Skip to comments.The State Worker: Anger grows over pay, furloughs [Calif]
Posted on 07/16/2009 7:57:44 AM PDT by SmithL
Her speech last week used "fight" four times and "strike" just once, but that was enough to spark reports that Yvonne Walker, president of Service Employees International Union Local 1000, had called for a strike vote.
She didn't, but the speech did mark a new and tougher stance by the local and a perilous turn for the state's biggest public employee union.
"This week the Local 1000 council voted unanimously to authorize concerted actions up to and including a strike, if necessary," Walker said in the speech webcast to SEIU members last Thursday.
Catch that? "Union actions up to and including a strike."
Walker made her speech the same day that this column reported Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants a 5 percent across-the-board pay cut on top of the thrice-monthly "Furlough Fridays" he has ordered to narrow the state's $26.3 billion budget gap.
The furloughs equal roughly a 15 percent reduction in state workers' pay and save the government's payroll about $1.3 billion over 12 months. If lawmakers don't go along with the added pay cut, the governor could add a fourth Furlough Friday.
The news racheted up angst and anger among many of California's public servants. Soon after Walker's Thursday speech, an anonymous text message circulated, encouraging a sickout on the following Wednesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
All of you are going to be a lot angrier in a year or so. You can’t make people who have no money pay taxes they can’t pay to give you exhorbitant salaries you don’t deserve to sit around doing virtually nothing.
Government bow wows think we work for them.
Maybe it’s time for them to seek employment elsewhere.
How exactly can you tell if a union state employee is on strike? Drinking coffee and sitting on their butts outside the building?
If someone is so concerned about money, then why go on strike and make no money, especially in an economy in which it is so easy to find replacement workers no less?
California is in trouble because they did SEIU’s bidding, and they are angry about it?
Simple solution, the legislature either just makes it illegal for them to strike, or they can make California a right to work state and fire their butts!
Who will hire the unhirable; especially when overall jobs are contracting?
We had an agency inspector questions us about a 180% reduction in production after we shuttered a process. He backed it up with numbers.
This is why government employees should NOT be allowed to unionize.
There is an unfair advantage to public employee unions.
The tax payers do not get a say in setting their pay or working conditions.
It is too easy to “bribe” by way of campaign donations the legislature. Since the money for pay and benefits is not coming out of their pockets they (the legislature) has no incentive to keep control of either.
I am at the point of saying if public employees want to go on strike, go for it. I no longer care.
Service is usually bad now when ever you have to deal with a public employee so how much worse can it get?
this union has STRONG ties to ACORN and does Acorns rent a mob activities
Maybe they’d like to see a chart showing the decline in TAX revenues from the layoffs/firings/reduced pay coming from the PRIVATE sector and business moving out of California! You know, the revenues that pay their salaries.
Why are public employees allowed to join a union anyway?
When these people have been through the kind of layoff that is routine in Silicon Valley, I might lend an ear. They make more money than the private sector, they have better working conditions, they have massive retirements, not a few revel in the pleasure of visiting pain upon the public, they have plump healthcare policies, and are almost impossible to fire regardless of how incompetent, wicked, or malfeasant they might be...
...and they bitch when the system collapses under their fat asses.
It just breaks my heart; fire them all and start over. At this point, there is no other way to save this state, not just from insolvency, but from the damage they do.
[They intend to protest mandatory furloughs by taking voluntary furloughs?]
When in the path of lemmings, sometimes it’s best to just stand aside.
they do not have the spine to fire them. plus most state employees are minorities and will sue for discrimination.
So, not only did you stop assembling things, you started disassembling the things you had already made? :)
What’s that Beatles tune:
He’s a real nowhere man
Sitting in his nowhere land
Making all his nowhere plans
Fits, doncha think?
As a California resident, I have two things to say,
1) Let them strike.
2) Let the state go bankrupt.
That’s what he thought.
Like I said, he had numbers to back up his claim. Patiently, I showed him his error and sent him on his way. He was quite dejected because he really wanted to write us a citation.
Just keep voting communist and you can stop protesting.
Where these Democratic voters gonna go, to a red state? Arnie the RINO is on the right track, bleed these overpaid, over pensioned social worker do-harmers and their unions dry. Dems are in a pickle, cut welfare bennies, school bennies or pay for their hacks, or they gonna raise the taxes on their rich base?
Well, if they are unhappy with it they could always quit.
>> How exactly can you tell if a union state employee is on strike? Drinking coffee and sitting on their butts outside the building?
Yeah, pretty much “business as usual” except that the more ambitious ones will be holding a sign that says something that they didn’t have the brains to think up.
>> or they can make California a right to work state
HAHAHA! You funny. KALIFORNIA a right to work state? Stop it! I’m cryin’ here!
(Although I shouldn’t laugh too loud... Texas is being overrun with Yankees and Kalifornians even as we speak, bringing their union mentality with them. I wonder how long before they vote right-to-work OUT in our state...)
There is little doubt among non-government employee taxpayers that the "public servants" are delusional. They have special status and can demand to set their own salaries forever with no consequences.
This may be a good time to revisit the concept of "merit" raises (lacking any merit whatsoever) and "step" raises. Guess who dreamed that up? the unions...
The State chief executive executive can just do a "Reagan Flight Controllers" on their butts and fire them all.
Anyone really think that the state workers will be missed?
Anyone think there is now a shortage of workers ready and willing to replace them?
Which may be the best solution. The new workers, a year from now, will not be threatening to strike to "catch up" to all the money that was "taken away" from them during the 2008-2009 financial meltdown...
Things may have gotten a bit too thick this time for the usual rants, threats and complaints by those poor, mistreated union types. The public ain’t gonna listen.
False. They elect representatives who bargain collectively on their behalf.
What people seem to miss on these threads is that public employees are not indentured servants. Yes, they work for us, but people who tell others where to work and how much they make are not called bosses. They're called overseers, and we have one currently in the White House we have to get rid of.
Though I'm sure everyone on this thread wouldn't mind taking an involuntary 15 percent payback made necessary by the incompetence of others, right?
And don't bother calling me a liberal. I'm a former public servant who just lost his job yesterday.
Why didn't you also write to his boss and have his totally incompetent ass fired?
You can't furlough us, we strike!
The out of line salaries aren’t the killer. They can be bargained down possibly
The outlandish pensions and bennies and double dipping are the budget busters. Only bankruptcy can open up these contracts
Fired? Better he got a raise. Everytime I see him he knows I have the advantage.
His inspection visits are down to about 15 minutes, once a year. He goes over some paper, looks at the plant from my office door and leaves.
They can’t strike. They don’t have a strike clause in their contracts.
I don't how taxpayers can deal with these parasitic growths except through constitutional amendment. Unions are redundant in modern government. The public sector provides—by law—pay, benefits and job security exceeding what would be paid in the private workplace where profit governs.
The State people should all park their cars on the freeway, blocking traffic into Sacramento. That way the guy who works for that private company downtown won’t be able to get to his job.
I hope they strike and seal their fate.
The main problem with SEIU going on strike is who is going to notice? At least when our overpaid, underworked Pennsylvania Turnpike workers went on strike a few years ago, we got flat rates (and sometimes even free passage) and the satisfaction of honking at them at the turnpike entrances.
1) Let them strike.
2) Let the state go bankrupt.
As a California resident I’d add only one thing.
3) Fire them all and break the unions, then go bankrupt.
Reagan and PATCO was a textbook case of how these things should be handled: The PATCO employees who reported for work within the 48 hour deadline kept their jobs. Those who did not got their pink slips.
Reagan gave a number of great speaches in his career, but the brief explanation to the American people of his PATCO decision was one of the best in my opinion.
Other unions are agreeing to cuts, some a lot deeper than the 15%. Not to mention all us private sector, non-union types who have had our salaries whacked this year. Welcome to the real world, Local 1000.
“Though I’m sure everyone on this thread wouldn’t mind taking an involuntary 15 percent payback made necessary by the incompetence of others, right?”
That’s exactly what just happened at my private sector job and I’m glad to be working. I also had to lay off 2 people out of a team of 12 last week as well. Nobody wants to take a pay-cut, but what do you think raising my taxes to keep you working is for me, silly? You seem to want me to take the pay cut via higher taxes in order to avoid the same for you.
Us taxpayers simply can’t afford to keep state workers on the dole any longer. We do not get enough value for our money from them and its time to cut. Sorry, but things are tough all over.
Texas(the non desert part)is becoming subrubanized with chain stores, big box sellers, and strip malls, and liberal attitudes at an alarming rate.
I fear Texas is where California was in the 80’s. Remember that California was a conservative, rural, and dependably Republican state till the late 80’s. Both Nixon and Regan were from California.
If Texas flips to reliably democratic ... there is no hope for the United States. The electoral map would be titled forever to the democrats. The democrats could effectively ignore the “solid south” and impose their new communism on us all.
Well, your bitterness is understandable, since you actually believe that you have a rational series of arguments.
First of all, yes, we elect representatives who "bargain" on our behalf. Nice theory. How has that worked out? Would we be having this conversation if they had been minimally competent? They are perhaps collectively more ignorant and criminally bent than the average public employee. That system need to be not just "adjusted," but totally overhauled.
Your "indentured servant" argument is pathetic. Not a single "public employee" is forced to accept any conditions she does not like. She is free to leave any time she pleases. You must be using the "Socialist Dictionary" for your definitions.
The reasonable person very easily could extend that argument to the private sector, where the employee can be fired in days, or at the most weeks, where conditions demand it. The public sector is firmly in the grasp of the 20-80 rule; Twenty percent of the employees in any given office do 80% of the work.
I worked in a large "public" facility for 8 years. Long enough to be happy I did not work the first 36 years of my life as a "public employee." I saw it all. Some random examples:
An employee simply disappeared one day. Long story short--- it was 18 months before she was "officially" fired, tying up a supervisor's time a significant amount of his time doing the "paperwork" designed to protect the worker.
Another employee had a side business which he ran out of his "public employee office. Took 4 years to fire him...
Nor are "supervisors" and "overseers" any better, all the way to the top. I toured a project which had cost many millions$, but was abandoned in place after it was completed because it was too expensive to operate it. No one was fired; few people talk about it or even know about it. In private practice this is literally impossible.
The following scenario, which I witnessed personally, summarizes the pathology of the public employee, by the way of contrast.
I became friendly with one of the three owners of a large consulting firm (a few common interests and hobbies), so I had special status in approaching him. Another employee walked up to him and said,"I just passed my state registration exam; do I get a raise?"
The answer was immediate and deadpan: "Do you produce more billable work as a result?" Yes, the employee could simple move on, and eventually he did.
A State employee would have made a federal case out of it. Quite possibly literally.
I "lost" my job in the mini-recession of 1991, when the small firm I worked for was sold and the new owners "kept" their old employees. I had 5 other jobs before I retired, the last being with a public agency. But I have never walked a picket line, nor whined about my absolute right to be entitled to a job and to set my own salary.
Just curious as to how he backed it up with numbers. I am thinking that the process had to cause reductions in other processes. That is how the government views production, or should I say money circulation.
I don't know, sir. Who did you vote for?
Your assumption, like that of far too many others on this site, is that public employees exist to take two-hour lunch breaks and connive for extra time off. Sorry. I call BS on that sort of thinking.
The assumption is that public servants should simply sacrifice their dreams and the livelihoods they have tried to fashion for their families because they're all cheats. I call BS on that "argument" as well. Despite what you might think, and despite what you hear on this website, there are good and decent public servants all over this nation that work hard for the taxpayers who pay them.
Yep. Things are tough all over. I understand that first hand.
Neither did I, and neither have I. It is in fact quite difficult to be a conservative in that kind of environment. It's just that I read far too many opinions from people like you who evidently haven't served the public, and who simply assume that because I did, I'm out to suck on the public teat.
I am in fact looking for a job now. Who knows. I may get to serve you again.