As has been said above, having a job is better than the alternative. Just think if Arnie was to cut 10% of the government workforce.
mugs
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2003
- 48,920
- 46
- 91
This.
And at least they're getting the day off instead of having to continue working the same hours for less pay.
Forced unpaid furloughs is a tactic that a lot of companies are using to try to cut costs while preserving their workforce. The reality is that for most companies there is less work to be done when people aren't buying your stuff, but furloughs are better than layoffs because you don't have to hire more people when things improve.
I used to work at a company that developed some software, and some electronics hardware. It seemed to me that a company in that business, where you have to continually improve your products to maintain a competitive advantage, would have been better off spending money on internal investment in new products or enhancements rather than lay people off or force furloughs (both of which they did), but I guess they didn't see it that way (they weren't even losing money). Oh well, their stupidity led me to a new, much better opportunity.
Fern
Elite Member
- Sep 30, 2003
- 26,907
- 174
- 106
Seems pretty reasonable to me.
Where I live is only minimally affected (so far) by the economic downturn, except for real estate associated business. In those type busineses they are both laying off and cutting people to 4 day (8 hr) workweeks to try and keep as many people as possible on a payroll. That's a 20% cut, CA is only doing a 10%.
Closing for entire days is a good idea as well. Our county gov, while not laying anyone off, has been trying to get the offices closed 1 day a week (4 days at 10hrs) to save on utility costs (elec, heating & cooling) to save money. CA should have some nice saving for this also.
Should reduce gas costs/consumption a little as employees need 2 fewer trips to the office per month.
IMO, if the people CA governs need to cut back, then the CA gov itself needs to cut back.
Fern
Where I live is only minimally affected (so far) by the economic downturn, except for real estate associated business. In those type busineses they are both laying off and cutting people to 4 day (8 hr) workweeks to try and keep as many people as possible on a payroll. That's a 20% cut, CA is only doing a 10%.
Closing for entire days is a good idea as well. Our county gov, while not laying anyone off, has been trying to get the offices closed 1 day a week (4 days at 10hrs) to save on utility costs (elec, heating & cooling) to save money. CA should have some nice saving for this also.
Should reduce gas costs/consumption a little as employees need 2 fewer trips to the office per month.
IMO, if the people CA governs need to cut back, then the CA gov itself needs to cut back.
Fern
My $60 one is from Radio shack and is the large outside type. I put it in my attic and then added a splited booster.
Now my shop tv has a basic $10 one and works fine with the Zenith 901 Digital tuner.
But Cable/Sat is way to much money now. And most require a box just to get anything it seems. Waste of money IMO.
StageLeft
No Lifer
- Sep 29, 2000
- 70,150
- 5
- 0
You know it's dire when being a state employee isn't even secure. Anyway, California just seems to suck.
Some workers will have to work harder on their days on, though.
Some workers will have to work harder on their days on, though.
Hell, I'd happily take a 25% paycut as opposed to being laid off.
Despite gas being cheap now, though, it turns out that people just spend that other day doing errands, so it saves little.
brandonbull
Diamond Member
- May 3, 2005
- 6,365
- 1,223
- 126
How can they di that without people getting unemployed benefits? If you are a full-time employee and they do not give you 40 hours, don't you get some compensation for that?
Are the legislators and Arrrrrnald taking big pay cuts? What about all the Mexico subsidy programs? I bet those programs chew through billions each year.
Are the legislators and Arrrrrnald taking big pay cuts? What about all the Mexico subsidy programs? I bet those programs chew through billions each year.
Toasthead
Diamond Member
- Aug 27, 2001
- 6,621
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: oldsmoboat
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
State resident/taxpayer
I just hate how they bent over Grey Davis and continue to be some unstoppable force in this state.
I told my coworkers that they ought to go through the voter rolls and those that voted for arnie can take the furlough.
yeah because Cruz Bustamonte was a far superior choice.
No, the Federal Govt needs to do its job and remove all of the people that don't belong here. It is not the state's job to control the border and illegal immigrants.
The Feds need to step up and reimburse California for all it's costs caring for the illegals.
And you are full of it. Illegals don't get welfare or free tuition. And you would rather throw all of the illegal kids out of school so they can join gangs? Great plan.
How about send them back to Mexico? Yes, illegals do get welfare and free tuition - through their children.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
The more pain the CA legislators inflict on the people, it will be remembered come re-election.
I suspect that the people are not going to put up with the bringing home the bacon attitude much more.
The bacon has mold on it.
It is one thing when the politicians actions impact the other guy, quite another when you become impacted because they refuse to do their jobs.
I suspect that the people are not going to put up with the bringing home the bacon attitude much more.
The bacon has mold on it.
It is one thing when the politicians actions impact the other guy, quite another when you become impacted because they refuse to do their jobs.
I voted all Republicans in the last election for CA house and senate. Of course they (dems) still won by like, 20-30%.
I tried convincing my parents to move to TX prior to the housing crash and they didn't listen. Oh well.
And the Dems are at least willing to compromise with the Gov, agreeing to all kinds of cuts.
The Republicans will not agree to any tax increases, or compromise, and are thus preventing any kind of agreement to get the budget passed.
At least Arnold is willing to compromise, he is not so ideologically rigid. If Republicans insist on sticking to their unworkable ideology, look for them to be punished (again) in the next election.
Compromise? CA already has ridiculously high taxes, why should they "compromise"? If the budget is still not balancing it's obvious that the Dems didn't "compromise" enough in their cuts.
Typical right-winger, insists they get everything they asked for, then calls it a compromise.
Keep it up, Republicans may go on the endangered species list here.
olds
Elite Member
- Mar 3, 2000
- 50,128
- 781
- 126
At least he has experience tha arnie didn't/doesn't have. The lesser of the two evils.Originally posted by: Toasthead
Originally posted by: oldsmoboat
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
State resident/taxpayer
I just hate how they bent over Grey Davis and continue to be some unstoppable force in this state.
I told my coworkers that they ought to go through the voter rolls and those that voted for arnie can take the furlough.
yeah because Cruz Bustamonte was a far superior choice.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter