Negotiators for Malloy, unions fail to reach agreement

There should be more than 4,742 layoffs. We have so many state workers, they are stacked up like cord wood. There is one state worker for every 61 people in Connecticut. There is one manager of a state worker for every 6 employees. State spending has increased by 250% across the last 20 years and job growth has not moved an inch. We have the highest per capita debt in the nation; nearly the highest gas tax; the highest utility costs; our sales tax is now higher and we are going to tax more things than anybody in the NE except NJ and NY and they're both cutting taxes, employees and re-shaping government. Here in CT, there is just more taxes and more debt and redefinitions of key economic terms like surplus. We are a state run by idiots and their first cousins.

Keep piling up folks on the unemployment line vs. having the large corporations and the SUPER rich pay their FAIR share....

Pretty soon they'll be NO middle class to pay the taxes, then what'll we do???

All you naysayers; Have you read the first comment? Are you sure that reducing the employee count before reducing the amount of work required by Dannel's new tax recommendations is a good idea? This is a way for Dannel to say he tried to reduce costs without putting the effort into a viable way to reduce costs. Now he has someone to blame when it comes out he has no clue how to form a state budget. The state continues to create new programs, new taxes, new oversite and we wonder why the cost of government goes up? These programs and taxes do not run by themselves. Absolutely reduce government spending. Do it in a thoughful and forward thinking way. Look to see what programs we can do without, what taxes that need to be processed are costing more to collect than they are generating? The you can reduce government is a more controlled way. Government, believe it or not, is really for the people or we would be a dictatorship. It is what legislation has done to government that is causing the bloat.

He will not get reelected, and he will not deserve to get reelected. If Malloy lays off 4700 people it will only prove that he is a liar, because if you go to the you tube website and just type in Dan Malloy/unions you will see all the speechses that candidate malloy gave in front of the unions. The truth is, is that he worked very very hard to get theie support, and the unions worked very hard, and went door to door for him during the election, and even helped to transport people to the polls/If he lays off that many people he should not win any points with the general public for doing so,even if unions are not popular with the general public, because it is blatant dishonesty.

One of the many problems with the Governor's plan is that he is proposing over 4,700 layoffs with no substantial change in the structure of state government and services which it provides. That's stupid and won't work. If the state wants to reduce its budget and the number of state employees -- both of which are needed -- it needs to reduce its programs and the services which it provides and asks those employees to deliver

"An advocate for.." Thanks for the link, an excellent article.

A couple quotes from an article he wrote in April really struck me:

"the Malloy Administration has never admitted that the number they are demanding from Connecticut’s state employees is “almost double what New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo obtained from his much larger work force.” "

and:

"Although rank and file state employees seem almost unanimously committed to doing their fair share to balance Connecticut’s budget, few – if any – understand the extent to which they have been set up to fail.

This is a dark time for Connecticut’s state employees and it will get darker in the coming days as the Malloy Administration announces with ‘”surprise” that the $1 billion dollars in concessions cannot be achieved. "

these quotes from 4/6/11 and were found here:
http://jonpelto.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/and-so-it-begins/

Malloy can now, as a last resort, execute Plan B, which is to reduce the state payroll by 10,000 workers (out of a total of 50,000 +) by offering them early retirement incentives, and thereby totally and ruthlessly bypass the unions, in meeting the budget deficit. This move will also deliver Malloy from self-inflicted bondage to the unions. Plan B will also help the young workers, who need their jobs most, to continue in their jobs and be productive, but get rid of the dead wood that are making the highest wages. When you retire the oldest workers, unions especially can not blame Malloy that jobs are lost due to shortfall of revenues, and hence any tax hikes can be minimal. However, Malloy should ensure that the reduction in state payroll is permanent, and a new law should be passed capping the number of workers on the state payroll. Once the workforce is pegged at 40,000 or less, there should be no spike, directly or indirectly, without approval of the voters by a 2/3rds majority of those eligible to vote in a state-wide referendum. That should be a constitutional amendment. Together, Tea party nuts and republican party as a whole, can be counted to play the role of Moses to deliver the believers from Pharoahs.

Univ Prof- 20% cut is a start. Now pay more for medical benefits, lose the pension, longevity bonuses, and the tenure, work 60 hour weeks and you may be approaching the life of a private workers. Join the club there are plenty of us in it.

Well I have worked in both public and private industry and I have worked extremely hard in both. There id deadwood in both so please do not give anyone the feling that private industry has all stars. I have seen workaholics in both and have received huge bonuses in the 80's and 90's in private industry. These are difficult financial times for the State of CT and the idea that stste workers are the reason for the state financial woes is stupid and incorrect. I agree that state agencies needs a complete organizational restructuring but this is not the way to do it. It needs to be properly done and will take some time to be completed but I am convinced all $ 2 billion can be found. I am disappointed at the nonsense passed for reorganization of higher education that saves nothing. If it cannot save at least $ 500 million, why do it? I will tell you that Malloy is a bit over his head right now and the team around him is unqualified to tackle this complicated task. I am disappointed and may never vote again because it will be a day in hell before I ever pull a lever for the Republican party, the party of no ideas but " tax cuts for the rich".

SET- I fail to see where the Republicans come into this. THe Dems control the legislature and the governor slot. THe Dems have controlled the legislature for years. THey control the COngressional delegation. AN you blame the Republicans. It is beyond me. The COngressional delegation hasn;t done its job as it gets us back only 69% of every dollar we send to DC. Even an earmark that Dodd put in the healthcare bill for 100 million for a hospital went instead to Ohio, a swing state. Since CT religiously votes Democrat, why waste an earmark on CT when you can get voters for Obama in Ohio. OF the gas tax, we spend only 32% on transportation and the rest goes to the general fund, but the Dems want tolls. The Democrats are owned by the unions, have over the years given them what they want in exchange for campaign contributions. The former AG now Senator Blumy, a Democrat, sued whatever company he could, putting some out of business even if they were innocent. Even on the national level, Dodd and Franks were the cheerleaders for Fannie and Freddie, major reasons for the subprime mess. And the Dems in Congress and in the WH have driven the deficit sky high, and regulated businesses to the point, where they don't know how badly the regulations will affect their business. So please tell me how the Republicans are at fault here?

Univ Prof- Everyone on the union side seems to focus on the hedge funds. You want confiscate more of their money, there is a good chance they'll leave taking their money with them. So how much can you push business/hedge funds before they'll leave? Well they already live in a state ranked 47 for business friendly and that was before the budget. NY, NJ are cutting their budgets so it is likely CT may drop to last. So well see how many business leave. Already lost 2, one to NY and one to RI. Hey but the hedge funds make bigs bucks. Yes they do and they take big risks for that money. And they can move to Florida if they want or even Bermuda. SO keep pushing them and then who pays the taxes? The state union members.
Some years ago, the UK decided to tax the rich more, and they left.

I'm happy that you are happy about the way your company treated you. But companies nor the state should treat employees on the corporate agenda. I'll assume you have no clue what that is. Theircagenda is to keep all American workers at the lowest pay with the fewest benefits, so that those who invest in their company can make money. They also want to pay the lowest taxes, and to protect their investors from paying taxes. That job of paying taxes is for the middle class. I don't like it. Maybe you do. I don't need to be rich, but as a state employee, I need my $60,000 job to support my single income family of three. Go ahead. Give up your wages, but don't ask us all to roll over and play dead.

SInce the unions refuse to bargain, aid to towns will most likely be cut. Malloy said in his campaign he wants the towns to tax themselves. Since he only needs the cities to win re-election, he can dump the towns to make up the differance. Would have been nice if the unions did their part but obviously they don't mind losing the 10% newest employees.

It's probably too late now but Malloy should have made a reasonable request for concessions like all other state Gov's have done. And like all other Gov's, request that part of the 'shared sacrifice' concessions include the 150,000 municipal/town employees rather than just ask this from the 45,000 state employees.

A baffling strategy that unfortunately will result in none of the real abuses being corrected (longevity, OT abuses to increase retirement etc.).

I hope the legislature puts plan b into effect. It is far from perfect but it is the best deal that they can get. It is disappointing that the legislature did not do anything about the unfunded pensions and medical liabilities.

I am not surprised the union pushed 4,700 of their members in front of the bus. The key words for them is ME and GREED. It will be very interesting to see what happens when the pension fund runs out of money. I hope I am out of this state when it happens.

I'd love to see the private sector be as productive. And be as inexpensive as state employees. Some years ago my department released four state employees who cost $139,000 from cleaning our building. The first two years the contract cleaning was cheaper... Now? We pay almost $300,000 to clean the building, they don't change light bulbs, we buy all their supplies, and one of the staff spends 20% of their week looking after them. Private sector productivity is another part of the corporate agenda. The media, and the blind, non-critical thinking general public believe that business does it cheaper and more efficiently, but the truth is those businesses are laughing at you all the way to the bank with your tax dollars. Keep knocking the state employees. Maybe you'll have to move to a state you can afford to live in!

>>I find it incredible that no one seems to remember that the state employees everyone loves to demonize are STILL paying for the last $1billion union concession package that was agreed to by the unions from 2+ years ago.>>

STOP IT, Mr. Professor!

You know darn well the unions 'gave back' about $300M, less than 1/3 the $1B they like to imagine.

Also, the professor doesn't know the difference between a cut to a potential or hypothetical pay increase and a true decrease in pay.

Far too many in the private sector know what it's like to be 'cut' or to have their pay AND benefits truly cut.

Actually, it sounds like the professor clearly understands that the state employees have already been subject to a "true decrease in pay" in ADDITION to the salary and benefit cuts that the unions agreed to a few years ago... and that the actual figure of those union concessions of 2009 is ~700million but you probably know that darn well too.

Vote "NO" to the concessions. To state employees, the state is still accumulating the savings from the concessions of '92, '97, '03, '09, and the huge savings from the new Tier II pension of '84. Now we have the concessions of '11, stepping on the toes of the concessions of '09. Since Weicker, we will have easily given up 20% of our pay between concessions and furlough days. We've seen 4 waves of Tier I employees retire from the ages of 55 to 60, with enhancements to an already generous retirement plan. Since Tier II pays out about 40% less than Tier 1, the Tier II employees will have to wait until Social Security age to retire, from 62 to 65. What I am fearful is that we are at the tipping point, because we are accumulating the credits we need to have a secure retirement, at a slower rate, I predict the new retirement age for non-hazardous duty union state employees will be 65 to 70. (I am not looking for sympathy from you private sector people, I just looking to pass information onto the state employees reading this.) I know that my union president will frame it as, we must have no layoffs and preserve services, so vote 'yes', and save the newbies. The irony is, to save the newbies, the older state employees will have to delay their retirements, to be able to afford to retire. My message to the state employees is, do what's in your best interest, don't delay your retirement, vote "NO" to the concessions.

The unions provided concessions in 2009? OK...but why is their pay still so out of whack with the private sector? Why are their benefits so out of whack with the private sector? Why is the parking lot empty at 5PM? Because you have to pay them overtime!!!

Let's stop calling all of this concessions and call it what it really is. Honest pay for a set amount of work. Isn't that what the unions used to say?