- Mar 3, 2000
- 50,125
- 780
- 126
Gray Davis was a monstrous pile of dog shit, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised you like(d) him.
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
Good for you.
Again to me the issue isn't a California cashflow problem as much as it is Arnold attempting to strongarm union's into unfavorable contracts.
The Supreme Court of California's ruling notwithstanding. Of which said ruling certainly did come in handy for Arnold's agenda.
Union strength in California is absolutely ridiculous and it would be much harder for him to take away their protections than it would be for him to "strongarm union's into unfavorable contracts." IMO all legislature that specifically grants protections to Unions should be thrown out because the 1st amendment is all we need.
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
if union strength was so "absolutely ridiculous" you wouldn't have half of them agreeing to tentative contracts that include a 5% paycut, new workers having worse pension plans...and higher pension contributions.
Pay attention. Arnold is getting everthing he wants with these "tentative contracts"
These contract changes all sound good to me, they got out of control in the first place I see this as a corrective measure.
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
And these contracts will probably be contested the moment Arnold is out ...
Unless Meg comes in...lord help us if Meg comes in.
Nevertheless I'm glad you think these "corrective measures" are a good thing. I disagree.
Right, and that case has yet to be ruled on. Chaing has stated the current payroll system is not capable of implementing the order without putting the state at risk of violating labor laws and this could possibly mean millions in fines.
I am further pointing out that the law GAS is implementing says to pay state employees FMW. It does not state that the gov can pick and choose which bargaining units he wants to pay full wages and which he will only pay minimum wage to. If he does that, he is opening the state to massive labor lawsuits. It is clear that he is only using the minimum wage threat to break the unions that have not agreed to his terms. This is coersion of the worste sort at the bargaining table and it is illegal to bargain in this manner.
Chaings response, below, says that 4 of the 6 steering committee members for making the payroll system change are GAS's appointees and the steering committee is perfectly aware that the new system will not roll out until 2012.
Controller Issues Statement Regarding DPA Letter
SACRAMENTO The following statement was issued by the Controller in response to a notice by the Department of Personnel Administration that they were planning on issuing a pay letter ordering the Controller to reduce state employee salaries to the minimum wage, with the exception of the six bargaining units the administration has reached an agreement with.
I am not surprised that the Governor would issue yet another demand that we cut pay for more 250,000 state employees even while the issue of whether it is feasible to do so has not yet been resolved by the courts. I have made it clear that once the courts hand down a final resolution, I will abide by that ruling.
In the absence of the leadership needed to bring the Legislature to an agreement on his budget, the governor again resorts to political tricks. Because of the limits of the states current payroll system, there is no way that his order can be accomplished without violating the State Constitution and the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. In short, his demands will do nothing to solve the budget deficit, but will hurt taxpayers by exposing the state to billions of dollars in penalties for those violations.
Unfortunately, the DPA also is mistaken about the position of the previous State Controller about the ability of the state payroll system to make reductions to more than 250,000 paychecks. In a letter written in July 2004, my predecessor notified legislators that his office had conducted a study and concluded it is not feasible to pay some employees full salary and others minimum wage under the states current payroll system.
Notwithstanding necessary changes to the States labor laws, we continue to work with the Governor on building a system capable of legally reducing wages in the manner sought by his Administration. This system modernization is slated for roll-out in 2012. If the DPA has a problem with that schedule, they should consult the steering committee, of which four of the six members are the governors appointees, including DPA Director Debbie Endsley.
Again, absent a final court ruling, I will continue to protect the States finances and pay full wages earned by state employees.
Link: http://www.sco.ca.gov/eo_pressrel_controller_responds_to_dpa_letter.html
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
good luck guy! I know that was exactly the type of hassle the SCO was trying to avoid.
As soon as the State CAN'T pay you your full base wage plus your overtime then you have a lawsuit you can file against the State of CA.
So will every other State employee that logs/earns 1+ hour of overtime.
/thumbsup
how you like them apples Arnold?
And according to SCO, Chiang's office made DPA and the Governor aware of all the obstacles to implementing a minimum wage conversion back in August 2008.
- Mar 3, 2000
- 50,125
- 780
- 126
Chiang won't comply
http://sco.ca.gov/eo_pressrel_controller_statement_on_minimum_wage_ruling.html
SACRAMENTO – The following statement was issued by the Controller in response to the Third District Court of Appeal’s ruling regarding the Governor’s authority to reduce state employee salaries to the minimum wage absent a budget:
“As expected, today’s ruling by the Third District Court of Appeal restates the Supreme Court’s 2003 ruling in White v. Davis, but goes several steps further by saying my office could be excused from reducing the salaries of some 250,000 employees to minimum wage if it is practically infeasible to do so without violating federal labor laws and the State Constitution.
“Like the Supreme Court in White, the appellate court declined to resolve the feasibility issue.
“This is not a simple software problem. Reducing pay and then restoring it in a timely manner once a budget is enacted cannot be done without gross violations of law unless and until the State completes its overhaul of the state payroll system and payroll laws are changed.
“I will move quickly to ask the courts to definitively resolve the issue of whether our current payroll system is capable of complying with the minimum wage order in a way that protects taxpayers from billions of dollars in fines and penalties.”
http://sco.ca.gov/Files-EO/07-02-10lettertoDPA.pdf
http://sco.ca.gov/eo_pressrel_controller_statement_on_minimum_wage_ruling.html
SACRAMENTO – The following statement was issued by the Controller in response to the Third District Court of Appeal’s ruling regarding the Governor’s authority to reduce state employee salaries to the minimum wage absent a budget:
“As expected, today’s ruling by the Third District Court of Appeal restates the Supreme Court’s 2003 ruling in White v. Davis, but goes several steps further by saying my office could be excused from reducing the salaries of some 250,000 employees to minimum wage if it is practically infeasible to do so without violating federal labor laws and the State Constitution.
“Like the Supreme Court in White, the appellate court declined to resolve the feasibility issue.
“This is not a simple software problem. Reducing pay and then restoring it in a timely manner once a budget is enacted cannot be done without gross violations of law unless and until the State completes its overhaul of the state payroll system and payroll laws are changed.
“I will move quickly to ask the courts to definitively resolve the issue of whether our current payroll system is capable of complying with the minimum wage order in a way that protects taxpayers from billions of dollars in fines and penalties.”
http://sco.ca.gov/Files-EO/07-02-10lettertoDPA.pdf
Last edited:
on a releated topic of state workers. Me and my coworkers are convinced the sacbee is anti state worker. We don't know why, but they seem tohave something against us.
- Mar 3, 2000
- 50,125
- 780
- 126
Jaskalas
Lifer
- Jun 23, 2004
- 35,944
- 10,285
- 136
Arnold attempted to fight the Democrat controlled legislature and was defeated by Democrats in the FIRST ballot initiative after he was elected. They control the state, he is powerless to stop them from bankrupting it.
He hasn't done nearly enough, but he never could in the first place.
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 80,287
- 17,082
- 136
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 66,427
- 14,832
- 146
Since there are two threads on this, I'll post the same thing in both.
Looks like the state employees got a break today...
http://www.kcra.com/politics/24285560/detail.html
" A Sacramento County judge won't order State Controller John Chiang to reduce state workers' pay to minimum wage, at least for now.
Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Patrick Marlette denied the administration's request for a temporary restraining order that would have forced the controller to pay the federal minimum wage immediately to about 200,000 state workers.
He ruled that it would cause too much harm to employees. Labor unions applauded the decision.
Deputy Controller Hallye Jordan said the decision means state workers will continue to receive their full wages in July and August.
"We were very pleased that the judge took into consideration our arguments and the impact it would have on hundreds of thousands of state employees who have worked for their checks and expect the full amount," Jordan said after the ruling.
The judge did say he will allow the administration's lawsuit to proceed so the courts can sort out whether the controller must pay minimum wage in the future.
The next hearing will be July 26.
A spokeswoman for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Department of Personnel Administration said the administration is confident it will ultimately prevail in the courts.
"And we also hope that the Legislature is going to pass a budget in the meantime so we aren't forced to pay our employees minimum wage," spokeswoman Lynelle Jolley said.
Earlier this month, a state appeals court in Sacramento ruled in favor of Schwarzenegger. It said the Republican governor has the authority to order minimum wage for civil service workers because the state has not passed a budget for the current fiscal year, which started July 1.
Schwarzenegger's order would cover about 200,000 of the state's work force of 237,000, who would be paid the federal minimum of $7.25 if the courts ultimately find in his favor. Salaried managers who are not paid on an hourly basis would see their pay cut to $455 a week.
If wages are cut in the future, employees would be reimbursed once a budget is passed and signed.
The Schwarzenegger administration filed its original lawsuit in Superior Court two years ago after the governor first attempted to impose the minimum wage during a previous budget deadlock. The controller, who cuts state paychecks, has refused to comply.
Chiang has filed a counter lawsuit in the long-running political feud, arguing he cannot make the changes. He said California's decades-old computerized payroll system is incapable of handling the pay reduction.
The system was designed more than 60 years ago and was last revamped in 1970.
Chiang, a Democrat who has received $190,000 in union campaign contributions this year, also warned that paying the minimum wage would violate the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act. That could lead to costly fines for the state.
Looks like the state employees got a break today...
http://www.kcra.com/politics/24285560/detail.html
" A Sacramento County judge won't order State Controller John Chiang to reduce state workers' pay to minimum wage, at least for now.
Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Patrick Marlette denied the administration's request for a temporary restraining order that would have forced the controller to pay the federal minimum wage immediately to about 200,000 state workers.
He ruled that it would cause too much harm to employees. Labor unions applauded the decision.
Deputy Controller Hallye Jordan said the decision means state workers will continue to receive their full wages in July and August.
"We were very pleased that the judge took into consideration our arguments and the impact it would have on hundreds of thousands of state employees who have worked for their checks and expect the full amount," Jordan said after the ruling.
The judge did say he will allow the administration's lawsuit to proceed so the courts can sort out whether the controller must pay minimum wage in the future.
The next hearing will be July 26.
A spokeswoman for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Department of Personnel Administration said the administration is confident it will ultimately prevail in the courts.
"And we also hope that the Legislature is going to pass a budget in the meantime so we aren't forced to pay our employees minimum wage," spokeswoman Lynelle Jolley said.
Earlier this month, a state appeals court in Sacramento ruled in favor of Schwarzenegger. It said the Republican governor has the authority to order minimum wage for civil service workers because the state has not passed a budget for the current fiscal year, which started July 1.
Schwarzenegger's order would cover about 200,000 of the state's work force of 237,000, who would be paid the federal minimum of $7.25 if the courts ultimately find in his favor. Salaried managers who are not paid on an hourly basis would see their pay cut to $455 a week.
If wages are cut in the future, employees would be reimbursed once a budget is passed and signed.
The Schwarzenegger administration filed its original lawsuit in Superior Court two years ago after the governor first attempted to impose the minimum wage during a previous budget deadlock. The controller, who cuts state paychecks, has refused to comply.
Chiang has filed a counter lawsuit in the long-running political feud, arguing he cannot make the changes. He said California's decades-old computerized payroll system is incapable of handling the pay reduction.
The system was designed more than 60 years ago and was last revamped in 1970.
Chiang, a Democrat who has received $190,000 in union campaign contributions this year, also warned that paying the minimum wage would violate the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act. That could lead to costly fines for the state.
Only when they're allowed to go unchecked and never forced to face reality.
Last edited by a moderator:
JSt0rm
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 27,399
- 3,948
- 126
I guess it really is a little bit of schadenfreude, but I can't help but laugh at how one of the greatest states in the nation, with vast resources and great weather has managed to get itself in this kind of position. Frickin' amazing if you ask me. It's a microcosm for the nation as a whole. If we don't heed the lessons CA is learning the hard way, we're going to be going down that same road as a nation soon.
Patranus
Diamond Member
- Apr 15, 2007
- 9,280
- 0
- 0
And that is what Schwarzenegger has been trying to do, from his ballot measures (shot down by the public after unions spent millions to defeat them) and this move. \
Chiang should be fired. It is not his job to dictate policy.
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: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter