LA City Prepares for 43 Furlough Days or 3,000 Layoffs

0 responses to “LA City Prepares for 43 Furlough Days or 3,000 Layoffs”

1. I vote for 3,000 layoffs! This agreement you are trying to shove down our throats is a terrible deal that does not adress the city’s probems or the concerns of the vast majority of city workers. This deal is being put forward to advance the concerns of union management at the expense of the workers. We gain nothing in this deal and give up everything. Hopefully, this time, the ballot language will not be as inflammatory as it was in the past, however, if not, cast my vote as yes to furloughs and layoffs!

2. If we are in a big Deficet, why is DWP, LAX, Ports and other departments not helping correct it.. Do they not take money from the City and get paid by the same Controller… Furloughs it is..

3. Patrick, if your job is on the line, would you still vote for layoffs?

4. This isn’t rocket science…

   The Mayor’s plan is only the first of many rounds of cuts. At the end of this fiscal year there will still be a structural deficit. He will cut more in the following years. How much will he cut before the city falls apart and those of us who still have jobs will not have roads to drive to them on. Who will fix the sewers, catch the loose dogs, run the libraries, answer 911 calls, and fix our city vehicals (just to name a few problems). I just don’t see what the problem is. We are looking at concessions… no one is happy about that or finds it acceptable. Things could have been done differently and faster provided the Mayor and City Council worked with us from the start. But these concessions are for the most part a one time pain. That is unfortunatly how government works sometimes.

   We must ratify this! If we don’t, the city council will be less willing to work with us in the future. I think that those of you who are nay-sayers are only looking at the pain. There will be some hours we need to take off… but layoffs and massive furloughs dont correct the problem. It only temporarily treats the symptoms. With this plan, we cut most of the top salaries off the payroll which saves today and in the future. With the mayor’s plan we save a little now… but next fiscal year, we will have to spend more money, make more cuts in $$$ and services.

   This plan (the coalition’s) is the most responsible plan out there. It preserves jobs, services, saves money, reaffirms our commitment to the city and its citizens. Most of all… It puts a cap on how bad things can get and lets our workers retire with dignity. Lets all vote YES!!! Lets get this behind us and go back to work. Thats how unions should work all he time! And together we can make it work.

5. The economic problems of the City are multi faceted and can not be broken down into simple things to do or not do. I will not lie to you, some of the problems will persist for years to come, and some issues will come around again next year.

   My reasons the ERIP is a good deal can be broken down into the following key points:
   1: 3000 layoffs is not just 3000 layoffs – it’s 3000 people out of work drawing on city and county resources driving up services that can not be afforded by the City or County as it is; it is 3000 families of 2-5 people each that may be going hungry and lose everything; its 3000 job opportunities being lost in the City of Los Angeles and the promotional opportunities that go with them. Employees will get cut from the bottom rung, but Management will eliminiate the jobs at the top end, reducing the chance for future deficits by reducing the number of higher paying job opportunities than exists now.
   2: Getting higher paying jobs back will be near impossible in the short to mid-term (3-7 years out). It took 8 years for the LAFD to add 40 positions, it will lose upwards of 60 positions (lay person and supervisory) in the time it takes to drop a gavel at Gity Council if the ERIP fails.
   3: The deal negotiated by the Coalition calls for deferals of COLAs and Step increases – From a budget perspective, pushing these out not only help get through a tough time and reduce the financial burden of the City now, but City Management has agreed to compensate employees for helping them through this struggle. Taking COLAs and step increases now instead of defering them is equal to the farmer who killed the goose that laid the golden eggs. Patience is key.
   4: I worked at the Airports for 10 years. To answer the question why aren’t the proprietary departments helping downtown, the answer is simple. The law prohibits them from doing so. The Airport is goverened by the Federal laws that say airport funds can only be used at the airport (anyone remember Mayor Riordan trying to take funds from LAX – it failed!) The Harbor is governed by the Coastal Commission which has similar provisions that bar the City General Fund from touching Harbor funds.
   Believe me, I have worked on budgets and finances for the City for over 20 years, and I know there is a lot of anxiety over this deal, but this IS a GOOD Deal for the Coalition. Do not sqwander this opportunity. Its going to be a little painful in the short run, but the gains ahead of everyone are so much more important.

6. Corey,

   Re your inquiry to Patrick:

   Many years ago I was informed that I, as a new attorney, would be laid off along with 20 other of the newest hires. I was newly married and saddled with debt from law school. I did not occur to me to ask other, more senior employees take pay cuts, furloughs, or pay more for their pensions in order to save my job. I went out and got offers for other positions . When the City finally came up with the funds necessary to retain the 21 lawyers, I stayed, turning down the 2 offers I had received.

   Employing the union’s logic, we should all volunteer to take 50% pay cuts. Then, instead of merely avoiding layoffs now, we could proactively reach out to new “brothers and sister” recently laid off by private law firms, or just emerging from law school. After all, in this workers paradise advocated by the union, everybody has the “right” to a job, even if it comes at the considerable expense of others. Now let’s all sing sing the Internationale!

7. Lesson in terminology;

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_gains_bargaining

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_bargaining

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Win-win

   WIN-WIN is the intent of “Mutual Gains.” That is the term used in our negotiations. Is that what this negotiation will provide?

8. No. There’s no win-win in this “deal.” Employees want job security and salary certainty. This “deal” provides neither. It does not protect from layoffs, either now (don’t forget the $100 million unexpected expenditure clause) or in the future (2010 – 2014 all bets are off). And the deal certainly gives nothing in the way of salary certainty. 5% voluntary furlough, 3% COLA deferral (+ for some 3.75% longevity step deferral), 1% toward ERIP (+ for some an additional 4% for ERIP), which can be adjusted over the next 15 YEARS based on yearly actuarial reports, plus 1/3 of the $100 million unexpected expenditure, plus any furloughs deemed necessary in the future. Keep in mind, the COLAs proposed for 2011 do not make us whole. The “deferred” COLAs are monies and salary advances lost forever. When you retire, you will always be 2 years behind where you could have been. Why would anyone bargain FOR this??

9. It’s time to make this deal happen.

   Unions across the state and country are taking real hits and making concessions far greater than what we are being asked to do. Anyone who thinks that layoffs and furloughs won’t happen is fooling themselves.

   Have you seen the courthouses and DMV closed by the State of California? Does anyone know a teacher whose been laid off at LA Unified? Can anyone deny that Orange County laid off a couple of hundred Social Services workers earlier this year, who help citizens who need Medicare? Has anyone seen the United Auto workers voluntarily give back raises to keep plants open and stay at work?

   This is a real worldwide fiscal emergency, and it’s at our doorstep. We have a chance to do something no other labor union has done anywhere in the country. We have a chance to minimize the damage, keep food on our tables, save our medical benefits, and protect ourselves from the worst situation this country has seen since the Great Depression.

   This is not a time to fight amongst ourselves. This is a time to be part of the union, and reach out to protect our brothers and sisters. This is a time for SOLIDARITY.

   It’s easy to call yourself a union member when we’re signing big contracts and making a lot of money with things like overtime. The real challenge of being a union member is now, when we are facing something deadlier than harassment at work, we’re facing the loss of our jobs.

   Step up to the plate, swallow your pride, look at your coworker, and tell them that you’re going to do everything you can to make sure they don’t lose their job. Then drop that ballot with a “YES” vote in the mail and support this deal. That is what being a member of a UNION is all about.

10. Does SEIU allow dissenting opinions?

    ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
    From: Dan Mariscal
    Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 10:24 PM
    To: SEIU Local 721 Action Center Subject:
    RE: LA Prepares for Up to 43 Furlough Days or 3,000 Layoffs if ERIP Not Ratified

    That’s very interesting. Right after we have our 721 meeting last Saturday, that did not go in the Coalition’s favor, another one of Mayor “Flip Flop” Villaraigosa’s minions starts with the belly‐aching and saber‐rattling. Does anyone else see a pattern?

    In late June 2009 we ratified an agreement (With no Plan B, remember?), and before the ballots were counted, Mayor Flip Flop and the City Clowncil do the honorable thing…by leaving town. By the time they get good and ready to return, the “deal” gets stale (So they said). Then they send it to Sally Choi of LACERS (appointed by Mayor Flip Flop) and she tries to poison it on the LACERS Board. The deal is accepted, but not recommended. On Sept. 15, 2009, more saber rattling and City Hall demands $63M ransom or the ERIP takes a “bullet to the head”. Then we’re off on a game of “good cop, bad cop” when the Coalition “comes to the rescue” and “persuades” City Hall for a “Stay of Execution” (Sept. 16) with a last minute “deal” in the making [Behind closed doors with no City employee bargaining teams present (No Plan B, remember?)]. On Friday, Sept. 18, 2009 the Coalition and the EERC supposedly pull a “rabbit out of the hat” and come out shaking hands, back‐slapping and high‐fiving each other, having reached a “deal”, that was “not in writing”. That weekend, the LA Times and the Daily news publishes highlights of the deal with the fact that what was once a $63M ransom now grew to $78M payoff (Imagine that! $15M in two days!)

    On Sept. 21, 2009 721 announces that the “deal” will include the sacrifice of the boot/uniform allowance and 50% pay for our holidays, but we could use vacation or accumulated time‐off to make up the difference. Then 721 “flip flopped” and said the boot/uniform allowance was now off the table and we couldn’t use any accumulated time to make up the other half of the 50% holiday pay. Despite the demand for the text of the “deal”, it wasn’t produced and that gave everyone license to speculate (that didn’t help).

    On Wednesday, Sept. 30, 2009 the text of the “deal” is nailed down and the Saturday October 3, 2009 721 meeting is scheduled, but the text of the “deal” isn’t released until Friday, October 2, 2009 at about 8:00 P.M. Saturday’s meeting started at 9:00 A.M. Was the text of the deal made available for the beginning of the meeting? [No. It was distributed after the meeting was over.]
    Instead Julie Butcher and Bob Schoonover valiantly try selling it with a power point presentation and a song and dance….It doesn’t work, and the meeting gets uglier that a hatful of a**holes.

    Word gets back to Mayor Flip Flop and he sends in his hatchet‐man to torture more numbers for us and our “good cop” obliges with this message to us.

    The timing is just too incredulous! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

    Everything we need to know about this “deal” is in the way they’re trying to ram it down our throats. We need to vote this down NOW ….AND DEFEND OUR 2007‐20012 CONTRACT.

11. I can see that everyone of these selfish, spoiled and childish haters that want to vote against the coalition’s plan considers themselves untouchable and safe from furloughs. I wonder if it was possible to send the home addresses of these “humanitarians”, to each of the thousands of those that would be layed off, if they would feel quite so safe? Of course that would never happen, so I guess you guys can go on feeling safe, and keep on hatin’. I can only hope that common sense will outweigh your ignorant disregard for your fellow workers. (Remember no deal 12%+ loss with more coming, with the deal 4% loss for 8Mos.)

12. Mr. Butcher, are you sure you’re no relation? Sounds like you’re projecting. Furthermore, threats of violence could amount to a crime. There are real losses that you have forgotten: the 3% COLAs, over two years; the 3.75% longevity step, for those to whom it applies, over two years; increasing some pension contributions from 2% to 6%; an additional 1% pension contribution over 15 years that can be adjusted upward at any time (a more than 15% loss that increases over time as pay increases); the “savings” that were put off until next fiscal year (50% sick time payments and $410 Bar dues). How do they intend to to pay these next fiscal year when it is projected to be just as bad or worse? Sounds like you need to take a deep breath, get yourself a new calculator, and try really hard to think of a tactic other than fear to get people to vote your way. Don’t hurt yourself.

13. In the first place, I would never advocate violence. I was merely hypothesizing as to whether or not you hatin’ folks would be quite so arrogant and uncaring, if your families interests were in jeopardy. By the way, you need to check your numbers. As with most all of you folks that are against this deal, they have many inaccuracies. I would invite you and anyone else that is reading this to go and read the actual numbers for themselves. Remember folks, these “vote no” people are going to cost you at least 12% this year, and more next year!

14. Apparently not, they’ve taken down many previous comments in opposition and reset the comments section. They’ve included comments from lost-timers whose obligation is now to support the deal…or else it’s back to work!

15. Dan,

    You keep preaching to everyone that we should reject ERIP and defend the 2007-2012 contract. Everyone reading these comments should be aware that YOU DID NOT SUPPORT the 2007-2012 contract when we were trying to ratify it. Now you’re “flip-flopping” as bad as the mayor!

    Actually, had we followed your sage advice back then, we would have signed a three-year contract instead. That means we would have to return to the bargaining table in 2010, when the city’s projected deficit will be about 1 billion dollars. Luckily, people decided that you were giving them bad advice.

    I really resent that you are suggesting lost timers are supporting this deal because we’re being paid by the union. That’s a really ignorant statement that’s only designed to agitate people. I wanted to work lost time for the union because I believe in saving our jobs and our paychecks. I also knew that I would need to spend a lot of energy countering the misinformation that you would be putting out there. I’m personally losing a lot of money while working lost time.

    Dan, the fact is that every time the union and it’s bargaining team endorses a deal, you are there to oppose it. That’s all you know how to do. So why don’t you display your wisdom for everyone, and answer the questions you’ve been avoiding on our email thread?

    Do you really think the union leaders are sitting in a back room with politicians trying to figure out a way to screw union members? How would that benefit the union?

    Do you think the union is saying ” There goes Dan Mariscal, trying to mess up our deal! Now we’re gonna have to enforce the 2007 contract, get our COLAs, and collect more dues money.”

    Don’t you understand that the union will actually lose more money in dues if ERIP passes, than if 2900 workers are laid-off? The unions job is to protect all workers, and it will actually share the pain with the members by passing ERIP.

    Let’s see how well you do answering these questions Dan. Let’s see you spin your way out of this one, and explain why you want to enforce the 2007 contract that you did not support back then.

    I’ll be eagerly awaiting your response.

    -Art

16. Art, I cannot and will not support a contract that the union will not let me copy and read for myself. Many, many members also agreed in 2007 that we could have and should have been closer to parity with DWP.
    You’re just going to have to face up to reality, Art. Not everyone thinks giving our money to benefit the bad spending habits of the city council is a good idea. Let alone holding our brothers and sisters hostage for ran$om. Get over it.-Dan

17. Dan,

    You refuse to answer my questions, because you would weaken your position by doing so. You’re obviously trying to spin your opinion and dodging any direct challenges to it.

    You’re also claiming that you can’t view the language of the new agreement.

    The links to that language are everywhere, including this article that you’re commenting on. Why do you keep claiming that the language is being kept secret? Just read slowly and you’ll see the links on this very page. Do you see the agreement language? Do you see the city ordinance?

    Don’t mislead people because you’re impatient. Take your time and read the facts before you spread false allegations.

    -Art