• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

CA State is paying minimum wage to employees starting July

dquan97

Lifer
Jul 9, 2002
12,011
1
0
UPDATE:

The 3rd District Court of Appeal has upheld a 17-month-old ruling allowing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to reduce state workers to minimum wage in the absence of a budget.

The court, agreeing with a Sacramento Superior Court ruling, said State Controller John Chiang overstepped his authority by refusing to issue minimum-wage paychecks to state workers during the 2008 budget impasse.

The decision, published just moments ago, comes the day after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Department of Personnel Administration gave Chiang the same pay reduction instructions the controller rejected two years ago.

Chiang's office has not said whether it will appeal to the state Supreme Court. If the ruling stands and no appeal is filed, Chiang will be hard pressed to refuse to follow Schwarzenegger's minimum wage ruling this year.

The governor's pay order was triggered by lawmakers' failure to enact a budget before the July 1 start of the fiscal year.

With no budget in place that appropriates money for wages, the state can withhold what it pays employees to the least amount allowed by federal standards, which is $7.25 per hour for most of the 240,000 workers subject to the law. The withheld money would be issued once legislators and the governor agreed on a budget with payroll appropriated.

"We ... conclude the DPA has the authority to direct the Controller to defer salary payments in excess of federally-mandated minimum wages when appropriations for the salaries are lacking due to a budget impasse, because the Legislature created DPA to 'manage the nonmerit aspects of the state's personnel system" and vested DPA with jurisdiction with respect to 'the administration of salaries' and 'other personnel-related matters,'" the appellate court said in its decision.

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/07/02/2865871/court-backs-schwarzenegger-wage.html#ixzz0sYiIBLyY

OP:

State issues memo on furloughs, minimum wage

Department of Personnel Administration Director Debbie Endsley has sent a memo to all California state agencies that lays out the Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's position on furloughs (they're over ... for now) and the possibility of employee pay being withheld to minimum wage (he'll do it if there's no budget).

The latter assumes, of course, that the 3rd District Court of Appeals doesn't overturn a lower court ruling that State Controller John Chiang overstepped his authority by refusing to implement a similar wage withholding order during the 2008-09 budget impasse.

Here's the memo, which at least some agencies are forwarding to their workers:

Here's an update on the furlough and minimum wage situations.

With respect to furloughs, the current program ends June 30, and the Administration expects the State to resume normal hours of operation in July. The Governor's budget proposal includes four proposals to reduce employee compensation costs: a wage cut, one day per month of unpaid leave, increased employee contributions to pensions, and the workforce cap. The Governor retains the right and authority to order furloughs if necessary to address a fiscal and cash crisis.

As for the prospect of state workers receiving minimum wage in lieu of full wages, it will depend on when the Legislature and the Governor reach a budget agreement. The California Supreme Court ruled in 2003 (White v. Davis) that absent an appropriation, which for most of the payroll comes through the annual state budget, the Controller is prohibited from paying state workers beyond what is required by the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Absent a state budget, we will send instructions to the Controller to pay wages in accordance with the FLSA for the July pay period.

The four unions that recently reached tentative agreements on new contracts (CHP officers, firefighters, psychiatric technicians, and some medical professionals) would not be subject to any new furlough program or minimum wage payments, assuming their contracts are ratified in a timely manner.

Debbie Endsley
 
Last edited:

shiner

Lifer
Jul 18, 2000
17,116
0
0
My god there is no pleasing you Republicans. You scream people are getting paid too much and when a state goes down to the minimum you bitch.

Make up your fucking minds.
Just because you are willing to work for Little Debbie Snack Cakes doesn't mean everyone is.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
Just because you are willing to work for Little Debbie Snack Cakes doesn't mean everyone is.
It's not that he wants to, it's just easier to get paid in Oatmeal Creme Pies than to endure buying them at the store, what with them costing $7 per box and then being forced to sign a form before he can buy them.
 

Hacp

Lifer
Jun 8, 2005
13,923
1
81
FINALLY! Now all the states should follow California's lead. Pay them all minimum wage. All of them!
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,272
103
106
I'm not sure I see the problem. What they're saying is that they might start paying them what they should have been paid all along?
 

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,031
13
81
My god there is no pleasing you Republicans. You scream people are getting paid too much and when a state goes down to the minimum you bitch.

Make up your fucking minds.
For once I think I agree with this clown. I'm not sure I understand the OP's outrage, does he want CA gov't employees to get a raise? Should the budget cuts be made elsewhere? Should the problem simply be ignored - pay everyone a full wage with good benefits, budget be damned?
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
46
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
For once I think I agree with this clown. I'm not sure I understand the OP's outrage, does he want CA gov't employees to get a raise? Should the budget cuts be made elsewhere? Should the problem simply be ignored - pay everyone a full wage with good benefits, budget be damned?
If people don't like the wage that comes with the job they are free to leave.

All budgets should be fiscally sound.
 

jackace

Golden Member
Oct 6, 2004
1,307
0
0
Always cracks me up when we talk about wages on this site and some of the others I visit.

Everyone says reduce wages, until it's their job that receives the cuts.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
2
0
Could they have met the budget using furloughs? County of Maui is doing 1 day of furlough a month starting next month, and I'm glad. I'd much rather do 5% less work for 5% less pay than have 5% layoffs.

In California there seems to be an irrational hatred of working less than 160 hours a month... I'm not sure where that attitude comes from. If their stance really is "No way will I work less for less pay, I want my full pay, budget be damned!!" then they deserve minimum wage. Enjoy not getting a day off, idiots.

Or lay them off, and each Friday send them a letter saying "You could have been enjoying furlough Friday today, good luck with your job search". Also send a letter to the lucky ones who didn't get laid off saying "You could have been enjoying furlough Friday today, but instead you're doing extra work to make up for the laid off guy".
 
Last edited:

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
345
126
The right-wing agenda to enrich the rich furhter is always to cut average people's incomes.

Never raise taxes on the rich or otherwise prevent them from concentrating wealth more.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
The right-wing agenda to enrich the rich furhter is always to cut average people's incomes.

Never raise taxes on the rich or otherwise prevent them from concentrating wealth more.
You mean like the wealthy media conglomerates who exploit copyright by extending it every time Steamboat Willie's copyright expiration nears?

Yeah, damn those right wingers...
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,865
5
0
The right-wing agenda to enrich the rich furhter is always to cut average people's incomes.

Never raise taxes on the rich or otherwise prevent them from concentrating wealth more.
Never mind that this is California we're talking about.
 

NesuD

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,999
106
106
The really telling part about all the cost cutting moves like furlough days, unpaid leave days and such is that it seems everyone keeps missing the obvious. If we you can afford to tell all your employees to stay home 10 or 20 days out of the year without pay to save money then doesn't it seem logical that maybe you have to damn many employees on the payroll? Hell just layoff 5-10% of your workforce. A job is not a right. Reassigning The duties of 10% of your workforce among the other 90% is really pretty easy. Here in the private sector we have been doing it for 2 years now. We have half the people we had 2 years ago and are still getting the job done. It sucks to lose a job because of a bad economy but that is the real world for those of us who don't have the good fortune to be government employees. Suck it up and take your turn just like the rest of us.

P.S. Dave? STFU. You are an embarrassment to your species.
 

drebo

Diamond Member
Feb 24, 2006
7,035
1
81
The really telling part about all the cost cutting moves like furlough days, unpaid leave days and such is that it seems everyone keeps missing the obvious. If we you can afford to tell all your employees to stay home 10 or 20 days out of the year without pay to save money then doesn't it seem logical that maybe you have to damn many employees on the payroll? Hell just layoff 5-10% of your workforce. A job is not a right. Reassigning The duties of 10% of your workforce among the other 90% is really pretty easy. Here in the private sector we have been doing it for 2 years now. We have half the people we had 2 years ago and are still getting the job done. It sucks to lose a job because of a bad economy but that is the real world for those of us who don't have the good fortune to be government employees. Suck it up and take your turn just like the rest of us.

P.S. Dave? STFU. You are an embarrassment to your species.
Actually, a lot of businesses that made layoffs when business got slow are realizing that they didn't need as many employees as they had now that business is picking back up.

Belt-tightening is good for everyone, even the government. Trim the fat.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
345
126
Never mind that this is California we're talking about.
I'm talking about the posters here, and the governor behind this is a Republican.

If the Democrats did do something like this as an emergency, they're the ones concerned about the people, while rhe right be be the ideologues cheering for lower wages.
 

jackace

Golden Member
Oct 6, 2004
1,307
0
0
Actually, a lot of businesses that made layoffs when business got slow are realizing that they didn't need as many employees as they had now that business is picking back up.

Belt-tightening is good for everyone, even the government. Trim the fat.
This is true for some companies, that were poorly run, but a good many are finding that they now need to hire. In fact that is how I landed my new job. The company admits they cut too many jobs and is now re-hiring for most of the positions they cut a couple years ago.
 

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91
It's not that he wants to, it's just easier to get paid in Oatmeal Creme Pies than to endure buying them at the store, what with them costing $7 per box and then being forced to sign a form before he can buy them.
OMG you win this thread!
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY