teachers in local jurisdictions. Not universities, colleges. n/t

[Beaverhausen]

14. California court approves Schwarzenegger cuts

Source: yahoo

SAN FRANCISCO (AFP) – A California judge ruled Thursday that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger can close some state offices for two days each month from February as the state grapples with its spiraling budget deficit.

Unions representing state workers had gone to court to try to block the move, saying Schwarzenegger had exceeded his authority and that only state legislators could approve the cuts to the working week.

But Judge Patrick Marlette said the state's fiscal emergency justified the governor's executive order, which translates into a pay cut of around nine to 10 percent for affected workers.

Schwarzenegger had warned that he would be forced to fire workers if his plan was not approved by the courts.

"I cannot help but recognize the huge impact on state workers this will have to take this kind of hit in these economic times," the judge said. "I understand that it is huge and in a number of cases may even be devastating."

The cutbacks are scheduled to last until June 2010, and are expected to save the state 1.3 billion dollars.

Many of the state's 238,000 employees will be affected by the closing of their offices on the first and third Fridays of each month.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090129/ts_alt_afp/usfinancebudgetcalifornia_20090129204057

[nichomachus]

15. Well, this is sure to increase productivity

People always respond well to having money stolen from them by their bosses. Why doesn't Arnold fire the cronies he appointed to high-salary do-nothing jobs recently?

[Sequoia]

16. Way to go Arnie....you got rid of Davis 'cause you thougt you knew better.

Instead you ran our state into the ground, thereby terminating it to the bottom of the barrel. 47 in schools now, when we used to be #1 in the nation.

[Piewhacket]

24. I think CA was #3 before Reagan, I was there

then watched CA was plunge to the bottom under Reagan...

It was the single greatest catastrophe ever to befall
my state. Despite subsequent prosperity CA schools have remained
on the brink.. a disgrace to any educated person, a
disgrace to any forward looking person.

Yet teachers are still dedicated, students learn, but
some are necessarily marginalized... the schools continue
under a barrage of mortal economic and political assault.

I hope change has finally come to education, for what
we have is not enough.

[Sequoia]

26. Okay.

[THUNDER HANDS]

17. combined

like Danny Devito and the governator, these two threads were twins that had to joined together at some point. Thanks.

TR

[pinniped]

18. Since this asshole is looking to raise some money for our bankrupt state,....

he should look into raising car registration fees.

Wait, Herr Gropenasshole can't do that. It's what he promised to rollback during his stupid recall campaign bullshit.

[Garbo 2004]

22. As I recall, raising the reg fees is one of Arnie's proposals to raise revenue....

ironic, no?

[shanti]

28. UPDATE

http://sacbee.com/topstories/story/1587330.html?commentSort=TimeStampAscending&pageNum=1

Schwarzenegger says furloughs also apply to statewide officials
By Jon Ortiz
[e-mail]
Published: Friday, Jan. 30, 2009

Thousands of state workers who until now have been considered outside Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's furlough order are finding out that he wants to pull them in.

A Schwarzenegger spokesman told The Bee this afternoon that the governor has sent the necessary documents to the State Controller's Office to furlough employees of state constitutional officers beginning Feb. 6.

"Upon review of the court rulings, it's clear that the governor has the authority," said Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear. "We have called the constitutional officers to inform them."

The governor also sent "pay letters" to Controller John Chiang, one of the state's eight constitutional officers, authorizing furloughs and the attendant roughly 10 percent reduction in pay.

The affected offices are: attorney general/department of justice, superintendent of public instruction/department of education, state controller, state treasurer, secretary of state, lieutenant governor, and board of equalization.


talk about pouring kerosene on the fire - this is getting interesting.

[Garbo 2004]

30. Yeah. IIRC the Gov's Office previously said they didn't have authority over constitutional

officers' civil svs employees. Now they say they do.

[shanti]

31. he's using this

just like * did/is doing. you know that they are VERY interested in how this pans out. the gropenfuhrer wasn't installed for no reason. the tentacles run far and wide.

[One_Life_To_Give]

33. Beats Layoffs

Some sales jobs (electrronic components) are doing similar. Given the option I would rather see my employer give a few weeks a year off without pay than to just layoff more people.

[shanti]

34. the thing is...

he's going to layoff anyway, so those on the bottom are screwed coming and going. :(

[diamidue]

35. Not just the State

City and County offices around CA are also in the process of laying off or cutting hours of employees.

[Maine-ah]

38. What does Ahhhnold make a year?

has he himself taken a pay cut?

[fasttense]

39. He takes his pay and donates it to charity supposedly.

"Schwarzenegger does not accept his governor's salary of $175,000 per year, and instead donates it to charities."

I think California could be classified as a charity. He should turn his pay back to the state.