• 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

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,631
3,126
126
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.
Excellent reply!!!
I totally agree!!
There is no pleasing these morons who bitch about people getting paid too much and then when the state lowers your wage down to minimum wagew to make budget you cry---wawawawa

Oh, I get it now...as long as it is not the people who already have jobs it`s OK for somebody to work at McDonalds for minimum wage!! Just don`t ask me to do my fair share...rofl...hahahaa
 

coloumb

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,097
0
81
Wow...that's insane. Makes me glad I don't work for any state or govt agency...
 

marincounty

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,227
5
76
Did you notice that the worst offenders as far as excessive salaries and pensions, have already struck deals with the governator so they will not be affected?
"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."
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,164
0
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".
Yeah basically this. I never understood the complaints about furloughs. If it's get some 3 day weekends and take a modest pay cut in exchange, or else take a massive across the board pay cut and/or lose your job, I know what I'd be chosing.

- wolf
 

jackace

Golden Member
Oct 6, 2004
1,307
0
0
Did you notice that the worst offenders as far as excessive salaries and pensions, have already struck deals with the governator so they will not be affected?
"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."
Yep and you know outside contractors are not going to be working for minimum wage either. There is a lot more waste and overspending in those areas compared to an admin assistant making 35-40k a year.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,890
638
126
What's up with all you whiners blasting the OP? I don't see a complaint at all in that post, it's just a quoted memo and some commentary. He's not bitching about anything, he's just making a statement.

There's no edit, there's no follow up post. You're reading something into it that's not even there. Then to top it off, you guys are having a circle-jerk over it and Dave's the pivot man.
 

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,031
13
81
What's up with all you whiners blasting the OP? I don't see a complaint at all in that post, it's just a quoted memo and some commentary. He's not bitching about anything, he's just making a statement.

There's no edit, there's no follow up post. You're reading something into it that's not even there. Then to top it off, you guys are having a circle-jerk over it and Dave's the pivot man.
What's the big thumbs down in the post title for, then?
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
460
126
What's up with all you whiners blasting the OP? I don't see a complaint at all in that post, it's just a quoted memo and some commentary. He's not bitching about anything, he's just making a statement.

There's no edit, there's no follow up post. You're reading something into it that's not even there. Then to top it off, you guys are having a circle-jerk over it and Dave's the pivot man.
Exactly what I was about to post. Not to mention that most people capable of sentient thought recognize that there is generally room between wages paid (especially in California government!) and minimum wage. Even if the OP does not support paying them minimum wage, that is hardly crying or bitching.

There really needs to be a mechanism for EVERYONE in government to take a 5% or 10% or 20% cut in pay, including unions, when times are hard, to avoid layoffs.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
345
126
Exactly what I was about to post. Not to mention that most people capable of sentient thought recognize that there is generally room between wages paid (especially in California government!) and minimum wage. Even if the OP does not support paying them minimum wage, that is hardly crying or bitching.

There really needs to be a mechanism for EVERYONE in government to take a 5% or 10% or 20% cut in pay, including unions, when times are hard, to avoid layoffs.
Maybe a gap between being taxed 10% of $10 million and 15% of $10 million, too.

Oh no! That's a tax increase!

What's the net difference between the tax increase and pay cut again?

Person gets $100 in salary. Tax increase of $10 more; or pay cut of $10.

Either way it's the same effect.

Oh ya, the difference - state workers, not the top 1%, not the voters in the private sector. Tax those lousy smelly state workers.

Don't tax you, don't tax me, tax that fellow behind the tree.
 

mrjminer

Platinum Member
Dec 2, 2005
2,739
16
76
I think this is pretty terrible. Most of the people that will get screwed by this are people that are getting paid appropriately for the work they do. As other have mentioned, the people being allowed to abuse the hell out of the system have already struck deals.

It's going to be pretty funny when the state can't find anyone to work their terrible jobs for minimum wage just because a bunch of cops / firefighters are banking 5x their normal wages.

Personally, I await the story highlighting the details of the deals they've made with cops and firefighters specifically.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,386
2
81
Give it time. They won't be protected for long. 2011 will make 2010 look balanced.
 

Mr. Lennon

Diamond Member
Jul 2, 2004
3,492
1
81
FINALLY! Now all the states should follow California's lead. Pay them all minimum wage. All of them!
Yeah that's right...lets just take away every incentive there is to work in the public sector. It is absolutely impossible to survive in Cali on minimum wage.

Fucking idiot.
 
Last edited:

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,890
638
126
What's the big thumbs down in the post title for, then?
Ask the OP.

IMO it sets the tone of the post. It doesn't necessarily define it. If the OP (dquan97) is a frequent poster here in P&N, I'm guilty of not realizing that. What I'm saying is that I personally, have no idea what his political leanings are. In addition, his post was neutral from my interpretation.

Dave, in his usual manner, gave his typical canned response that IMO, was out of line based on the post. Nothing new there.
 

JockoJohnson

Golden Member
May 20, 2009
1,404
52
91
Yeah that's right...lets just take away every incentive there is to work in the public sector. It is absolutely impossible to survive in Cali on minimum wage.

Fucking idiot.
If anything, there is too much incentive to work in the public sector. Why is it that across the board (federal and states) jobs are being added while private sector is cutting jobs? Just because unemployment is high doesn't mean the gov't needs to offer a teat for the unemployed to suck on.

These kinds of cuts should be in any contract with a union in the PUBLIC sector---except a union won't allow it because they will see it as a slippery slope.
 

JockoJohnson

Golden Member
May 20, 2009
1,404
52
91
Ask the OP.

IMO it sets the tone of the post. It doesn't necessarily define it. If the OP (dquan97) is a frequent poster here in P&N, I'm guilty of not realizing that. What I'm saying is that I personally, have no idea what his political leanings are. In addition, his post was neutral from my interpretation.

Dave, in his usual manner, gave his typical canned response that IMO, was out of line based on the post. Nothing new there.
From the posts in this thread, I am not seeing as much of a right/left partisan bickering as a common sense approach to what needs to be done. (Maybe my sarcasm meter is broken on some of the posts)
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
460
126
Maybe a gap between being taxed 10% of $10 million and 15% of $10 million, too.

Oh no! That's a tax increase!

What's the net difference between the tax increase and pay cut again?

Person gets $100 in salary. Tax increase of $10 more; or pay cut of $10.

Either way it's the same effect.

Oh ya, the difference - state workers, not the top 1%, not the voters in the private sector. Tax those lousy smelly state workers.

Don't tax you, don't tax me, tax that fellow behind the tree.
In the perhaps vain assumption that you had a point in there (other than drugs are bad, m'kay) - in my company we all took a 10% cut to avoid laying off anyone, even when we didn't have the work. Those who aren't board members got every other Friday off until the work picked up; those of us who are on the board worked our usual hours to pick up the slack. That is responsibility. Demanding that others be further punished to protect every bit of your own lifestyle is NOT responsibility, it is merely petulant selfishness. Sometimes petulant selfishness works to your advantage, at least in this world. Sometimes petulant selfishness gets your ass laid off or reduced to minimum wage. There is absolutely no justification for protecting the public sector - those who consume the wealth - while the private sector - those who produce the wealth - are in such distress.

Feel free to further increase taxes on the wealthy, but a word of advice: When the last tax-paying wealth producing legal resident leaves California, Arizona WILL turn off the lights.
 
Aug 23, 2000
15,511
1
81
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?
Well how about stop paying the fucking unemployed, the people that leach the system dry. AKA the illegals and all the other dead beats i nthe state that are on some type of welfare system. Basically, you are saying, Fuck you you have a job. But these dumb asses over here that won't work. they should still get money.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
So is the Governor going to work for minimum wage or take a furlough?

They could just force everyone to use their vacation all at once and shut down the government for the month of July or August. Just call it forced vacation of planned government shutdown. It is kind of hard to shutdown hospitals or police and firemen.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
1
0
So is the Governor going to work for minimum wage or take a furlough?

They could just force everyone to use their vacation all at once and shut down the government for the month of July or August. Just call it forced vacation of planned government shutdown. It is kind of hard to shutdown hospitals or police and firemen.
Forcing people to take their vacation is pointless... Because it's PAID vacation.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
1
0
If anything, there is too much incentive to work in the public sector. Why is it that across the board (federal and states) jobs are being added while private sector is cutting jobs?
Because the stimulus is working. That was the whole point of sending money to local governments.


Just because unemployment is high doesn't mean the gov't needs to offer a teat for the unemployed to suck on.
What??

These kinds of cuts should be in any contract with a union in the PUBLIC sector---except a union won't allow it because they will see it as a slippery slope.
Ah, the old conservative fallback, blaming the unions again. My union, the HGEA, agreed to 1 furlough day per month with the county and 2 with the state.
 

Elfear

Diamond Member
May 30, 2004
7,032
551
126
There really needs to be a mechanism for EVERYONE in government to take a 5% or 10% or 20% cut in pay, including unions, when times are hard, to avoid layoffs.
So does that mean that govt. employees get an automatic 5-20% pay increase when the economy gets better? I have seen a lot of people whine that govt. employees should take a big pay cut because the private sector is doing bad but that is exactly why people take govt. jobs (i.e. job security). Seems a rather unfair proposition to say that govt. employees have to make less when times are good and the same when times are bad.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY