Skip to comments.
CA: State begins first wave of staff layoffs
Sac Bee ^
| 9/26/03
| John Hill
Posted on 09/26/2003 8:53:05 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Edited on 04/12/2004 5:58:06 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
A season of anxiety for state workers started in earnest this week with the issuance of as many as 200 pink slips, the first wave of work force reductions expected to total in the thousands.
"It's safe to say that there will be layoff notices going out every week for a while now," said Lynelle Jolley, a spokeswoman for the Department of Personnel Administration.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: begins; calgov2002; firstwave; layoffs; recall; staff; state
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21 next last
To: NormsRevenge
Join Us
Your One Thread To All The California Recall News Threads!

Want on our daily or major news ping lists? Freepmail DoctorZin
2
posted on
09/26/2003 8:54:30 AM PDT
by
DoctorZIn
To: *calgov2002
.
NOTE --- California Conservatives & taXpayers.. You are surplus as well and will be dealt with accordingly. :-o
3
posted on
09/26/2003 8:54:46 AM PDT
by
NormsRevenge
(Burning Clinton's Britches Since 1998)
To: NormsRevenge
It's a start...I think.
4
posted on
09/26/2003 8:56:01 AM PDT
by
tubebender
(FReeRepublic...How bad have you got it...)
To: NormsRevenge
Oh no! Crisis, Crisis!
"the Department of Finance has approved plans that reduce the work force by 4,065 positions, including unfilled vacancies. Of this number, 628 will be through layoffs, Peace said. The total work force subject to the reductions is about 200,000."
628 layoffs in a workforce over 200,000? They're just scratching the surface.
The following data pertains to employees (State government, California State Universities, and Judicial Council) paid through the State Controller's Office Uniform State Payroll System in the July 2003 pay period.
Number of payroll warrants issued monthly 169,352
Number of direct deposit payments issued monthly 239,986
Percentage of employees on direct deposit 63%
Amount of gross wages paid monthly $1,177,199,078
Amount of net wages paid monthly $788,463,151
Amount of Federal taxes withheld monthly $121,566,208
Amount of State taxes withheld monthly $33,372,915
Amount of payroll deductions withheld monthly $125,199,360
The following data pertains to employees (excluding California State Universities) appointed to the State Controller's Office Employment History Data Base.
Number of active full-time employees 196,388
Number of active part-time employees 5,287
Number of active intermittent employees 29,151
Number of active indeterminate employees 56
Total number of active employees 230,882
http://www.sco.ca.gov/ppsd/empinfo/demo/index.shtml
5
posted on
09/26/2003 9:07:48 AM PDT
by
Weimdog
To: NormsRevenge
If they are laying off on the basis of seniority, as usually happens, they are very unlikely to lay off those who are not doing any work.
To: Weimdog
Thanks for the info. It would be interesting to know how many "new hires" since 1/2003...I understand that in spite of the huge deficit, that there have been tens of thousands of "new hires" since the last election not to mention the "pay raises" to existing state employees like the prison guards.
7
posted on
09/26/2003 9:39:06 AM PDT
by
kellynla
(USMC "C" 1/5 1st Mar Div. Viet Nam '69 & '70 Semper Fi VOTE4MCCLINTOCK http://www.tommcclintock.com)
To: NormsRevenge
The unions agreed to forgo 5 percent pay increases for a year in return for an extra day off every month and bigger state contributions toward health care coverage. The state screwed the pooch on that deal. There are 2080 hours in a 52 week, 8 hour day year. If there were no additional days off (holidays, sick, vacation), the extra day off that was negotiated amounts to 4.6 percent of the work year.
But we all know they get other days off. For arguments's sake, let's say the average union employee gets 2 weeks vacation (10 days), 6 sick days, and 7 holidays. That would reduce the actual work year to 1896 hours. The additional 12 days will then constitute slightly more than 5% of the work year. And don't forget the state agreed to bigger contributions to health coverage!
So, in exchange for a completely understandable wage freeze, the state agreed to spend more in other ways. And let's not even get into the fact that a day off by a state employee is not made up by either coworkers or the worker themselves. It is a lost, paid day. No wonder California is dying.
8
posted on
09/26/2003 9:41:18 AM PDT
by
Mr. Bird
To: Mr. Bird
Yeah, we should all move to that mega economic powerhouse of Maryland.
9
posted on
09/26/2003 9:45:41 AM PDT
by
Joe Hadenuf
(I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
To: Joe Hadenuf
Well, I left CA for MD in '94 and never looked back. We've got problems to be sure, but I don't regret the move.
10
posted on
09/26/2003 9:52:34 AM PDT
by
Mr. Bird
To: NormsRevenge
Before I accept
any politician's or bureaucrat's expression of crocodile tears, I want them to acknowlege the number of State employees
now vs when Gray was elected.
There has been NO detectable improvement in the State's service level anywhere nor competent attention to the State's necessary infrastructure.
They did fund dozens of gay parades and other "critical" pathological needs...
11
posted on
09/26/2003 10:06:58 AM PDT
by
Publius6961
(californians are as dumb as a sack of rocks.)
To: Publius6961
EMPLOYEES IN CALIFORNIA STATE GOVERNMENT
1975-76 TO 2000-01
1975-76
206,361
1976-77
213,795
1977-78
221,251
1978-79
218,530
1979-80
220,193
1980-81
225,567
1981-82
228,813
1982-83
228,489
1983-84
226,695
1984-85
229,845
1985-86
229,641
1986-87
232,927
1987-88
237,761
1988-89
248,173
1989-90
254,589
1990-91
260,622
1991-92
261,713
1992-93
260,939
1993-94
265,035
1994-95
269,004
1995-96
271,076
1996-97
271,966
1997-98
264,551
1998-99
282,860
1999-00
296,076
2000-01
311,239
http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache:pYPrYGdsHTgJ:countingcalifornia.cdlib.org/pdfdata/csa02/C05+total+california+state+employees&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
12
posted on
09/26/2003 10:18:07 AM PDT
by
Weimdog
To: Mr. Bird
Enjoy the fast approaching winter that is just about upon you....No offense, but if I had to leave Cal and go to Maryland, I'd go completely berserk.....
13
posted on
09/26/2003 10:21:15 AM PDT
by
Joe Hadenuf
(I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
To: Joe Hadenuf
No offense taken. We're planning on heading back West in a few years, but AZ and NV are as far as I go. I think CA is just too damned big to be governed effectively from Sacramento.
It's always been a radical state (meaning revolutionary in the Prop. 13 sense), and I think they should try a republican model within the state. Take the power out of the capital and create 5 or six districts. Govern at that level with oversight by a tiny presence (but necessary) in Sacramento.
Someone in San Diego shouldn't pay for the needs of those in San Francisco, and vice versa.
14
posted on
09/26/2003 10:38:12 AM PDT
by
Mr. Bird
To: Weimdog
Very interesting stats there in the last three years! Davis????
15
posted on
09/26/2003 10:41:02 AM PDT
by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: Mr. Bird
"Well, I left CA for MD in '94 and never looked back."
Isn't that like going from Cuba to China? I really shouldn't comment since I live in New Jersey. I'm suprised that they haven't built a wall around NJ yet...
To: Constitutional Patriot
Isn't that like going from Cuba to China?Excellent comparison. I ended up here in the PRofM chasing job prospects, and it turned out very well. California is still the most beautiful state I've ever seen, but living in a land of $500k homes with poor employment prospects is not for me.
Ultimate plan is ranchin' it in the high desert. As for you, for heaven's sake, get out of there!
17
posted on
09/26/2003 10:57:21 AM PDT
by
Mr. Bird
To: Mr. Bird
We're planning on heading back West in a few yearsWelcome back to the west!
18
posted on
09/26/2003 12:03:19 PM PDT
by
Joe Hadenuf
(I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
To: Mr. Bird
The state screwed the pooch on that deal. There are 2080 hours in a 52 week, 8 hour day year. If there were no additional days off (holidays, sick, vacation), the extra day off that was negotiated amounts to 4.6 percent of the work year. Either I'm missing something, or you are. 4.6% of 2080 is 95+ hours. I think maybe you misplaced a decimal point?
19
posted on
09/27/2003 12:29:08 PM PDT
by
Brandon
To: Brandon
Either I'm missing something, or you are. 4.6% of 2080 is 95+ hours. I think maybe you misplaced a decimal point? Not really, it's twelve 8-hour work days off or about 96 hours.
20
posted on
09/27/2003 12:35:55 PM PDT
by
Bob
(http://www.TomMcClintock.com)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson