In California City, Layoffs for Nearly Half the Staff

04SCTLS

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
3,188
Reaction score
7
Location
Lockport
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/us/25layoffs.html?_r=1&hp

COSTA MESA, Calif. —To solve a looming pension crisis and budget gap, city officials said, they needed to take drastic action. Now everyone agrees on one thing: they did.
Nearly half of this city’s workers were told late last week that, come September, they would probably be out of a job. Nearly every city department will be eliminated. More than a dozen tasks will be outsourced, including graffiti removal, firefighting, building maintenance and street cleaning.

Unlike the drama that played out over several months in Madison, Wis., the battle over public workers in this bustling suburb of upscale shopping malls in the heart of Orange County is happening at lightning speed.
The letters went out last week to more than 200 of the city’s roughly 450 workers, sending many into a panic as they scurried to look for new jobs. The move will, in one great swoop, reinvent municipal government here, and perhaps lead the way for other cities to adopt similar plans.
Emotions in Costa Mesa, already running high, grew more intense after one city worker, summoned to receive his pink slip, instead climbed five stories to the roof of City Hall and jumped to his death. A small side entrance to the building is now decorated with supermarket bouquets and tall, white candles, a memorial to the 29-year-old man, who had worked for the city’s maintenance department for four years.

The layoffs have deeply divided this small city, just over the coast from affluent Newport Beach. While Costa Mesa has long been a politically conservative enclave, much like the other wealthy suburbs that surround it, the move to privatize so many city services strikes many residents as a harsh political tactic, meant to remake the city into a national model in the battle over public employee unions.

But the City Council, which moved quickly to approve the outsourcing and layoff plans, says the layoffs are the only way to solve a budget gap of as much as $15 million next year and deal with pensions that grow exponentially each year, eating away at the city’s $93 million budget.
“We see the train wreck coming and the only questions are how bad it will be and how quickly we want to try to stop it,” said City Councilman Jim Righeimer, who has led the push for outsourcing and has battled with public employee unions for years. “We have to stop blaming other people and start to solve these problems ourselves. These are hardworking people, but we know we cannot afford to keep paying what we have been.”

This is the Wisconsin labor battle in miniature — union officials and opponents of the layoffs say it is politics and not money that is driving the decision. City officials say they do not know how much money they will save by outsourcing, although Mr. Righeimer said he expected to cut anywhere from 15 to 40 percent in labor costs.
Mr. Righeimer, a real estate developer, has been a vocal irritant to unions for years, and he fought a bruising battle against them in his first bid for the City Council here last fall. But few here seemed prepared for him to push such wholesale change so quickly. Several community leaders called this week for the city to rescind the layoff notices, although there were few signs that officials would back down.

“They should have been thinking from the very beginning what kind of cost saving they were going to get before doing this — not tell us now. ‘You don’t have a job, and we’ll get back to you later if we change our mind,’ “ said Helen Nenadal, who has worked in the city’s maintenance department for more than 30 years and who now believes the city will not back down on the plan. “They are on their mission,” she said.
City officials say the services could be outsourced to a mix of private firms and other municipal governments. The county’s fire department has indicated that it would be willing to take over the firefighting duties in Costa Mesa, as it has for other cities. The department said it could cover the city with 15 fewer firefighters, Mr. Righeimer said.
City officials have not ruled out outsourcing the police as well, one of the only city departments not included in this first round of layoffs. Although other employees, like city planners and engineers, may have avoided the pink slips for now, few feel confident that they will not be laid off later, what with a team of consultants considering cost savings in the entire city.

Wendy Leece, the only one of the five City Council members to vote against the layoffs, said her colleagues were acting “recklessly.”
“We’re a nice, safe and clean city, and we need to make sure we stay that way,” Ms. Leece said. “I’m a lifelong Republican — nobody can out-Republican me. But I think we also need to be conservative on the front end and not rush into something that is going to alienate all our employees.”
“The sky isn’t falling,” she added, “but there is a real effort by some to exaggerate the crisis.”
The city has already been through a round of cuts. Last year, it eliminated or reduced the hours for 77 employees and cut programs. Tom Hatch, the city’s chief executive, said the city currently had the same number of staff members as it did in 1985, “with a much higher demand of services.” And employees have offered some concessions, including paying more toward pensions.
But because so much of the city’s budget goes to paying salaries and benefits, there has been less money to spend on needed city services. Roads have gone unrepaired for too long and it has been years since there has been enough money to buy fertilizer for city parks, said Stephen Mensinger, who was appointed to the city council this year and is backing the outsourcing plan.
“At some point we don’t have money for anything else except for labor,” Mr. Mensinger said. “That can’t go on. We’re not a poor town, but we’ve been spending money without regard to whether it’s for the best possible services at the lowest possible price.”

________________________________________________________

Starting to run out of other people's money?
 
Ohio's Governor Moves Against Unions

Ohio's Governor Moves Against Unions

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...8701704322310.html?mod=WSJ_hps_editorsPicks_3

The reform goes further than Wisconsin's.


By KARL ROVE

For weeks, the nation's attention has been drawn to the storm in Madison over Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's proposal to limit the power of government unions. Yet 500 miles to the southeast, in Columbus, Ohio, Gov. John Kasich is on the verge of passing a more extensive reform.
Under the Ohio bill, government workers can only bargain for pay increases based on merit and performance, not years of service. Wisconsin's law allows workers to negotiate wage increases on seniority, but it limits increases to inflation. Anything more would require voter approval.
Ohio would limit bargaining on health insurance and reduce sick leave and holidays to what's allowed for nonunion government employees. Wisconsin has no similar provision.

Public employees in Ohio wouldn't be able to negotiate on hours, discipline issues, transfers, equipment and outsourcing of services, staffing levels, and teacher-student ratios—all areas Wisconsin's law doesn't address. Police, firefighters and other public safety personnel would be covered by Ohio's law. They are exempt in Wisconsin.

Ohio also ends binding arbitration to settle contract disputes. Unions like arbitration because it takes power away from elected legislatures, city councils and country commissions. Wisconsin allows binding arbitration for local and county employees.

Finally, Ohio would broaden its current ban on strikes by police and firefighters to cover all government workers—as is already the case in Wisconsin.

Both sets of reforms give local and state governments flexibility to deal with budget shortfalls and looming deficits, rein in unfunded pension liabilities, return control of personnel policies to elected officials, and end counterproductive workplace practices demanded by unions. Yet all in all, labor law experts consider Ohio's new law stronger, broader and more wide-ranging than Wisconsin's.

Why then so much attention to events in the Badger State and so little to those in the Buckeye State? The most likely reason is that legislation began moving in Wisconsin first. Once the media had deployed to Madison, they didn't have reporters, cameramen and television time to open a second front in Columbus. It was also costly for unions to bus in protesters and put on rallies in Madison. Similar protests in Columbus would have drawn much less attention while doubling expenses.

Wisconsin has a longer, larger and apparently louder tradition of liberal and union activism than does Ohio. While both state capitals are more liberal than the rest of their states, Dane County, Wis., went for Mr. Obama with 73% while Franklin County, Ohio gave him 59%. And the University of Wisconsin-Madison is more liberal than The Ohio State University in Columbus, making it easier to recruit college-student demonstrators.
Finally, the rules of Wisconsin's legislature require a supermajority of members to be present for votes on spending bills, allowing the state Senate Democratic minority to temporarily halt legislative action by high-tailing it for Illinois. Mr. Walker removed the labor union provisions from the spending bill, allowing it to move forward in spite of the Democratic legislators' absence. The Ohio legislature can pass a bill with a simple majority of legislators present.

By taking on the tough fight first, Wisconsin's governor drew fire away from similar reform efforts in Ohio, as well as Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Tennessee and other states. For that, many governors, state legislatures—and taxpayers—are in Scott Walker's debt.

That may be cold comfort to Wisconsin's young reformist governor. He has been vilified by mobs, had his family threatened, and had his policies distorted by President Barack Obama—all because he was the governor of a state where the labor movement decided to make something of a last stand.

But the union movement has been bleeding members for decades, and its appeal is dimming. In a March 11 poll, Gallup asked "what word or phrase comes to mind when you think of labor unions?" Thirty-four percent said "positive," 38% said "negative." Overall, Gallup said, this was a "less positive picture" than it found last summer—when approval of unions dipped to the second-lowest level since 1930. Unions have become just another unpopular special-interest group.

In attempting to re-energize itself by battling in Madison, the labor movement is making itself appear weaker and more thuggish than before. Scott Walker didn't expect this fight, but he is winning it. He absorbed body blows in the process, as strong and effective leaders do. The lasting damage has not been done to Mr. Walker but to the labor movement, whose desperation grows as its power, numbers and reputation wane.

Mr. Rove is the former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush.

______________________________________________________________

An alterative approach to sending half the government workers home?

It's going to be an interesting run up to the 2012 federal election.
We'll see what happens with all these state government workers and how that plays out.
 
This is good news on both fronts. While the california deal does seem a little more rash, but the problem is everyone thinks we can just keep spending money and everything will be alright. I'm glad things are at least moving in the right direction.
 
I think it's better for morale to send half of them home and put the fear of God into the other half rather than having all of them all p!ssed off over cuts.

That gives us a chance to reinvent as more efficient the government services and the servants.
 
yay! get rid of the unions!!! :-D

No whips?
I thought it was she likes whips and chains:p:p
Got me under pressure.

Do I note a hint of sarcasm in your disingenuine cheers :rolleyes:
Didn't you want to work in the Fire Department?

This is what happens when bought politicians promise government workers other people's money that they are not accountable for and we're starting to run out of that.

It's come to this....as Allahpundit would say.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top