NVR Logo
Schwarzenegger: Layoffs if no budget by Friday
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Save and Share Share
12:30 p.m.SACRAMENTO — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s administration warned Tuesday that it will begin proceedings to lay off thousands of state workers if the governor and legislative leaders do not reach a budget deal by Friday.

Notices would go to employees with the least seniority in the state’s corrections and health and human services departments, as well as all other agencies that receive money from the state’s general fund, said Schwarzenegger’s communications director, Matt David.
The move is part of the governor’s order to cut 10 percent from the government payroll as California faces a $42 billion deficit through June 2010.

“This is simply a matter of needing to realize savings and running out of time to do that,” David said.
The governor’s proposal to balance the budget through a mix of spending cuts and tax increases assumed the fix would be enacted by Feb. 1, but he has been unable to reach a compromise with lawmakers after weeks of meetings.

“We’re losing savings the longer we go into February,” David said. “We’re at the point where time’s up.”
Administration officials are seeking to eliminate up to 10,000 jobs. Because of seniority and so-called bumping rights, however, they will need to send about 20,000 layoff notices.

They project $150 million in savings through the end of the 2009-2010 fiscal year.

Under labor agreements, the procedure to lay off a large number of state workers takes about six months, said Lynelle Jolley, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Personnel Administration, which oversees employee pay and benefits.

She said employees first receive a type of pre-layoff warning that gives them 120 days’ notice.

“It gives the employee the opportunity to shop for other state jobs that they will be given preference for, compared to a non-state employee or even another state employee,” Jolley said.

Employees who receive a notice will have a chance to transfer to other branches of state government that are not paid through the general fund.

Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear said the first notices will be sent Friday if a deal is not reached by then, although he characterized ongoing budget talks as encouraging.

“It’s not a threat. This is not a tactic. It’s a necessity. The state is starting to run out of money. The governor has very few options that he can take to unilaterally cut back on state spending,” McLear said.

Schwarzenegger has the authority to start the layoffs under an executive order he issued in December, in which he also ordered the first furloughs in state history.

Some 200,000 state workers were forced to take last Friday off without pay, as part of twice-a-month furloughs Schwarzenegger ordered to save money. The furloughs amount to a 9.2 percent pay cut for affected employees.

The administration also wants to eliminate two of the 14 paid holidays state employees get each year, a move it estimates would save about $75 million through June 2010.

Lance Corcoran, a spokesman for the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, which represents most prison guards, said mass layoffs would hurt the state economically without solving California’s budget woes.

“Wholesale layoffs is a drop in the bucket with respect to the state’s overall fiscal problem,” Corcoran said. “Even with a 10 percent reduction in pay, state employees are only one 40th of the problem.”

California has issued mass layoff notices because of precarious financial conditions before.

In summer 2003, then-Gov. Gray Davis issued about 16,000 surplus notices, or pre-layoff notices, Jolley said.

In the end, lawmakers agreed to cut 9,300 state government positions when they finally reached a budget accord. Most were vacant at the time, so about 1,200 people lost their jobs or were demoted, she said.

Schwarzenegger and lawmakers are approaching the 100th day since the governor called the special session to deal with the state’s fiscal crisis.

Republican legislators remain opposed to tax increases, while Democrats are trying to preserve as much education and social service funding as possible.

———

Associated Press Writer Judy Lin contributed to this report.

 
30 comment(s)

TINAMAC wrote on Feb 10, 2009 1:08 PM:

" I'm not trying to be sarcastic I really can't remember details...

can someone refresh my memory why Gray Davis was voted out? impeached or whatever happened there...

I just can't remember getting an IOU when he was in office... "

antipc wrote on Feb 10, 2009 1:14 PM:

" About time the public sector experiences what the private sector has been experiencing. "

y2kcbr wrote on Feb 10, 2009 1:29 PM:

" antipc -
Just to let you in on a few things. There will be a ripple effect if State employees are laid off. Just as there is a ripple effect when private sector people are laid off. "

dellasumbrella wrote on Feb 10, 2009 1:31 PM:

" Tinamac: He was blamed for the budget crisis which was not really caused by him, but was rather a slump exacerbated by Enron fraud resulting from deregulation. The voters though it would be a good idea to put in an actor with a lot of muscle, because when in doubt, voters go for pzazzz.

Clearly, what we needed was not a Terminator.

I'm a broken record on this, but it didn't help that the new gov decided budget difficulties warranted a roll-back of the car tax, in defiance of legislation setting it at 2%, to be cut only in times of economic well-being. "

dellasumbrella wrote on Feb 10, 2009 1:32 PM:

" Yes, antipc, isn't it wonderful that more people will lose jobs? That just puts the icing on the cake, huh? "

JimClark wrote on Feb 10, 2009 1:38 PM:

" I want to know where these "layoffs" are going to place and who will be layed off? The front line employees really make things happen. It ispeple like Mr. Long and myiad other bureaucrats that won't hurt the services to The People of California.

Believe me the services would be much better without desk jockeys. "

angrytoo wrote on Feb 10, 2009 1:49 PM:

" Can we lay off the Governator?? He seems to be costing us the most money. "

kbc wrote on Feb 10, 2009 2:32 PM:

" PLEASE start with the legislative branch of the government - they are way over staffed any way but no one ever touches them. "

cab e-girl wrote on Feb 10, 2009 2:38 PM:

" State lay offs are long overdue. Our state government has grown much faster than the private sector and is truly out of control. Arnold, for once is doing what he has to do to get government spending under control. Lay offs should not come from the front line, ie. teachers, firemen, highway patrol but from a long list of tired, overpaid bureaucrats who know how to milk the system. Lets hope that right people get a pink slip. "

Unclestuy wrote on Feb 10, 2009 2:44 PM:

" According to the radio report, it will start from lowest senority upward across the spectrum of employees. Obvisouly, we have a budget loophole here. I hope someone fixes this situation so that it does not happen again. KGO reported yesterday, 33% of the prision population are federal prisioners. The Feds are not paying us for taking care of their prisioners. One suggestions was to bus them to the nearest federal pen and drop them off with instrucions for the feds to taking care of them. So, good to me. "

Raven wrote on Feb 10, 2009 2:55 PM:

" cab-e-girl, this state has one of the lowest ratios of state and local government employees in the country according the the census brueau. California is among the lowest 5 in the country with a ration of about 104 per 10,000 residents. the national average is about 142. Even Texas has a higher ratio, at 120 per 10k. So, where do you want the layoffs to come from?

angry, laying off the governor was what happened with gray davis and got us the governator.

antipc, exactly what do you find so pleasurable about losing a job that makes you want more and more people to experience it? "

antipc wrote on Feb 10, 2009 3:44 PM:

" While I prefer the bureaucrats get the pink slips any & all cuts are welcome. Government at all levels is too big & too wasteful. Environmental agencies especially are too powerful & over-reaching. It's the size of government that created all the deficits.

The hope is, being forced to make cuts lets the bureaucrats know that they are not in charge & that changes need to be made. The economy grows & shrinks, up until now government has only grown. It's true that everyone is expendable & people that receive a pay check via my taxes are no exception. Enough of the right cuts will get us back on track. "

dellasumbrella wrote on Feb 10, 2009 4:09 PM:

" Everyone is expendable?!

Cool!

That takes care of a lot of problems, then. "

Rob C wrote on Feb 10, 2009 6:41 PM:

" The above inference that the CCSCE (Center for Continuing Study of the CA Economy) provides in the #'s is that we are somehow deficient b/c of our state employee-to-population ratios. (Those stats also include education employees in the tally.)

Remember that CA has the largest population in the US, nearly 13 million more than the closest state, TX. So one would expect some "economy of scale" to come into play and that naturally the ratio per 10,000 would drop.

Additionally, Stephen Levy - principal of the CCSCE for many years uses that argument routinely in support of his position advocating higher taxes on Californians.

Always a story behind the numbers, you know. "

Paddy wrote on Feb 10, 2009 6:44 PM:

" Most companies are laying of 10% or more of their employees. The state should be no different. I hope they take a hard look before they do and find a way to make this government downsizing a permanent situation. Start with Jerry Brown and gut the attorney general's office. "

db76 wrote on Feb 10, 2009 7:01 PM:

" How nice. The great state of California is going to layoff hard-working American citizens before 86′ing programs that supplement people that don’t belong in this country to begin with. "

pinkflame wrote on Feb 10, 2009 8:37 PM:

" I regret ever paying to see any of his movies in the theaters because now he takes 9.23% of my money and is threatening to take my job. Fire season is coming and I dont think he realizes the impact of knocking out 10% + of the Cal Fire staff. All that means is overtime for the people that are left OR watch CA burn. "

Raven wrote on Feb 10, 2009 9:26 PM:

" actually Rob, if you are talking about the numbers I used, they come from the statical abstract of the United States, put together by the census bureau and do not include education employees....but if you do include them CA still is in the bottom of the list at 124 per 10k.

and how does one get an economy of scale in hiring clerks? "

Rob C wrote on Feb 11, 2009 8:45 AM:

" Regardless, the inference is that b/c we rank lower we are deficient and raising taxes is the solution.

As far as scale, "clerks" is a reductionist argument. For example, many services and business dealings (DMV, applications, etc.) will increasingly move to web-self service.
In this structure a single employee can manage larger amounts of population simply through automation. More bodies in remote outposts manually servicing large populations doesn't need to be the answer, and only adds to overhead future-expense (benefits, salary, etc.) pressure.

The answer for the future lies in these approaches, not endless funding for the "old California".

Of course if we want to flatten the tax structure, bring all those who don't pay any taxes into a new plan that includes their contributions from say, a flat consumption tax, then by all means, let's get that ratio down. "

dellasumbrella wrote on Feb 11, 2009 9:16 AM:

" Well, some schools are starting to lay off teachers before the Friday showdown, so that should help us all have a brighter future, with lower taxes & all and plenty of opportunity to buy that new flat screen TV or the RV you've always wanted! Yeeeha!

All we can hope is that the national stimulus package still has a little money left for the states and still has provisions for training and work on jobs for the future, including opportunities for teachers. "

napaparent wrote on Feb 11, 2009 9:33 AM:

" Cab-e-girl--where the heck do you get your numbers! My god--there are staffing shortages at ALL institutions etc--as one reader pointed out--we have the lowest state worker ratio in the nation--we are (for the most part) efficient! Now what? How will the public be served? We are not a private business selling a product... "

36213621dp wrote on Feb 11, 2009 10:30 AM:

" What nobody wants to admit is that when the economy is doing well we sign outrageous union contracts that we can not maintain when the economy has a downturn. I feel bad for state employees but then again they receive benefits and pensions that the private sector has to pay for but the people working in the private sector will never get benefits or pensions anywhere close to the ones state employess receive. Its time to get rid of the unions and state employees take responsibility for there own retirements and benefits the way the private sector does. "

5th generation napan wrote on Feb 11, 2009 11:29 AM:

" Sorry if I am not totally in tune with all the stats and numbers. BUT, please tell me how many, State, and Federal, Legislators have a business background? Even basic accounting? I'm sure they have "staff telling them what to do", but really. None of congress, the lesgislature, or govenors, even "the pres" really have a financial background. The govenator at least is a self made millionair and knows how to run a company and I think he is trying to make sound fincancial decisions. I also remember Davis's car registration went from $300 for my two cars to over $1200 per year. And they were 15 year old cars. We need to cut the political garbage and find sound solutions for every one, not just continuing the good old boy network that got us into this mess. "

dellasumbrella wrote on Feb 11, 2009 11:52 AM:

" Those must have been some high-end 15-yr-old cars!

I think mine might have been about $150 some when it was new, with the higher tax, and now is 8 yrs. old and with the rollback is $90/year.

It's kind of like sales tax -- a flat tax, but the more expensive car you can afford, the more you can afford to pay in tax. Truth be told, I can afford the $150. "

Cadence wrote on Feb 11, 2009 12:08 PM:

" I believe the state is happy to accept donations to its general fund. The state's reducing vehicle registration fees in no way precludes any of you who find a higher fee no problem from donating that higher fee to the general fund. I think you'll get a tax write-off, too. "

5th generation napan wrote on Feb 11, 2009 12:15 PM:

" Sorry it was 3 cars. 1986 S-10 blazer, a 1983 honda civic, and a 1969 for F-100 Pick up truck, and it would have been hard to pay that price, which totalled to about $1,200. I remember it very well. The 69 pu went from $35 to over $175! "

pinkflame wrote on Feb 11, 2009 1:42 PM:

" "Clerks" will be a position that will never be completely automated due to the hundreds of variables involved in even simple transactions. As a former DMV employee I can attest to their fear of technology and automation of services. There will always be people that prefer to deal with a person and not a computer. "

Rob C wrote on Feb 11, 2009 4:14 PM:

" Then why are ATM's ubiquitous and bank tellers in steep decline?

I thought with a computer in every classroom and net neutrality, all walks of life will be cruising the information highway full speed ahead... "

dellasumbrella wrote on Feb 12, 2009 10:10 AM:

" Cadence -- Okay, I set myself up for that. But let's get real here -- If I really thought the individual contribution I might make to the state for my car would make a difference, I'd do it. But it only makes a difference if everyone does it.

Many of us already contribute voluntarily (to the nonprofits that do the work the government can't and the private sector won't). And I already pay upward of 35% of my meager income in taxes because of self-employment tax. I know, don't I wish I had contributed that to a private investment retirement account instead? Hah! I've lost over 1/3 of the little bit I had invested there. But if I were to voluntarily contribute more, I'd want to know it was matched in kind by my fellow citizens. "

voter1944 wrote on Feb 15, 2009 10:36 AM:

" I don’t understand why the state legislature can’t come up with a budget. They seem so inept to me. "

Comment Guidelines
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy