Schwarzenegger cuts 22,000 state temp jobs

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Only on ATOT.

Some might say that.

 

[classy]

Eliminating the jobs I can see, but slashing people's pay is nothing short of ignorant. And no he won't get away with it.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: classy
Eliminating the jobs I can see, but slashing people's pay is nothing short of ignorant. And no he won't get away with it.

He isn't cutting their pay, he is delaying paying them their full wages until he is legally allowed to pay them.

 

[JJChicken]

Originally posted by: TridenTBoy3555

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: TridenTBoy3555

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: TridenTBoy3555

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: Gothgar
Excelent, I love this game

Potential comedy in the making.

Only on ATOT.

I'm confused. -_- Did you just skip me?

Yes.

Then, you're a bitch.

Ya, but I can spell.

So can I, don't care.

I think all this went over your head.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: classy
Eliminating the jobs I can see, but slashing people's pay is nothing short of ignorant. And no he won't get away with it.

He isn't cutting their pay, he is delaying paying them their full wages until he is legally allowed to pay them.

If he can't LEGALLY pay them their full wages, how can he LEGALLY pay them the reduced wages. IF he can't LEGALLY pay them then he should furlough all of them until such time as he CAN LEGALLY pay them.

This is all just more bullshit posturing by a man who can't relate to anything not in a script.

 

[thepd7]

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: classy
Eliminating the jobs I can see, but slashing people's pay is nothing short of ignorant. And no he won't get away with it.

He isn't cutting their pay, he is delaying paying them their full wages until he is legally allowed to pay them.

If he can't LEGALLY pay them their full wages, how can he LEGALLY pay them the reduced wages. IF he can't LEGALLY pay them then he should furlough all of them until such time as he CAN LEGALLY pay them.

This is all just more bullshit posturing by a man who can't relate to anything not in a script.

Did you see the article?

"Schwarzenegger also cited a 2003 California Supreme Court ruling allowing him to slash the pay of regular full-time employees when the state lacks a budget. By law, those workers must be paid at least the federal minimum wage of $6.55 an hour and will be reimbursed once a budget is approved."

Not sure what the ruling was but I am guessing if he cited a supreme court ruling then he probably has that right.

Please post real info proving that he doesn't if you are going to post any more. You seem like a great guy from everything I have read and it's awesome that you care about what's happening to these people, however as soon as a budget gets handled they are going to get all their money.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: thepd7

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: classy
Eliminating the jobs I can see, but slashing people's pay is nothing short of ignorant. And no he won't get away with it.

He isn't cutting their pay, he is delaying paying them their full wages until he is legally allowed to pay them.

If he can't LEGALLY pay them their full wages, how can he LEGALLY pay them the reduced wages. IF he can't LEGALLY pay them then he should furlough all of them until such time as he CAN LEGALLY pay them.

This is all just more bullshit posturing by a man who can't relate to anything not in a script.

Did you see the article?

"Schwarzenegger also cited a 2003 California Supreme Court ruling allowing him to slash the pay of regular full-time employees when the state lacks a budget. By law, those workers must be paid at least the federal minimum wage of $6.55 an hour and will be reimbursed once a budget is approved."

Not sure what the ruling was but I am guessing if he cited a supreme court ruling then he probably has that right.

Please post real info proving that he doesn't if you are going to post any more. You seem like a great guy from everything I have read and it's awesome that you care about what's happening to these people, however as soon as a budget gets handled they are going to get all their money.

The interpretation of that ruling is up for questioning. The Office of John Chiang (state of ca controllers office) laid out a reasonable argument in which the CA supreme court ruling left open the possibility of paying state workers full wages in times of a budget impass.

link to Chiang letter


edit: and to add, there are real people out there losing their jobs (part-time/retired annuitants/student assistants) and its going to impact the Sacramento region without a doubt. And I doubt that the state agencies cutting jobs are going to backfill once a budget is signed.

more people in the unemployment line. Last number I heard was about 10,000 layoffs...but that could be over estimating it.

This also means less knowledgeable/experienced people handling state business that each and every one of you depend on. Yes some of you people like to generalize that state workers are low-level, low skilled workers but that's not true. There are highly knowledgeable, and skilled people that control everything from retrofitting the bridges you drive across everyday, to ensuring that all of your senior family members, or developmentally disabled family members are getting the services they require to live an independent life. Its not just the damn DMV workers that represent your average state worker. There are psychologists, engineers, nurses, special ed teachers etc etc.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: ed21x
Government employees are lazy, overpaid, and almost impossible to get fired while having mandatory guaranteed raises every year, and mandatory overtime pay while also on a salary... all of which simply encourages even more laziness. About time we trim the fat, and start running the government like a well ran business than an inefficient bureacracy.

I just started my first post-graduate position working for a state government and I would both agree and disagree. There is certainly a LOT of inefficiency and incompetence in government. On the other hand, there are certain disadvantages. My pay here is at least 1/3 less than I would earn in the private sector (or even at a university). Added to that I am on a one YEAR probationary period.

Regardless though, I feel bad for the workers there. I would not take effectively not being paid due to the incompetence of management at any job in any location.

 

[OCGuy]

Why is it always the dems who want huge CA budgets? Holy smokes...we can only spend what we take in! Lets not follow the current federal administrations lead.