The State Worker

Today the first furlough paychecks went out to state workers, and today, for many, it's the first time that the notion of taking home nearly 10 percent less pay became real.

Phone calls we've received from state workers reflect the range of emotion that they're feeling. Some are angry. Others are resigned. One person started to cry.

And then there are the e-mails. Some samples:

I just wanted you to know that I just got my state worker paycheck. My take home pay is $453 less. My family will not be going out to eat or buying anything until after July 2010. We will not even be able to make any donations to charity that we usually do in December. They say retired senior citizens are on fixed incomes, yet they do get a COLA raise in January. As a state worker, I have not had a COLA for three years, and have now been cut 9.23%. State workers are not only on fixed incomes, they are on dying incomes. No more half price lures, no more movies, no more new clothes, no new car, no new appliances. This is going to be a long spiral down, just as I thought we could retire and enjoy ourselves. This feels like the Great Depression my parents talked about.

Jon, In case you're curious, we've been getting our paychecks today and it's not pretty. My check, as an Office Assistant (Typist), was $150 less take home than it used to be. My mother, an Assistant Information Systems Analyst, had her take home drop by $300. We will salute the governor with our Top Ramen meals for the next seventeen months.

Today, thousands of state workers received their first pay check reflecting the 10%decreasese in pay. Even though I knew it was coming and had set up a budget for the lessor pay I was still utterly shocked to see it in black in white. The room began to spin I am sure that I would have fainted if I hadn't sat down. I am a single parent receiving no other financial assistant ( child support). Everyone says it, we are being punished for the legislators not doing their job, but how do we get them to suffer the same as us make them feel it in their bank accounts too. With the rising cost of everything I feel so depressed and contacting EAP isn't going to help. I am fearful that someone with be hurt today either by self injury or riots I don't know I am just so very sad and scared for the people of California it affects everyone in some way.

A Sacramento Superior Court judge this afternoon listened to arguments in a lawsuit over whether Controller John Chiang can refuse an order to adjust state worker pay, then ended the hearing without rendering a final ruling.

Judge Timothy M. Frawley will probably issue a decision in the next few days. This afternoon's session lasted about 45 minutes with attorneys representing Chiang and Dave Gilb, director of the Department of Personnel Administration, debating whether Chiang was legally obligated to follow an administration order last summer to temporarily cut about 200,000 state workers' hourly wages to the federal minimum $6.55.

Pay amounts to salaried workers such as managers and administrators also would have been reduced with all pay and back wages restored only after the money was approved in a new budget.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger last summer ordered the temporary wage reductions as a way to save money after lawmakers failed to agree on a budget by June 30, the end of the state's fiscal year. Gilb's office then issued letters to Chiang detailing how to reduce the pay amounts. Chiang refused to comply.

The controller's lawyer, Steven Rosenthal, told Frawley this afternoon that the pay letter instructions went beyond DPA's authority, that the order violated federal labor law and that the contoller literally couldn't comply because the state's aging systems made adjusting pay amounts "infeasible."

"The resources and systems are not in ... the controller's possession," Rosenthal said.

Attorney Christopher Thomas, representing Gilb, argued that DPA has "broad authority" in personnel matters that includes the temporary pay reductions, that the order didn't violate federal law and that Chiang hadn't offered a legal reason that "infeasibility" was a legal defense to refuse the order.

Frawley on Thursday issued a tentative ruling that the state controller doesn't have the authority to disregard a DPA pay letter and must "leave review of the decision (to alter pay) to the courts and/or the Legislature." The judge will probably hand down his final decision in a few days after considering this afternoon's arguments, but it's rare for a judge to change a tentative ruling.

Even if Frawley holds to his initial decision, it's unlikely to impact state worker pay any time soon. Lawmakers passed a budget that runs through June 2010, so money is appropriated to pay wages. A governor would need to issue another order to trigger the reduction.

And it's possible that the Chiang camp, which includes support from several state worker unions, would appeal a loss, although none so far has been willing to talk about that possibility.

A spokesman for Chiang's office declined to comment on the hearing.

You can read Frawley's tentative ruling here.

Furloughed CalPERS employees are rushing to change their payroll deductions. The increased workload has backed up the fund's HR division, according to this internal memo obtained by The State Worker.

It makes us wonder: Is the same thing happening at other departments and agencies around the state?

The State Worker has obtained a breakdown from DPA showing how many employees were designated "surplus" for the purpose of sending out layoff warning notices last week.

A few things worth noting:

The figures for departments with more than 100 surplus employees total more than the original estimate of 20,000 because employees with identical hire dates were all included on the lists.

DPA didn't give us the numbers for departments with 100 or fewer surplus employees. It's the administration's policy to withhold that information for privacy reasons, spokeswoman Lynelle Jolley told us.

And remember, the list follows instructions in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Dec. 19 executive order to tag as surplus the least senior 20 percent of the workforce in General Fund departments. The percentage doesn't vary among departments, but, obviously, the number of employees in each department does vary.

Here's the unedited list from DPA:

Depts. with over 100 "surplus" employees:
CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION--13265
MENTAL HEALTH--2343
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT--1723
DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES--1420
GENERAL SERVICES--843
SOCIAL SERVICES--800
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH--658
WATER RESOURCES--570
HEALTH CARE SERVICES--566
PARKS AND RECREATION--533
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS--514
FISH AND GAME--401
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE--388
REHABILITATION--369
VETERANS AFFAIRS--327
WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD--315
AIR RESOURCES BOARD--255
TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL--192
CONSERVATION--123
DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT SERVICE--113
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOP--112
CA EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY--104

Depts. with 1 to 100 "surplus" employees:
AFRO-AMERICAN MUSEUM
AGRICULTURAL LABOR REL BOARD
BUSINESS, TRANS & HOUSING AGY
CA. COASTAL COMMISSION
CA. TAHOE CONSERVANCY
CALIFORNIA CONSERVATION CORPS
CALIFORNIA DEPT OF AGING
CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY
COMM ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN
COMMISSION ON STATE MANDATES
COMMUNITY SERVICES/DEVELOPMEN
DELTA PROTECTION COMMISSION
DEPT OF ALCOHOL & DRUG PRGMS
EMERGENCY MED SERVS AUTHORITY
ENVIRNMTL HLTH HAZRD ASSESS
FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
FINANCE
HEALTH & HUMAN RESOURCES AGY
MANAGED RISK MEDICAL INS BRD
MILITARY DEPARTMENT
MUSEUM OF SCIENCE & INDUSTRY
OFC OF SECTY ENVIRMTL PROTECT
OFF STATE CHIEF INFO OFFICER
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
OFFICE OF STW HLTH PLNG & DEV
PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION
PUBLIC EMPLMT RELATIONS BOARD
STATE & CONS SVS AGY
STATE LANDS COMMISSION
STATE PERSONNEL BOARD
STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER

From The Orange County Register:

A Los Angeles Superior Court judge has thrown out Orange County's lawsuit seeking to roll back pension increases handed out to deputy sheriffs in 2001.

The decision in the year-long lawsuit that pitted Orange County against the deputies union and the local retirement system means that county supervisors will have to decide on Tuesday whether to appeal.

While several supervisors said they were disappointed and still believe in the merits of their case, it's unclear how they will move forward.

"I still believe that we're correct," said County Supervisor John Moorlach, who led the charge in filing the lawsuit. He believes the county should appeal the decision handed down by Judge Helen Bendix.

CalPERS and Attorney General Jerry Brown sided with the deputy sheriffs.

Click here to read the entire OC Register story by reporter Noberto Sanata Jr.
and check our our earlier blog item about the case by clicking here.

Lawyers representing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Controller John Chiang will square off today at 1:30 p.m. in Sacramento Superior Court for a hearing on whether the contoller must pay state workers the federal minimum wage, currently $6.55 per hour, if lawmakers fail to pass a budget by the end of a fiscal year.

As we report in this story, Judge Timothy Frawley on Thursday tentatively ruled in favor of the governor. Frawley will issue a final ruling some time after today's hearing. Judges usually don't change their tentative decisions.

Remember, since the governor and lawmakers have budgeted money for state worker wages through the 2009-10 fiscal year, the earliest pay period that a budget delay could trigger wage reductions is July 2010.

That's assuming, of course, Frawley sticks with his tentative ruling and that Chiang doesn't successfully appeal it.

What does all of this mean to you? DPA set up this Web page last summer to answer questions about how the order would have affected state workers.

If you want to understand the issues more deeply, here's a list of significant documents that will give you plenty of context:

• Schwarzenegger's July 31 Executive Order S-09-08, which mandates the wage reductions.
• A transcript of the Schwarzenegger press conference announcing the Executive Order.
• Chiang's "I will not comply" letter of July 31.
• Chiang's prepared remarks to the Senate Governmental Organizational Committee on Aug. 4.
• DPA Director Dave Gilb's Aug. 5 pay letter to Controller John Chiang authorizing the pay reductions in accordance with White v. Davis. (You can read the State Supreme Court's ruling on White by clicking here.)
• The lawsuit brought by Gilb to force Chiang to comply with White v. Davis.
• Frawley's tentative ruling.

A Sacramento Superior Court judge has tentatively ruled that state workers' wages can be temporarily reduced to the federal minimum when lawmakers don't pass a budget on time. You can read our story here. To view the tentative ruling, click here.

Joseph A. Dear on Monday takes over investments at CalPERS. Bloomberg.com marks the occasion with this story.

A couple of things worth noting from the piece: CalPERS, with $168.3 billion in assets, is now the second-largest public pension fund behind the $197.3 billion Federal Thrift Savings Plan. We hate to admit it, but we didn't know that.

The story also talks a bit at the end about losses incurred by the Washington State Investment Board while Dear was that pension fund's executive director.

IMAGE: Joseph A. Dear / CalPERS

DPA has posted the SEIU Local 1000 contracts on its Web site by bargaining unit. You can read them here.

The department also has posted this summary of the deals.

Union employment, good. Non-union employment, bad.

That pretty much sums up a new report by The Center for American Progress, which describes itself as a "progressive think-tank dedicated to improving the lives of Americans through ideas and action."

Looking from 1980 to 2008, nationwide worker productivity grew by 75.0 percent, while workers' inflation-adjusted average wages increased by only 22.6 percent, which means that workers were compensated for only 30.2 percent of their productivity gains.

The center has a California fact sheet that you can access here.

The American Progress folks put out the information to argue for the The Employee Free Choice Act.

But here's the question for state workers, during this season of contract bargaining: How much have you benefited from union representation? And if your union is at the table now, what would you consider a reasonable deal?

It's helpful, we think, to occasionally put California's state worker issues in a larger context:

1. Take a look at The Arizona Republic's story, ""Union's request to halt state layoffs denied."

While you're there, check out a few of the reader comments. Not much different than what we see on nearly every state worker news story posted on sacbee.com.

2. Public pension consultant Susan Mangiero writes on her Pension Risk Matters blog that,

The stage is set for continued frustration on the part of public employees (many of whom no doubt work quite hard to do a great job) versus Joe and Sally Taxpayer who have less and less disposable income to finance giant IOUs.

Her comments spin off a Forbes.com story, "Gilt-Edged Pensions." The title says it all.

Side note: Forbes has a map that shows estimated funding levels for state pension plans around the country. Click here to view the graphic.

The State Worker recently told you about an IT blogger who contended that Chief Info Officer Teri Takai's "Wins for California's Information Technology" list overstated the state's high tech successes. The blogger, Michael Krigsman, concluded after analyzing a lengthy list of state projects that, "California's CIO presented an unbalanced, and perhaps even misleading, view of success and likely failure on the state's IT project portfolio."

Krigsman has now pulled back on that assessment, according to a recent entry on his ZDNet blog:

After a lengthy conversation with senior representatives of California's CIO, Teri Takai, I no longer believe Takai deliberately intended to mislead the public over project duration reporting in California's 2009 IT Strategic Plan.

The reason for Krigsman's change of heart?

Takai's representatives, Adrian Farley, Chief Deputy Director for Policy and Program Management, and Bill Maile, Director of Communications, convincingly explained how the duration reporting discrepancies I identified in a previous blog post arose from "unclear language" and "nomenclature."

Krigsman's conclusion:

Large IT projects combine substantial cost with high complexity, creating tremendous risk and corresponding opportunities for waste. Government agencies have an obligation to report this data clearly and accurately.

To the Office of the CIO's credit, Farley and Maile readily acknowledged the confusion and said they will update their strategic plan with specific time durations for each project.

Click this link to Krigsman's blog post for more details and analysis.

Assemblyman Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) has introduced a bill intended to make state spending more transparent. We want to know what you think, state workers.

AB 400 would require agencies and departments post on their Web sites each year how they're spending their money. Several other states already have online tools that let anyone look at state spending. Here's an example of what Texas does.

We're interested to know what state workers think, since they're the ones who always have to carry out the marching orders that the generals under the dome issue when they pass this kind of legislation.

Can this be done with California's vast bureaucracy? Would it be an effective way to hold state government more accountable? What downsides, if any, do you see with this bill?

You can view the bill's language by clicking this link.

Click here to read the de León press release. And look here for a bill background sheet issued by the Assemblyman's office.

Colleague Andrew McIntosh reports in this story that DGS is about to launch eProcurement, which as the name suggests, is a new Web-based procurement system.

After Andrew filed his story, we poked around a bit on the DGS Web site and found these paragraphs from a Jan. 30 DGS bulletin about the system. The bulletin was sent to all department directors (bold added for emphasis):

The Department of General Services Procurement Division (DGS/PD) anticipated rolling out the new statewide e-procurement system (eP) in February 2009. However, end-to-end system testing has not yet been completed, and there has been difficulty securing department system training attendance and department identification of its system administrators (and backup). Therefore, the DGS/PD has revised the implementation schedule with a new "go live" date of Monday, March 16, 2009. It is imperative that departments that have not yet done so submit the name and contact information of their designated system administrators (and backup) and register the appropriate staff for system training.

Failure to identify System Administrators and submit their contact information to the DGS/PD may result in delays to contract advertisements and registering contract entries in the DGS/PD's California State Contracts Register (CSCR) and the State Contract Procurement and Registration System (SCPRS).

DGS first put out the call for trainees on Aug. 1, and at the time planned to launch the system in October. It repeated the request on Sept. 9.

Three days later, Sept. 12, DGS put off the October launch and the employee training that was scheduled for Sept. 15. The reason: the budget impasse, according to this bulletin.

What are we to make of this, if anything?

Obviously, this is one relatively small example of how the budget mess disrupted the state's business. Is this also an example of communication breakdown in state government? Did this slide down management's priority list as other, more pressing issues piled up? What has your experience been when new technology is introduced on your state job? Even the best technology doesn't work if humans don't learn how to use it.

We're considering this broader topic for our weekly column. It all depends on what we hear from you. If you're interested in being part of that, shoot us an e-mail at jortiz@sacbee.com or call (916) 321-1043.

IMAGE: www.spi.dgs.ca.gov

State workers are already an issue in the 2010 Republican gubernatorial campaign. Both top contenders for the party's nomination, ex-eBay CEO Meg Whitman and Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, have talked about further cutting California's employee expenses.

Both candidates appeared at the state Republican convention over the weekend and pledged they wouldn't raise taxes if elected to succeed Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Regarding state employees, Whitman said this during a Saturday press conference:

I think that the thing that was not looked at carefully at all was the size of the bureaucracy and the size of the number of employees that serve the state. Every company, every not-for-profit, when you see the kind of revenue declines the state has had, you have to look at headcount.

And there were, you know, furloughs. I think we should have looked at doubling the number of furloughs and, frankly, taken out 10 percent of headcount across the board. And trust me, it can be done without degrading the services to the citizens of California.

Poizner has a similar take.

In a Feb. 17 meeting with The Bee's Capitol Bureau reporters, he said that under his leadership, his department has gone from about 1,300 workers to about 1,150 through attrition and technology improvements to boost efficiency. It's proof, Poizner said, that he can use similar techniques to trim the work force throughout California's vast bureaucracy after a thorough review of state operations.

IMAGES: Steve Poizner / Sacramento Bee, Randall Benton; Meg Whitman / Sacramento Bee, Hector Amezcua

California's budget deal last week doesn't mean state workers can spike the ball. In some ways, the game is just starting. Most unions are still bargaining for contracts. The full impact of furloughs has yet to show up on paychecks. Several furlough lawsuits are still in play.

And of, of course, there are plenty of questions about what's going on with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's layoff order.

On Friday, we passed along several of your questions to DPA. Here's the e-mailed response we received this morning from spokeswoman Lynelle Jolley:

Is there a date when all the surplus letters will go out at once? Or a delivery deadline that has to be met by the departments?

There's no attempt to pick a single date and time for all recipients to get them, although DPA instructed departments to get them out last week (Tuesday or Wednesday). The departments that get money from the General Fund were instructed to send them, no exceptions.

Are the letters being mailed to employees or handed to them at work?

Each department decides the best method of delivery, either in person or by mail.

Does the state have a breakdown by department or agency of how many notices are going out?

I don't have a breakout (at least not yet) of who sent them out but the top one was CDCR (around 13,000). The count is based on the lowest 20 percent of each of these GF depts in terms of seniority.

In a separate telephone conversation a few minutes ago, Jolley said now that the state has a budget, departments can manage to a specific savings goal. "That means there will probably be a lot fewer (lay offs) than what it might have been" without a budget in place, she said. Departments are making "refinements" to their layoff plans as they crunch their numbers.

IMAGE: www.dpa.ca.gov

In all the hubbub that went with last week's budget and union contract news, we failed to mention that a date has been set in Sacramento Superior Court to hear Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's lawsuit to settle the question of whether constitutional officers have to abide by his furlough order.

Controller John Chiang's side must file their papers by March 3.

The Department of Personnel Administration must then respond by March 9.

The hearing is set for March 13 before Judge Patrick Marlette. You'll recall Marlette was the judge who last month said Schwarzenegger's emergency powers include furloughing state employees.

In some ways, the lawsuit is a moot exercise, since Schwarzenegger reduced the constitutionals' personal services budgets by up to 10 percent. (Lt. Governor John Garamendi, an outspoken critic of the budget, didn't get off so easy. His 21-member personal services budget took a 62 percent hit.) The targeted line item cuts by the governor mean that the departments will likely have to furlough or lay off employees.

You can view the court order here.

We're working with Bee reporter Jim Sanders to flesh out this story on Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's cuts to the budgets of the state's constititional officers. The cuts in almost every instance are directed specifically at funds that pay for employee wages.

Most of the cuts take 10 percent out of the departments' personal services budgets. Some less, and one, Lt. Gov. John Garamendi's 21-person office, takes a 62 percent hit.

You can read the budget cuts by clicking here. The cut details start at PDF page 8.

We've received some e-mails and phone calls all asking the same question: So now that the budget is passed, is Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger still going send lay off warnings to 20,000 state workers?

Well, the threat is still out there.

Here's what he said to reporters on Thursday after legislators passed the budget:

QUESTION: What does this budget vote mean for state workers as far as furloughs and the planned layoffs, can you tell us?

GOVERNOR: Well, you know, I cannot tell you, because we have to look at it. Whatever gets us the savings. I think that with the furloughs and with the sick leave and the holidays and all of those things, I think we get tremendous savings. We just have to look if we need any further savings.

We called Schwarzenegger's office this afternoon to see if there's been any budge on layoffs. Is the plan still on?

No change, we were told.

Why not? Here's our thinking:

Although Schwarzenegger has a tentative deal with SEIU Local 1000 that would cover nearly half of the state work force, he's still not come to terms with the other half.

It's clear that layoffs and furloughs are the two big sticks he's brandishing at the bargaining table to prod the other 10 unions and 11 bargaining units without new labor pacts into making concessions.

(The California Association of Highway Patrolmen aren't part of this discussion. The CHP officers' union has a four-year deal that doesn't expire until July 2, 2010.)

Look at Schwarzenegger's position:

He won the first round of the furlough court fight.

He has a tentative deal with the Local 1000, California's biggest public employee union, that (on paper at least) costs the state less than the expired contract.

He has a budget deal that includes significant changes to state worker holidays and overtime.

He just whacked by 10 percent the personal services budgets of the constitutional officers, achieving the same savings he figures his two-day-per-month furlough order would have yielded if those officials complied. (Lt. Gov. John Garamendi's office took a much bigger hit.)

So why back off on anything now? From the administration's perspective, the governor is on a roll. Of course, from the perspective of many state workers, he's rolling over them.

A couple of news nuggets that we had to set aside while chasing budget and union contract developments over the last few days:

Local 1000 group says new agreement 'bad for employees'

An SEIU Local 1000 dissident group calling itself Environmental & Transportation Professionals in California Government, has declared on its Web site that, "SEIU 1000 contract bad for employees!" The group, which says it represents about 1,600 workers who want to sever from the local, has called for members to vote "no" when the tentative agreement comes up for ratification.

CalPERS re-elects board members, names new real estate investments manager

CalPERS board announced in this press release that Rob Fecker was re-elected to a fifth term as the system's president and George Diehr was re-elected vice president for a second year. The fund also has named James G. Lasher as its new Senior Portfolio Manager of its Real Estate Housing Program.

IMAGES: Rob Feckner (left) and George Diehr / calpers.ca.gov

There's an opening at DPA:

... DUTIES: Under the general supervision of the Chief Counsel and the direct supervision of an Assistant Chief Counsel, the incumbent is responsible for representing the Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) and client agencies in defending legal actions challenging the lawfulness of layoffs, and other related litigation; participating in labor arbitration hearings pursuant to the existing Memoranda of Understanding ...

Of course if you're faced with being laid off, you have a leg up on transferring:

... WHO MAY APPLY: Surplus/SROA eligibles at the Legal Counsel, Staff Counsel, Labor Relations Counsel I, II, III, IV levels, and/or those who have eligibility for appointment or transfer to this level are strongly encouraged to apply. Applications will be screened and only the most qualified will be considered for an interview.

You can see the job post here on the State Personnel Board's Web site.

IMAGE: www.dpa.ca.gov

Blog backs review your thoughtful and provocative online comments, amplify points, answer questions, correct our mistakes and humbly accept your warranted criticism.

Feb. 12 The State Worker: Furloughs boost governor's muscle at bargaining table

It's a power grab...The Governor loves power...although late in his Administration...it is something he will take credit for and relish in (sic) unless he is soundly knocked on his backside...

We suspect that all elected officials by their nature tend to "love power." A willingness to wield power is a prerequisite for seeking high office. Using power once in office is part of governing.

Whether an official's actions effectively use power or abuse it is generally where disagreements arise.

Moving on ... This blog user quotes from our column and then draws a conclusion from it:

"It's a fight worth having. Someone needs to decide if a governor can run California like a CEO heading a high- tech firm in the dot-com bust."

Uhm, no kidding Ortiz again... I guess Wilson giving endorsement to Whittman (sic) was purely coincidental, or are you too afraid or uncertain to spell it out? Whittman (sic) is Ahnold all over again..

.

The commentator is seeing shadows where none exist. We have no opinion on the Meg Whitman candidacy.

Having said that, we're not convinced that a successful business career sharpens the skills a person needs to lead in a democracy, since government operates differently than a private sector company.

No one man should have this much power in a democracy.

We'll see if the courts agree, assuming that challenges to Schwarzenegger's furlough order continue.

The Bee and apparently "The State Worker" aren't aware that the State usually furloughs many of its employees from around June to February 16, in the last few years, in order to make money come out of the air ...

You're correct. We didn't know this, So please, educate us. How many workers are we talking about? A few hundred? A few thousand? Several departments or one? How much money "comes out of the air" from this policy? Specifics, please.

Feb. 13 Layoff warnings averted -- for now

Here's a rare kind word for the governor from a self-identified public employee ...

Whereas Gray Davis would've been paralyzed due to his generosity to certain unions and inability to absorb negative fallback from any cuts he would've had to make, our current governor is taking definite action. One may not agree with them but he is taking the necessary steps to force the Legislature to come up with solutions. As far as the lack of communication, it is unfortunate. However, public sector employees (such as myself) will find that private sector employees are also in the same boat when it comes to "business communications."

This disgruntled blog user opines about the state's communication problems:

... I am tired to reading what is happening with my employment in the newspaper before I hear about it from my employer. There seems to be a standard disregard for employees from the Governor and the legislature. Since I can not be sure that any of them read e-mails, evidenced by lack of response, I'd like to address them all here. After all, since all communication comes through the Sac Bee from them to us, maybe they will see it here ...

The user then expresses his disgust.

We occasionally hear stories from state workers who say using this blog gives them more information about what's going on with their jobs than what they get from their superiors.

We have it on good report that several weeks ago employees in one state unit found their access to The State Worker was blocked. Several attributed the cutoff to an administrator who became upset in a meeting when subordinates shared furlough policy information they'd read on this blog -- information that the administrator didn't know.

Some state workers figured out how to get around the block. Others protested the policy. After a few days, the filter blocking the access was removed.

Feb. 14 SEIU and administration reach tentative labor deal

The State Worker community was divided on whether the SEIU tentative agreement is a good deal:

Well done. This is an acceptable compromise. Lets's close this terrible chapter of our lives.

I read this and quite frankly laughed out loud. This is like negotiating and giving the other side the preferred method to do you in. SEIU members should feel robbed that they pay dues to this clueless organization.

Feb. 16 Layoff warning notices to go out Tuesday morning

Schwarzenegger's furlough / layoff orders have created a dilemma for state workers: Am I willing to give up some of my pay to save colleagues' jobs? Blog users weighed in:.

I'm sorry I just can't hide what I am thinking. Layoofs (sic) suck and I am sorry for those who may get laid off. (Which I doubt will happen) But I will say this. BETTER THEM THEN ME.

I for one would gladly take a one day furlough rather than get laid off. Those of you who are willing to let your co-workers get laid off so you can keep a lousy 5% should be ashamed.

I am not ashamed, I have worked for the state 33 years and in the past two years have seen everthing (sic) that I worked hard for go away with this gov. and this so called union. This happens in the private sector, it's bad that the younger workers with get laid off, but that is life.

Feb. 17 Furlough Friday rules clarified for this week

If this contract does get ratified, and therefore we will be owed one day of pay from February since the instructions are not to work, how will all this pan out? I don't believe they ultimately will say "here's your money back for that extra furlough day we made you take in February."

The SEIU tentative agreement calls for 17 furlough days in 17 months from February through June 2010. Employees covered by that deal, assuming it's ratified, will get credit for the extra "Furlough Friday" they took this month by skipping a furlough day later on.

A tired Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger threw the state worker rumor mill into high gear this afternoon with these remarks during a press conference:

QUESTION: What does this budget vote mean for state workers as far as furloughs and the planned layoffs, can you tell us?

GOVERNOR: Well, you know, I cannot tell you, because we have to look at it. Whatever gets us the savings. I think that with the furloughs and with the sick leave and the holidays and all of those things, I think we get tremendous savings. We just have to look if we need any further savings.

QUESTION: So the furloughs will stay in place for now? Two days a month?

GOVERNOR: It's one day a month of furloughs.

QUESTION: One day a month?

GOVERNOR: Exactly, yes.

Those remarks, Webcast live via the Governor's Web site, prompted state workers and union officials to call us asking what the deal is. Was the governor reducing state workers' furloughs from two days to one day per month? Was this a signal?

Nope, said Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear.

"As it stands, the executive order is still in effect for two days per month," he said.

That means tomorrow is another "Furlough Friday."

That's even true for SEIU members whose a tentative agreement calls for one self-directed furlough day per month, assuming the deal gets ratification from members and the Legislature. Once that happens, workers covered by the SEIU agreement will get credit for the day they take off tomorrow, since their contract calls for 17 furlough days in 17 months.

Everyone else? Until your union cuts a deal that reduces the number of furlough days, you're still on the two-per-month plan.
Starting next month, however, management will have flexibility to schedule furlough days to suit the organization's needs. The reason: SEIU members make up a large part of the workforce; they can't work on Fridays while everyone else is off or vice-versa.

And that means for some folks the pain of being furloughed won't be blunted by getting a 3-day weekend. It's quite possible that the new policy will mean most people have to take Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday off without pay.

As to Schwarzenegger's remarks, "Give the guy a break. He's been up all night," McLear said. "Or maybe he just didn't hear the question correctly."

We just received a copy of the SEIU Local 1000 tentative agreement. We've broken it up into three sections:

SEIU tentative agreement, Part 1, 57 pages

SEIU tentative agreement, Part 2, 33 pages

SEIU tentative agreement, Part 3, 54 pages

As we have reported, SEIU has said that its contract's overtime provisions supercede language in the budget bill that removes all personal leave from counting toward overtime. Yesterday it sent out talking points to stewards that included:

Sick leave is no longer counted towards overtime (i.e. If you use a sick day, and have to work on Saturday, you will not earn OT, until you've worked more than 40 hours).

Within hours of signing the TA, the governor went to the Legislature seeking to expand the overtime exemption to include all leaves; Local 1000 leaders and lobbyists worked throughout the weekend and was able to convince legislators to kill the bill.

But as we noted earlier today, the Legislature did indeed pass a bill, SBX3 8, that eliminates all leave from counting toward the overtime threshold, regardless of the reason.

Furthermore, it appears that SEIU's deal accepts the Legislature's tougher OT rules. Here's the pertinent paragraph from the tentative agreement:

Should the Legislature amend or enact any provision of law that allows the State to exclude leave from counting as time worked for purposes of determining the number of hours worked in a work week, that provision to the extent that it may be in conflict with this MOU, shall not be superseded by any provision of the MOU. Any and all MOU sections or past practices that conflict with this new provision of law shall immediately be superseded without further action.

Click here to view the image of that page of the agreement.

We called SEIU for comment about that key passage. Union spokesman Jim Zamora said, "No comment at this time."

We don't want to create worry needlessly, but we can't hold back any longer. It looks like SEIU and DPA have a serious disagreement about their recent labor agreement.

We're weeding through the new budget legislation to figure out what it means to state workers. The key bill is SBX3 8. What's clear is that unless a union negotiates a better deal for itself, its members lose Lincoln's Birthday and Columbus Day and overtime rules are significantly changed. Furloughs aren't in the legislation. We've reported that for you previously.

But a difference of interpretation between the union and the state has arisen over how to read today's budget when it comes to state worker overtime. SEIU says its deal to allow all leave except sick leave to count toward OT is supreme. DPA says, no, it's the language of the budget -- and furthermore SEIU's language to allow stricter OT rules passed by the Legislature.

Two sections of the budget bill deserve particular attention:

SEC. 5. Section 19844.1 is added to the Government Code, to read:

19844.1. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, personal leave, sick leave, annual leave, vacation, bereavement eave, holiday leave, and any other paid or unpaid leave, shall not be considered as time worked by the employee for the purpose of
computing cash compensation for overtime or compensating time of for overtime.

(b) If subdivision (a) is in conflict with the provisions of a memorandum of understanding reached or amended pursuant to Section 3517.5 on or after February 1, 2009, or the date that the act adding this section takes effect, whichever is later, that memorandum of understanding shall be controlling without further legislative action, except that if those provisions of the memorandum of understanding require the expenditure of funds, the provisions shall not become effective unless approved by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act.

SEC. 7. Section 19853 is added to the Government Code, to read: 19853. (a) All state employees shall be entitled to the following holidays: January 1, the third Monday in January, the third Monday in February, March 31, the last Monday in May, July 4, the first Monday in September, November 11, Thanksgiving Day, the day after Thanksgiving, December 25, the day chosen by an employee pursuant to Section 19854, and every day appointed by the Governor of this state for a public fast, thanksgiving, or holiday.

(b) If a day listed in this subdivision falls on a Sunday, the following Monday shall be deemed to be the holiday in lieu of the day observed. If November 11 falls upon a Saturday, the preceding Friday shall be deemed to be the holiday in lieu of the day
observed.

(c) Any state employee who may be required to work on any of the holidays included in this section, and who does work on any of these holidays, shall be entitled to receive straight-time pay and eight hours of holiday credit.

(d) For the purpose of computing the number of hours worked, time when an employee is excused from work because of holidays, sick leave, vacation, annual leave, compensating time off, or any other leave shall not be considered as time worked by the employee for the purpose of computing cash compensation for overtime or
compensating time off for overtime.

(e) Any state employee, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 3513, may elect to receive eight hours of holiday credit for the fourth Friday in September, known as "Native American Day," in lieu of receiving eight hours of personal holiday credit in
accordance with Section 19854.

(f) Persons employed on less than a full-time basis shall receive holidays in accordance with the Department of Personnel Administration rules.

(g) If subdivision (a), (c), or (d) is in conflict with the provisions of a memorandum of understanding executed or amended pursuant to Section 3517.5 on or after February 1, 2009, or the date that the act adding this section takes effect, whichever is later, the
memorandum of understanding shall be controlling without further legislative action, except that if those provisions of the memorandum of understanding require the expenditure of funds, the provisions shall not become effective unless approved by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act.

We've talked to SEIU. Twice. We've talked to DPA. Twice. Part of the problem is that we've seen the budget language but haven't yet seen the union agreement.

You can read the budget language that affects state workers for yourself. Click here to read the bill. You'll want to scroll down to page 15 and Secton 4 of SBX3 8 which amends 19844.1 of the government code. OT and holiday terms run through page 19.

Stay tuned. We'll certainly have more from SEIU and DPA about this.

Bee business reporter and Home Front blogger Dale Kasler has a story in today's Bee about what President Barack Obama's home foreclosure-prevention plan means for Sacramento, one of the nation's worst housing markets.

As he worked on the story, Dale put out an online request for people in danger of losing their homes to contact him. On Wednesday he told us that of nine responses, five were from state workers:

"All (five) say the furloughs have pushed them closer to the edge of foreclosure. They were scraping by, but now the lost income definitely hurts their ability to keep up with mortgage payment."

The State Worker has obtained a copy of SEIU Local 1000's talking points to help stewards explain to the rank-and-file what's going on with "Furlough Friday" this week and the union's tentative contract agreement with the Schwarzenegger administration:

Furlough Friday--2/20/09

· The governor and (sic) has gone back on the word of his negotiators and will now close state offices this Friday ... Despite telling our negotiators otherwise as the tentative agreement was being signed, DPA is covering for their boss saying that Local 1000 represented employees ARE furloughed this Friday, because the tentative agreement has not been ratified.

· ALL state employees should ask their supervisors for written instructions on whether or not they are to report to work on Friday, February 20.

Key provisions of the Tentative Agreement:

· The new contract will run through 6/30/10.

· 8 hrs/month Mandatory Personal Leave/Furlough Program
Ø Pay is temporarily cut by 4.62%.
Ø Pay will be restored to January 2009 levels on July 1, 2010.
Ø In exchange, employees will receive 8 hours of personal leave per month.
Ø The temporary pay cut can be mitigated by carefully planning your sick and vacation days. You can use personal leave days in lieu of sick days and bank your sick time toward retirement. You can also use your personal leave days instead of vacation days and bank your vacation time for payout when you end your employment with the state. The new personal leave days cannot be cashed out.

Ø The PLP time must be used by June 30th, 2012.

Ø Part Time and Permanent Intermittent employees will have their hours cut pro-rata.
Ø SEIU1000 will continue to appeal the initial court's finding that the governor can unilaterally impose furloughs.
Ø DPA ordering 2/20 as a furlough day is being added to our litigation.

· Layoff protection: Layoffs can only occur when departments are eliminated or entire offices or entire facilities are closed.

Ø Local 1000 represented employees are being included in the 20,000 surplus notices being sent out this week ... however, our tentative agreement give them special protections from actual layoff.

Ø Layoffs will not go into effect until this summer.
Ø Under terms of the tentative agreement Local 1000-represented employees' whose position is subject to layoff, will be given another job within 10 percent of their current salary and within 50 miles of their home, provided their department isn't being eliminated or their entire office or entire facility isn't being closed.

· Employee health contributions will be frozen to about the same levels as 2008, Kaiser and Blue Shield plans most affected.

Ø That's a 5% - 9% cost saving to Local 1000-represented employees. (Consider it this way, whatever you do not pay as an increase in healthcare insurance costs is an increase in what you keep as "take-home pay.")

Ø Increased contributions already paid from January 30, 2009 on will be refunded.

· We will get two new floating personal holidays in exchange for giving up Lincoln's Birthday and Columbus Day. This means we will now have three personal holidays.

· Dues will go down accordingly, because pay will be reduced by 4.62%. However, if employees make more than $6000 per month, after the reduction in pay, your dues will be the same because these employees were actually paying less than 1.5% because of the $90 cap.

· Travel per diem is increased from $40/day to $55/day: $8 breakfast / $15 lunch / $25 dinner / $7 incidental.

· Training and Development: The tentative agreement will increase career enhancement options by creating a Joint Labor-Management Trust, with $1 million in initial funding to be applied to continuing education and professional development for Local 1000-represented employees.

· "Most Favored Nations" clause: If another union gets a better deal, we can re-open our contract and negotiate a similar improvement.

· Sick leave is no longer counted towards overtime (i.e. If you use a sick day, and have to work on Saturday, you will not earn OT, until you've worked more than 40 hours).

Ø Within hours of signing the TA, the governor went to the Legislature seeking to expand the overtime exemption to include all leaves; Local 1000 leaders and lobbyists worked throughout the weekend and was able to convince legislators to kill the bill.

We take plenty of calls and e-mail from state workers who criticize Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for furloughing employees and planning layoffs as ingredients for easing California's financial crunch. This letter to Schwarzenegger and the author's prologue to it sums up the tone of what we're hearing every day:

From: Robert H Nunn
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 3:20 PM
To: Ortiz, Jon - Sacramento
Subject: Letter to Gov.

I sent this email (below) to the Governor this morning about saving money in the state budget; I fear that he is not really serious about saving money, but is only politically motivated to "beat up" on state employees. Arnie's chief game plan is to lay state employees off and further worsen the California economy and he won't be happy until he achieves this goal.

This is the way things were also, back when Jerry Brown was governor in 1976 during the Caltrans layoffs. Jerry wasn't happy until he and Adriana Gianturkey laid off several thousand Caltrans engineers which they accomplished (I was one of them); then, a year or two later after they had literally gutted Caltrans and made it ineffective, they then tried to hire back all the Caltrans engineers that they had laid off.

I fear that politics hasn't changed much over the years. Gov. Arnie has it out for all state employees now!!

My email to the Governor was as follows:

Dear Governor:

If the Governor would like to save some money in the state budget, here are a few possible suggestions:

1. Retrieve approx. 10-15% if all the state agency's operating expense budgets; this should amount to several million dollars in savings and this money could be placed right back in the general fund immediately to make up for deficits.

2. Reduce all unnecessary travel and training for all state agencies immediately and make it supervisor approved only; these items could be reduced easily by all state agencies; this should also result in many thousands of dollars of savings (i.e., we are sending people to Traffic Ops academy in Fresno and paying for training and travel costs; this kind of training should be postponed until the budget normalizes and we have adequate funding for training such as this. I, for one, would rather have a full paycheck than Caltrans be paying for training); many Project Development Team meetings could be held via video conference (i.e., why have region folks travel all the way from Fresno to SLO for meetings and pay for travel when meetings could all be held via videoconference.)

3. Offer an early retirement proposal such as 2 years service or 2 years age for all state agencies; this would entice some folks to retire a lot earlier than they normally would; the KEY to the savings would be, of course, NOT to backfill the vacated positions.

4. Implement a hiring freeze for all vacant positions in state government; vacant positions could only be backfilled on exemption basis only.

Thank your for your consideration on this matter.

Sincerely,
Robert H. Nunn, P.E.
PECG Member

SEIU Local 1000 has a tentative labor deal. Now it needs member ratification. Here's how the vote will go down:

On Tuesday, the Statewide Bargaining Advisory Council is scheduled to vote on the agreement. The 250-member group is comprised of union members from all over the state who are elected by their peers.

Assuming the council approves the agreement, the process moves on to a rank-and-file member vote. All members will get ballots in the mail, or they can vote at any ratification meeting scheduled after the council vote.

The locations and times of those meetings will be published on the SEIU Web site as soon as they are set. It's not yet clear how many meetings the union will hold. "I am told that last time we approved a contract there were 250 meetings in work places all over the state," SEIU spokesman Jim Zamora said in an e-mail.

The member ratification vote will take about three weeks to finish after the council's vote Tuesday.

SEIU also will post the full text of the agreement on its Web site, but it has not announced when.

The Department of Personnel Administration just told The State Worker that Furlough Friday this week will happen with the same rules that governed the Feb. 6 furlough.

In other words, unless you're on a self-directed furlough for different day, don't show up to work on Friday. The instructions include the 95,000 workers covered by the tentative agreement struck last week by SEIU Local 1000.

The reason SEIU members are going to take the day off with everyone else is that Local 1000 still has to ratify its contract and the Legislature hasn't approved it, DPA spokeswoman Lynelle Jolley told us.

If you were off Feb. 6, you'll be off again this Friday.

So, should you show up for work on Friday?

The state is still figuring it out. Officials are unraveling the ramifications of the tentative agreement with SEIU Local 1000 that limits employees covered by the pact to one day of flexibly-scheduled leave per month.

Here's where it gets tricky.

No other unions have struck labor deals yet. The Department of Personnel Administration says that means the two-day furlough order by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger still applies to them. We're talking about roughly 143,000 state employees, both union rank-and-file and exempt managers not covered by the SEIU agreement (which, by the way, still needs ratification by its members).

So what now? Should everyone show up for work on Friday? Or should only employees covered by the SEIU agreement show up? But if they show up and no one else does, including their supervisors, how exactly does that work?

We're not even sure that SEIU members should go to work on Friday. We asked union spokesman Jim Zamora if all 95,000 of the employees covered by the tentative deal should go to work on Friday. He e-mailed reply: "Sorry, You need to ask the state to confirm that."

We already had. A little before 3 this afternoon we received word that the Department of Personnel Administration hasn't yet made a final decision about the next scheduled Furlough Friday.

This letter from Controller John Chiang to Finance Director Mike Genest lays out Chiang's rationale for not furloughing his people.

SCO spokesman Jacob Roper sent it to us last week with this explanation:

Jon - attached is the proposal from the Controller, which produces a $16 million solution for this agency alone (State Controller's Office). The Controller has already restricted hiring and travel expenses for the entire agency. Furloughing employees would only produce a temporary $9 million solution, but it's very possible that would introduce other problems for this agency as we manage the State's worst cash crisis since the Great Depression.

We approached the Governor's office about this alternative, and other constitutional officers have put together similar plans. Instead, yesterday, we got a lawsuit. If this is really about money, then the Governor should respect independently-elected officials' authority to responsibly manage their agencies and reduce expenditures, as other governors of both parties have done in the past.

On the furlough litigation, we have the standard 30 days to respond. If we put anything out, I'll let you know, but in the meantime I should direct you to the Attorney General's office, since that office will be representing the Controller in this case.

The letter also addresses criticism of the Cannery Business Park project.

As you'll recall, employees of the lieutenant governor, the secretary of state, the treasurer, the controller, the attorney general, the superintendent of public Instruction, the insurance commissioner and the BOE didn't take the Feb. 6 furlough day. (Gov. Schwarzenegger, the eighth constitutional officer, did furlough his staff.) Schwarzenegger is suing to force the constitutionals to follow his furlough order.

IMAGE: John Chiang / Sacramento Bee, Randall Benton

The State Worker has received a copy of the "surplus notice" that individual departments are sending out to their least senior employees. Each department will put the notice on its own the letterhead.

The letter will be issued to 20,000 state workers, according to officials in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration, with a target of 10,000 layoffs by July 1. The Legislative Analyst, however, questions whether that goal is realistic.

Click here to read the letter.

You can see a how the layoff process works on this page of the Department of Personnel Administration's Web site.

We're working on getting a few things for you this morning:

• A copy of the layoff warning letter going out to 20,000 state workers today.
• Specifics on how furloughs will work this week, given that employees under the SEIU's tentative contract, reached on Saturday, are not subject to twice-monthly furlough. The SEIU deal calls for just one unpaid leave day per month.
• More details on the new SEIU contract

.

We're also planning to reach out to unions still bargaining for a new contract. Is the SEIU deal a template for them? And what about various court actions fighting the furlough order?

We want to hear from you. What questions do you have? Have you or a coworker received a layoff warning letter? Let us know what you're seeing.

Well, it's going to happen. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is going to send out 20,000 layoff notices tomorrow morning. You can read the details in this breaking story by Kevin Yamamura.

The good news, if you're represented by SEIU: You're not subject to the layoffs, under the terms of the Local 1000 tentative agreement reached on Saturday.

For everyone else, the notices trigger a layoff process that takes 120 days. These aren't "pink slips." They're warnings that positions may be terminated. The governor's aim is to eliminate 10,000 of the 20,000 jobs under the layoff warning.

With the budget stalement locking up nearly everyone's attention, it's easy to forget that the state is still doing business (although it's not paying its bills right now). Here's one example:

The Office of the Chief Information Officer is hosting a vendor / state officials forum next week at DGS headquarters in West Sacramento. The OCIO's announcement says, "this will be the first in a regular series of events to focus on all that is happening in state government," and, "will focus on the recently released California IT Strategic Plan, IT Capital Plan and the Governor's IT Reorganization Plan."

The event will be Webcast live Monday from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. on the OCIO website, which you can reach by clicking this link. You can read the official announcement here for more details.

SEIU Local 1000 and the Schwarzenegger administration have a tentative labor pact, as we report in this breaking news story.

Of course, the Legislature and the union rank and file have to sign off on the deal. We expect our elected state workers will burn the proverbial midnight oil tonight in last-minute budget debate.The union will provide more details to its members next week.

So now, with this big contract looking like it's done, will the other unions follow? Or will they resist similar concessions? Most contract years, the first deal becomes a template that others follow. But this isn't most years, is it?

Blog backs review your thoughtful and provocative online comments, amplify points, answer questions, correct our mistakes and humbly accept your warranted criticism.

Feb. 9 Psychiatric technicians union agrees to furlough specifics

ProudCalifornian, there have been no details released. Questions to DPA, SCO, and the union remain unanswered. For answers, my agency has been referred to DPA's PML 2009-007 (http://www.dpa.ca.gov/personnel-policies/pmls/2009/html/2009007.htm) which "clearly" states:

"The Furlough Program begins with the February 2009 pay period and goes through the June 2010 pay period. During that time, all State employees will have two unpaid days off each month. This program is subject to change through court or legislative action and through bargaining."

To me it is as clear as mud.

Comments that include informative links to legitimate sources always add value to the blog. Thanks.

Feb. 10 Nagging questions about the furlough

How will the State recruit professionals? I once sat in at the very top level of a management meeting at one taxing agency about ten years ago and they were sadly joking that the only thing they had as a lure for IT folks was free parking. They were serious and it was part of the recruitment brochures. I doubt things have improved, expecially with ongoing furloughs and layoffs.

I believe that the Governor has just given the "on the fence" state workers his version of a golden handshake. Retire and you will not have to go through this pay reduction ... It's time to wake up! The power is on the Govenor's side and will remain there for at least 2 more years.

Events in recent weeks have certainly hurt the state's image as an employer. Not that it was all that great before. Watch the terms of the next budget / contract. Concessions could push some state workers out the retirement door who would have stayed a few more years in better times.

If the furlough is allowed by the courts as an allowable excercise of executive power, what element of a contract can the Governor NOT change by decree? How about furlough 5 days a month? Ten days? Can he cut off health benefits? Vacation or sick time?

Great questions that inspired our last State Worker column.

Feb. 10 Layoff letters to go out: What are people saying where you work?

This post quickly became a forum to debate who is the biggest sinner in the state's financial fiasco:

Arnold is the problem ... California and the entire country is facing the worst economic crisis since the great depression. Rather than flex muscle, sue, fire, threaten and throw temper tantums, we need a real LEADER. Dire times have always brought forth our greatest LEADERS. Leader face problems with real solutions. Cowards point the finger and blame others. Arnold is no leader.

Paranoid fantasy scenarios aside, it's just not Arnold's fault. His best efforts to lead have been methodically and systematically thwarted by an intractable, obstructionist legislature too wrapped up in its own self-importance to notice that they have not been doing their job for the last three years. That swamp downtown is in dire need of a good draining..

Many blog users expressed anger and frustration:

Johnny Paycheck had it right.

A reference, of course, to the classic workers' anthem, "Take This Job and Shove It."

So morale continues to plummet, and its fair to say that we all feel like fish swimming in a tank, hoping to avoid being served up with a side of chips.

We always appreciate users who can find new ways to explain old things.

Feb. 11 Furlough Friday protester for Governor?

Comments to Rod Brietmaier's furlough protest were mixed. Some hailed him:

I won't be joining the "no spending on furlough-Fridays" movement... In fact, I'll be using my furlough days going to Reno and spending my California money helping the Nevada economy.

I'll be joining the "no spending on furlough-Fridays" movement.

I agree with this. I hope this hurts the small business, who turn around and complain to the gov. Kind of like a fly wheel...eventually so many people will be up in arms the furloughs will be eliminated.

One commenter criticized Brietmaier:

Nice picture. What better way to perpetuate the idea that state workers are lazy than by having a photo of a guy sitting on a couch and playing video games. I realize that he has been furloughed and has a right to spend his forced free time as he likes, but what I am talking about here is perception. The only people who are going to sympathize with furloughed state workers are other state workers ...

Feb. 11 Budget includes furloughs, holiday reductions, OT changes

Jon--note all the confusion since the Governor chose to ignore all usual ways of doing State business (like the confusion implementing furloughs)--he doesn't deal in the details required to implement anything--and he chose a slew of methods at odds with laws and contracts--------many federal. Budgets require real numbers for real dollars to be available and spendable (so the Controller can issue warrants).....I can hear his voice, should anyone dare to point this out to him, "Let them eat cake!" and "Long live my Bastille!"

We continue to be amazed at calls and e-mails asking about who is exempt, how furloughs work for employees at 24/7 facilities and the like. Clearly, there's a communication problem somewhere in California's vast, bureaucratic labyrinth.

Let me get this straight, state workers were furloughed because the gubernator declared a state of emergency. When a budget is signed (hopefully tomorrow), we will no longer be in a state of emergency. Doesn't that mean our furloughs are cancelled?

Feb. 12 Governor could move layoff warning deadline

... And Arnold is still going to layoff over 10 thousand of us anyway.

That layoff number seems virtually unattainable, according to LAO analyst Jason Dickerson. He explains why in this post by San Diego Union-Tribune blogger Chris Reed.

Feb. 12 Farewell to the chief

Why is this on the State Worker site? Look, not to knock the guy but as a State Worker, I could care less about someone retiring. I have to deal with State Government for a while longer and I would much rather be reading news on this site pertaining to What is going on with State Workers!! Leave the warm and fuzzy crap to State News or something.

Obviously, this blog user doesn't work for CAL FIRE. Beyond that, high-level departures from state service have news value, particularly when the state is facing so many personnel stresses. It's a difficult time to lead.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger won't send out layoff notices today, despite the Legislature's failure to meet his Friday deadline for a budget deal that includes $1.4 billion in employee cost savings through June 2010.

Schwarzenegger had said he would send out layoff warnings to 20,000 state workers aiming to lay off 10,000 for an estimated $750 million savings in fiscal 2009-10. The warning letters would trigger a 120-day-process leading up to the terminations. Employees in positions that are about to be terminated can bump those with less service time from jobs that aren't going to be cut. Those bumped workers can then displace others below them.

This is what Schwarzenegger press secretary Aaron McLear moments ago said to Bee Cap Bureau reporter Kevin Yamamura:

"There will be no layoff notices today. The governor believes we are close to an agreement that includes the spending reductions, revenue increases, economic stimulus and government efficiency that the state needs. We are still in negotiation within the big 5 and with unions with regard to state employee compensation. But we are close to an agreement on the budget. The governor believes we will have a vote in the next couple days."

Check out this morning's story by Jim Sanders for details about the pressure on the Legislature to get a budget deal done -- and pressure on individual legislators to keep this deal from getting done. And you can read this report on how union contract talks are moving in tandem with budget discussions.

Andrew McIntosh reports in this story that Chief Ruben D. Grijalva, director of Cal Fire, will retire Monday and become the interim chief of a small suburban department near San Jose suburb.

Andrew notes:

Grijalva, 54, retires after less than three years as director of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, though he was state fire marshal for two years before being named the top boss.

Click here to read Grijalva's final memo.

And here's the press release announcing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's choice to replace Grijalva, Del Walters.

IMAGES: Ruben Grijalva (left), Del Walters / www.fire.ca.gov

Cap Bureau colleague Jim Sanders just returned from a holiday press event with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and brings news that the administration may hold back on sending layoff warnings to 20,000 employees Friday if the governor is satisfied today that a budget deal is close.

The latest word, according to this report from Kevin Yamamura, is that the budget vote has been pushed from Friday to Saturday in the Assembly. Schwarzenegger said he would send out the layoff warning letters if lawmakers failed to reach a budget agreement by Friday.

"If at some point today we're pretty much there (with a budget agreement), that we can realize the savings elsewhere, then we may not have to do layoffs," Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear said shortly after the governor issued a Lincoln's Birthday proclamation and took a few questions from reporters.

Meanwhile, we're working feverishly on a story about what the new budget could mean for state employee union talks and taking your calls and e-mails responding to today's State Worker column.

The news is moving quickly on several fronts. Stay tuned to sacbee.com, Capitol Alert and The State Worker blog for the latest.

IMAGE: Aaron McLear / Sacramento Bee file photo, March 2008, Brian Baer

CASE and three employees at the State Compensation Insurance Fund are suing to exempt the fund from furlough. The main reason outlined in this 18-page court document: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's emergency furlough powers don't include the independently funded and guided agency.

Looks like tomorrow will be the last time you'll get Lincoln's Birthday off, state workers.

Budget rumors continue to swirl as it looks like negotiations are in the final stages. The Bee's Kevin Yamamura reports that two furlough days each month, two fewer holidays per year and changes in how OT is accrued are all part of the deal.

We understand the budget contains a caveat that allows the administration and unions to continue bargaining furlough specifics. We expect a budget vote on Friday.

Click here to read Kevin's story.

Last week we wrote about Rod Breitmaier's personal economic boycott to protest state worker furloughs. The DMV IT auditor has vowed he won't spend a cent on Furlough Fridays.

We were curious whether he'd received any feedback from his story in The Bee. Here's what he told us in a recent e-mail:

Actually the support has been stronger than I had hoped for. As you know I work in an audit environment, and have even had positive feedback from management. Many of my friends and co-workers love the idea of no spending on Furlough Fridays.

... I think some will join the one man protest and curb spending on that day. I have had a few offers to buy me milk. A few colleagues have even printed the picture of me and posted outside their cubicle with "Rod for Governor" on it. What a compliment -- though obviously tongue-in-cheek ...

Blogger Michael Krigsman has an interesting analysis of Chief Info Officer Teri Takai's "Wins for California's Information Technology" list.

Krigsman notes that the CIO's Web site introduces 10 completed projects and nine active projects with these words:

The story of IT in California is one of many successes and a few failures. Between 2003 and 2007, California successfully completed more than 90 projects. These projects, stewarded by a combination of hardworking state employees, involved executives, and a watchful legislature, have provided services to millions of Californians in an efficient and effective manner. The list below exemplifies the breadth and variety of California's IT successes.

But after analyzing the cost and duration of more than 90 projects on the list of state IT efforts, Krigsman concludes:

Apparently, California's CIO selectively pulled examples of relatively short IT projects from her large portfolio to "prove" successful IT in general ,,, I believe California's CIO presented an unbalanced, and perhaps even misleading, view of success and likely failure on the state's IT project portfolio.

You can read Krigsman's analysis here. Click on this link for the 65-page "California Information Technology Strategic Plan," from which the "Wins" list was culled.

So we contacted Takai's office -- something we're told that Krigsman didn't do -- to get a response to the blog. What follows is the unedited e-mailed answers to our questions from the CIO's Adrian Farley, Chief Deputy Director for Policy and Program Management:

Is the analysis fair and accurate?

The state's IT Strategic Plan provides a framework to addresses many longstanding issues with IT in California. Due to the breadth of the document, it is possible that information in the Plan could be misconstrued which could then lead to inaccurate conclusions. As an example, the durations of the 10 completed plans highlighted were 3.56 years on average and not 1.9 years as mentioned in the blog. The Child Support Automated system for example took almost 6 years to complete, far longer than the 2 years described in the blog. While there are always risks associated with large IT projects, the state has completed more than 100 projects since 2003 with an average cost of almost $26 million - and more than 25% of these projects had a duration of 3 years or longer. The Office of the State CIO is committed to promoting transparency and the entire list of approved projects is posted on our website and we are always available to provide additional information about specific projects.

How were the 19 projects picked for the "Wins for California's Information Technology" list?

The 10 completed projects highlighted in the IT Strategic Plan were chosen because they provide context as to the scope and scale of the IT projects undertaken by the state and because they are representative of the diversity of 119 projects completed by state agencies since 2003. The nine projects listed in the top nine are those active IT projects with approved budgets above $150 million.

How is the state's budget strain impacting current projects?

In light of the state's fiscal condition, the OCIO is working with departments to reduce project costs. This ranges from delaying projects to exploring innovative strategies to fund projects.

Note: Thanks to State Worker blog user rbatters for calling our attention to the Krigsman blog.

While we were out of the office, Cap Bureau colleague Kevin Yamamura filed this story about Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's threat to issue layoff warnings to 20,000 workers if a budget deal isn't done this week.

So what are people saying where you work? Are they blaming the governor? The Legislature? Both? Do you fear for your job or those of coworkers? Or is this a stunt that will never actually happen? (Many people thought that furloughs wouldn't happen, either.)

Please shoot us an e-mail with your workplace reports to jortiz@sacbee.com.

The way that just about every media outlet has dropped coverage of California's state worker furloughs, you'd think that it was a one-and-done deal. Obviously, it's not.

If Sacramento Superior Court Judge Patrick Marlette's ruling in support of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's emergency furlough power stands up to appeals, we think it's a potential game changer that shifts more power to set workplace conditions to the executive -- and away from the Legislature and the unions.

So how the furlough plays out will have consequences far beyond last Friday and, perhaps, far beyond June 2010 when they're scheduled to end. Some questions that we scribbled down after a recent lunch with Jason Dickerson, the guy at the Legislative Analyst's Office who looks at state worker issues:

• Will the furloughs push some longtime state employees to retire a few years earlier than they might have? If furloughs do accelerate retirements of experienced, knowledgeable workers, what impact will that have on state services? How would a wave of earlier retirements impact CalPERS?

• How will the Legislature react to this expanded gubernatorial leverage? Is a bill in the offing to limit the executive's furlough power? Would the next governor sign such a bill? If the bill is vetoed, would the Legislature be able to muster a two-thirds override vote?

• Will furloughs become a gubernatorial campaign issue next year as candidates vie for union PAC contributions?

• As colleague Hudson Sangree noted in his recent story about Yolo County furloughs, some workers there learned to adapt. When the state's furlough program ends, will state employees be upset that they have to go back to full work weeks?

• If constitutional officers win the pending court fight over whether they have to furlough their employees, would that prompt migration by some state workers who want to avoid the furlough? (We've received a couple of e-mails from state workers who said they're considering it.)

Blog backs review your thoughtful and provocative online comments, amplify points, answer questions, correct our mistakes and humbly accept your warranted criticism.

Note: we usually reserve blog backs for Fridays, but the volume of comments to our last State Worker column and recent blog posts has prompted us to post a rare mid-week BB to keep up. In the interest of space and brevity, we're exercising editorial license to excerpt comments.

Feb. 5 Should constitutional officers' employees be exempt from furlough?

Hey Ortiz - You are asking the wrong question. Why should state workers be the only group to take a 10% pay cut (tax)?? ...

Our question was rooted in the developing news of the day. The question of furlough fairness has been thoroughly discussed by this blog's users. And as regular visitors of this blog know well, private sector workers are quick to point out that many folks outside of state government have taken a 100 percent pay cut through layoffs.

We saw no reason to raise again what has become a well-worn debate.

Meanwhile, users were split over whether which is more important, spreading the furlough pain to everyone or maintaining the independence of statewide officers:

The principle of constitutional officer independence, as a part of the California Constitution, is as important as the Constitution itself. I personally think that the furlough is a poor decision altogether. The Governor, a constitutional officer, ordering another constitutional officer to furlough their employees is equivalent to one manager telling another manager how to manage their staff -- inappropriate.

I work for a special fund agency and we are furloughed ... I don't think this is appropriate. These constitutional officers lack the nuts to tell their staff to stay home. Its about sharing the pain. Its about showing the public we, state employees, don't always have our hands out looking for more ... If independence brings the ability for these clowns to spend money the State doesn't have, they need to be appointed ...

The autonomy of the Constitutional Officers is paramount...otherwise they are nothing more than appointees in function...there is a reason they are individually elected...this is nothing more than a POWER PLAY by the Governor to try and submit the State, citizens, employees and constitutionally elected officials to his will...he will most likely lose in the end...after more taxpayer dollars are wasted on his high cost contract attorneys and the courts...

Have those independently elected constitutional officers affirmatively directed their employees to show up tomorrow and promised them they will get paid for that day's work? ... I can't find any indication of that in any of the Bee's coverage.

We were working on that angle when we posted the Feb. 5 blog question and evolving online story. In case you missed the full story published the following day, here's the link.

... I suspect the State may ultimately face some tough lawsuits when, for instance, a secretary at a non-constitutional agency takes a mandatory 10% pay cut, while a secretary with an identical spb job description at a constitutional agency does not, since there are all kinds of laws and regulations about equal pay for equal work in the state civil service system.

Thoughtful remarks that look ahead and take a wider view of the issue than the user's personal experience. Good post.

Feb. 6 The State Worker: Furloughs' unseen cost -- in morale

Does Jon Ortiz realize that many state workers are not paid out of the general fund. Our not being paid will not save the state a nickle (sic), and in many cases will cost the state revenue. My guess is he is like arnold (sic), and his only concern is to kick sand in our faces ...

We realize that state employees are paid from various pots of money, and we've questioned the administration about why those workers are subject to furlough. The answer, according to DPA officials is that money paying for agencies and departments outside the General Fund is available for borrowing and therefore those arms of the government should be cutting costs as well, including by furlough.

The charge that our "only concern is to kick sand" in state workers' faces implies that we find pleasure in the misery of others. We don't.

Feb. 6 Governor's office: 'What Californians are saying about furloughs'

WOW Sacramento Bee.... You might as well just come out and say it... you're bending right over for the Governor. This is terrible! No wonder I don't order the Bee. What a sorry excuse for a news source!

As we often point out, our blog posts of e-mail, press releases, editorials, news stories and the like should not be interpreted as supporting the views expressed in them.

Nice cherry picking of comments. I have this yellow snow that is actually dissolved gold to sell if you are interested ...

Feb. 5 Furlough Roundup

So Jon,hold Lockyer's spokesman's feet to the fire. "We saved money"?!? Where are the specifics?

We've asked Lockyer spokesman Tom Dresslar for specifics. He told us that the data is available but needs to be organized to make it understandable to a general readership. When we receive it, we'll post it. We're also asking the other constitutional officers for their savings information.

Feb. 6 Judge denies CDF Firefighters' request to stop furloughs

Aren't they CalFIRE now???

"CDF Firefighters" is named in the court filing.

Feb. 6 The State Worker: Furloughs' unseen cost -- in morale

In retrospect, the furloughs might be the tipping point for state government. Productivity is tanking because of plummeting morale. Decisions are not made because managers are in crisis mode, trying to save positions. Meanwhile, the elected and appointed political overclass keeps mandating new workload. Under the furloughs, every dollar saved will translate into many, many more dollars lost.

We think that the furloughs represent a huge shift in power that will change the state workplace, possibly forever. We'll discuss this in greater detail in our Thursday State Worker column.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is suing State Controller John Chiang -- again. This time the tiff is over whether constitutional officers and the BOE are subject to furlough Fridays.

We've posted an online story about the lawsuit. You can read the court filing here.

The big media interest in California's first Furlough Friday has passed, but here at The State Worker we want to know: What's the mood been on your first day back?

Have you seen any change in productivity as people work harder to make up for lost time or slower because they're discouraged, distracted or disgusted? Or perhaps there's been no perceptible change where you work.

This may be the part of the furlough story that most other media outlets miss.

Of course, the impact of all this hasn't yet been fully felt, since February paychecks won't be issued for a few weeks. We may revisit this question then.

You can always make comments here, but we'd love to take your e-mails and calls, too. You can reach us at jortiz@sacbee.com or 916-321-1043.

A story by Marc Lifsher in today's Los Angeles Times looks at CalPERS' new CEO Anne Stausboll and the priorities she's setting for the fund.

Among them, Lifsher writes: "... a full review of the agency's strategy by the CalPERS board in May, including delving into some controversial and money-losing investments."

Stausboll also promises that CalPERS will push "to a new level" its insistence that companies in which it invests practice good governance principles.

As to the fund's recent and well-chronicled losses, Stausboll notes that CalPERS has reported negative returns in only four of the last 25 years. "We've been tested. We've been resilient," she says.

Click here for the LAT piece.

IMAGE: Anne Stausboll
Source: CalPERS

The California Association of Psychiatric Technicians says it has reached an agreement with the state about furloughs of BU 18 members.

This document spells out the details and closes with this paragraph:

CAPT Chapter Officers will be scheduling informational meetings at your worksite to explain in greater detail the Furlough Program. In the meantime, CAPT is still negotiating with the state to come up with an alternative plan that will minimize the negative effects this furlough plan has on our members' monthly take home pay.

Sacramento Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley has denied CDF Firefighters' request for a temporary restraining order to keep Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Controller John Chiang from furloughing Bargaining Unit 8 members and reducing their pay.

This link takes you to the five-page court decision, filed late Friday.

IMAGE: yolo.courts.ca.gov

This roundup of media quotes about state worker furloughs floated our way this afternoon from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's press office. We noticed that The Bee was not among the 10 sources cited.

Blog backs review your thoughtful and provocative online comments, amplify points, answer questions, correct our mistakes and humbly accept your warranted criticism.

Jan. 28 Taxpayers deserve streamlined IT

And, just when did the governor intend to pay serious attention to the recommendations of his own CPR (California Performance Review), almost completely ignored by him to-date? Did I last read it would save 'only' $16 billion?

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's 2009-10 budget proposal reaches back to the CPR to suggest more than two dozen state boards, agencies, bureaus and commissions the administration wants to streamline, combine or eliminate.

Integrating and collapsing the State's IT organization is a monumental undertaking and it's a path where many have tread and few (none?) have succeeded. The State Controller boldly revealed the ineptitude of this IT organization when he admitted a mass-change of the State's workers salaries was nigh impossible with its archaic, proprietary mainframe-based payroll system. Talk about job security. Be it Quickbooks or a huge ERP solution, the notion of an unchangeable payroll system is utterly comical. Surely this is but one of numerous inefficiencies in this vast, splintered organization with dozens of IT directors and independent silos. In State government time, it will likely take a really driven CIO 10 years to truly consolidate the IT org.

A well-written analysis. For an example of the state's struggle to upgrade IT, check out Cap Bureau colleague Andrew McIntosh's recent story about unfinished projects at EDD.

Feb. 4 Governor's lawyer responds to Chiang's request for furlough clarification

The Bee really needs to review posts and new accounts before just granting access. This statement below only points to the absolute stupidity of the racist poster and how did the Bee let that screen name get past?! Wake up Bee!

The Bee, like many heavily-visited Web sites that allow comments, relies on users to flag offensive, inappropriate and off-topic posts. If you see an offensive comment or user name, use the "Report abuse" link found at the bottom right of the offending comment. Bee online staff will then review it.

Feb. 5 The State Worker: Furlough's unseen cost -- in morale

Furloughs are NOT about saving the state money. Furloughs are about "streamlining" I will repeat this again, once the state goes to a four day workweek, as many other states have, the state WILL operate on a four day workweek. I see this as a PERMANANT (sic) move.

It's clear that the governor is looking for some permanent cost savings to what the state spends on employees. That's the big reason that the administration has proposed changing how health benefit packages are negotiated. His call for erasing two paid holidays from the state calendar is another such move.

When it comes to furloughs, think through this scenario and see what you conclude: Say it's early May 2010. Furloughs are supposed to end in June. But the economy is even worse off than it was in 2009 when furloughs went into effect. State government remains strapped for cash. What will the governor say about restoring regular hours and pay to state workers?

I was in the "OK with it" group until I arrived at work today to find that my alternate work week schedule ('9/8/80' or every other Friday off) may be abandoned, so I will still work nine days (8 hours each)every fortnight and get paid less. I wouldn't feel right slowing my work pace, but I am feeling a bit sick right now.

Furloughs can have a progressively degrading impact on morale and productivity unless the furloughed workers believe that they have had some input and that the sacrifice is for a greater good. From what we can tell, neither mitigating circumstance exists here.

Here's how my not being in the office will have an impact. I work with consultants to assist with Caltrans proejcts. They requested a meeting for this Friday to clarify some issues. Meeting had to be rescheduled to next Tuesday. Not a big deal it seems but this 4 day delay will likely delay other decisions and actions, which will have a cumulative impact on the timing of the project down the road. Now consider all the other cumulative impacts throughout the state with other delays since employees won't be around and you can see how these small impacts will effect the State as a whole.

Click here for our story on the 3rd District Court of Appeal's denial of the CASE request to immediately stop state worker furloughs.

This link takes you to the text of the court's decision.

California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges, and Hearing Officers in State Employment late Thursday filed a petition in the 3rd District Court of Appeal to stay the Jan. 29 Superior Court ruling that supported Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's emergency furlough authority. The CASE filing asks that the court delay the state's implementation of furloughs until it decides whether Judge Patrick Marlette made the correct ruling. We've written a quick online story about CASE's filing. We'll follow it as news develops.

You can read the CASE filing here.

Meanwhile, SEIU Local 1000 says it is fighting the furlough battle on several fronts, including a request it will make today to the Public Employee Relations Board to overturn Schwarzenegger's order. The union also has an unfair labor practice charge filed with PERB even as SEIU negotiators continue to negotiate new contracts for its 95,000 members.

It's been a wild day as The State Worker chased news from eight consitutional offices and the Board of Equalization. Of course, we've also fielded your calls and e-mails about our Thursday column as Furlough Friday looms.

Admittedly, we've fallen a bit behind. So here's a quick roundup of stuff that almost slipped throught the cracks:

Here's an e-mail to Cap Bureau boss Dan Smith from Treasurer Bill Lockyer's spokesman, Tom Dresslar, comparing furlough savings to money the department has saved through other means.

You can view the "Memo from Governor's Legal Affairs Secretary Andrea Lynn Hoch on Judge Marlette's Response to State Controller" by clicking here.

This release explains EDD's Furlough Friday plan.

So we're working like heck on the story spinning from news today that Judge Patrick Marlettte essentially said, "No comment," when asked by the controller to explain whether the judge's court order last week meant constitutional offices fall under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's furlough authority.

Many state workers have correctly pointed out that employees whose pay comes from outside the general fund are still being furloughed. Meanwhile UC and CSU employees aren't subject to furlough, and now it looks like about 10,000 employees under seven officials elected by statewide vote are going to work all their hours and receive full pay. We're trying to reach the Board of Equalization to see what position its board is taking.

Is it OK to furlough some employees and not others? Do you think that some workers will try to migrate over to jobs in constitutional offices to avoid the furlough? (The LAO recently suggested this sort of thing might happen if furloughs aren't evenly spread.)

Is this setting up an unfair furlough system? Or is the principle of constitutional officer independence important enough to exempt employees in those departments and agencies?

Judge Patrick Marlette has responded to Controller John Chiang's request for clarification of last Thursday's furlough ruling.

We've written (and rewritten and will probably rewrite again) an online story that you can read here. This link will take you to the judge's minute order.

IMAGE: Judge Patrick Marlette / Sacramento Bee, Brian Baer

The Public Employee Relations Board has ruled that a decertification petition circulated to members of Bargaining Unit 21 is valid. SEIU Local 1000, which represents the roughly 700 education consultants and librarians in BU 21, wanted the petition invalidated. The union had claimed the petition hadn't been filed in a timely manner and that the petitioner had made false claims to woo employees to sign on.

PERB is meeting in a couple of weeks to set a date for the vote.

Click on this link to view the the letter detaiing the decision by Roger Smith, PERB labor relations specialist.

IMAGE: www.perb.ca.gov

Department of General Services has put out this list of state buildings that will be opened or closed on Furlough Fridays.

Eric Lamourex of DGS tells us that the list will be updated "as the furlough situation unfolds." The department hopes to add other state buildings, such as leased properties.

Our favorite entry so far is the Office of Emergency Services HQ, which, according to the list, 'maybe (sic) open in the event of emergency."

Speaking of furloughs, check out our colleague Shane Goldmachers's post on Capitol Alert, "Why furloughs compute (and pay cuts didn't)."

The state engineers union has posted a "public-private partnership disasters" Web site that hoots at 3P projects. Every few days the site adds to its worldwide list of highways, toll roads, and buildings that it says illustrate how privatizing big public projects wastes public money.

The site also compiles news stories and opinion pieces that criticize 3P's, like this Jan. 26 op-ed by California State Treasurer Bill Lockyer.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger supports public-private infrastructure partnerships, because, he says, they deliver projects faster, better and more cheaply.

IMAGE: Bill Lockyer / Sacramento Bee file photo / Brian Baer

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's office sent us this response to Controller John Chiang's request to Sacramento Superior Court for furlough ruling clarification.

Our phone and e-mail are swamped this morning with state workers clamoring for the latest state workplace news. If you missed yesterday's developments, you can read our story in today's Bee about the ongoing furlough fight by clicking here.

Other than that, there's nothing new to tell you this morning about furloughs or contract talks. But there's always this afternoon ...

Meanwhile, several credit unions are now offering lines of credit to their customers "impacted by the state's historic cash crunch," according to a statement from Controller John Chiang. This press release has a list of the institutions and the dollar amounts that they have committed.

We noticed that The Golden 1 isn't on the list. SCO spokesman Jacob Roper said that the state worker-centric credit union is onboard, but didn't commit a dollar amount so it wasn't put on the list. We've called Golden 1 to confirm. We'll update this post as soon as we hear back.

We also asked Roper if the credit lines were set aside for individuals or businesses. He response: "This is for any of their customers. It could be vendors, state workers or taxpayers" impacted by the state's delayed payments.

UPDATE at 12:50 p.m.: We just got off the phone with Golden 1 President and CEO Terry Halleck. She said that the controller's office approached the credit union about what it was willing to do for members hurt by the budget delay and specifically wanted a dollar amount committed. In her view, the request was asking for a cap on available funds. She wasn't comfortable with setting a limit.

"We'll do as much as we need to do to help our members," Halleck told The State Worker. "We'll do every loan that makes sense for our members and our organization. We're in the business of making loans."

PECG and CAPS have filed furlough appeals.

You can view the PECG / CAPS filing here.

As we've just reported, State Controller John Chiang has asked the judge who paved the legal path for furloughs whether he intended constitutional officer employees to be covered by that Thursday ruling.

You can read the story here.

Click here to read Chiang's letter to Marlette and letters to Chiang from Lt. Governor John Garamendi, Treasurer Bill Lockyer, Secretary of State Debra Bowen, Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell, Attorney General Jerry Brown and Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner.

IMAGE: Controller John Chiang / Randall Benton, Sacramento Bee

Many times the loudest voices get the most attention.

That's certainly been true as we look back at The State Worker's coverage of the governor's controversial furlough plan over the last couple of months. We've given plenty of space to unions, lawyers, political spokespeople and, of course, state workers who are upset at the prospect of furloughs.

There are many reasons for this media tendency.

Conflict makes for good storytelling. There are heroes and villains, plot twists, subplots and a sense of suspense as events unfold to an uncertain conclusion.

It's also out of the ordinary, which is one definition of news. You'll never see a headline that reads, "DMV on Broadway opens on time," unless opening on time becomes an unusual event.

Combatants often have a strong message with a point of view..

They're usually eager to be heard , so they'll readily talk.

But when it comes to the furlough story, there's a contingent of state workers who [probably haven't been covered much: The employees who are OK with furloughs. Maybe they see it as a necessary sacrifice in troubled times. Or maybe they value the time off more than the money.

If you're in that group, shoot us an e-mail at jortiz@sacbee.com or call us at 916-321-1043. Even though you're not part of a vocal group, your story deserves telling.

The Governor's Office last night released a memo it sent to its staff detailing how furloughs will apply to them.

Governor's office employees will be expected to take two furlough days a month or they can be banked and taken up to two years after the furloughs are scheduled to end in June 2010. Either way, their pay will reflect two furlough days each month.

The memo from Will Fox, the governor's deputy chief of staff for operations, also says "most units" of the governor's office will be reduced by one position.  Press Secretary Aaron McLear said the goal is to reduce the staff from 158 positions to approximately 144 through attrition and possibly layoffs.

McLear said the governor's office already has reduced it's budget -- from $19.7 million to $19 million -- and its staff -- from 174 positions to 158 -- in the last year.

Blog backs review your thoughtful and provocative online comments, amplify points, answer questions, correct our mistakes and humbly accept your warranted criticism.

As the furlough drama unfolded last week, we noticed that more self-identified state workers comments indicated a reluctant acceptance that a furlough looks likely. While many users are still fighting mad, the rise in the number of moderate comments is a striking change from the "no surrender" tone of many posts on this blog which Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger first proposed a monthly one-day furlough in November.

Jan. 29 PECG: We'll appeal the furlough ruling

I would prefer the unions stop filing suits, they are only doing so to prove to their members that they are trying to do something to support them. This will only result in higher unions or "fair share" dues in the very near future, so please don't egg them on. As for me, I am feeling incredibly fortunate that I still have a job and I will find a way to make due with less income as everyone else in the nation who is suffering from furloughs or layoffs or foreclosures, etc.

Hey PECG, brilliant (and SEIU isn't too far behind). Get the furloughs overturned and let the layoffs begin. Don't come crying to the State Worker blog when Arnold welds his meat cleaver after the furloughs are overturned. Someone somewhere once said 91% of something is better than 100% of nothing. BTW, since the unions are doing such an outstanding job of negotiating job security, will I get a 9% reduction in my dues/fair-share payment?

The moral (sic) is so bad already in my office that people are looking forward to the furlough.

This insightful state worker's comment took a wider view of the impact of furloughs:

I assume the deadlines on all state designed projects will now be extended by 10%. The delay will be used as an excuse to spend more money to contract out the work that the state engineers who are not at work can't do.

Other state workers appear to be plotting their next move:

Jan. 29 The State Worker: Today's furlough hearing won't ease uncertainty

What SCIF form is used for stress?

nanosecond wrote "What SCIF form is used for stress?" You can find it here: http://www.dir.ca.gov/dwc/DWCForm1.pdf Share it with your friends and don't forget to call the 800 number for EAP for a crisis counseling session. If you do go, be sure to get a DOWO. You don't need your boss on your back for taking time off.

That prompted this appeal:

To those of you thinking about playing the "stress card" please don't. Don't contribute to the public opinion that state workers are lazy and always looking for ways to go out on a bogus claim at tax payer's expense. Let's keep our integrity and show the private sector that we aren't quitters, but workers of strong character. The whole state is hurting. Much as I hate the furloughs, and the consequences for many, we must fight these politicians not resort to tacky, false claims that only sully our worker reputations. Write your legislator, be active, write letters to newspapers, talk to your friends, but please, show we are honest workers of good character.

Jan. 30 Judge approves Schwarzenegger's furlough plan

Listen, and understand. That Terminator is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

Amusing post that gives new meaning to actor Michael Biehn's line in "The Terminator." Well done!

Jan. 30 Furlough details released

The Governor won the court room battle based on his "state of fiscal emergency." Was it ever brought up or discussed as to why he waited so long to declare an "emergency". Could it have been an intentional act to delay union talks so he could act without meet and confer. Pete Wilson was no friend to public employees, especially state ones. Only two general salary raises in eight years. Yet he meet with and negotiated a one day furlough a month for all state employees, even those working for constitutional officers.

Court documents submitted by the governor's attorneys included papers that showed some labor negotiation details and that noted the special legislative sessions called to address the budget mess. Those failed efforts, in combination with the unforeseen market meltdown, appear to have convinced the judge that the situation is an "emergency."

One question before I leave these silly boards for good: How will the general fund absorb the automatic 10% restoration of pay when the furloughs expire? Where will that money come from? Arnold's successor will be faced with a very serious labor crisis not of his/her own making.

Good questions for which we have no firm answers. You can reasonably speculate that if the economy hasn't recovered this year -- some economists are now predicting it won't -- that the state's finances will remain strained when the furloughs expire next year. Much will depend on the language in the next labor pacts. Will they include iron-clad terms that restore furloughed hours and pay? We'll see.

By the way, sorry to see you go. We hope you'll reconsider.

The Association of California State Supervisors wants its members to use their furlough time on Friday to lobby legislators. According to this e-mail blast to ACSS members, elected state workers aren't getting much static about furloughs:

The first furlough day is set for this Friday, Feb. 6. ACSS is urging all members who will be off to use that day to make district office visits to their legislators. The legislators are telling us they're not hearing from their constituents and are concluding the furlough is not a serious problem. It is vital that your legislators hear from you on this issue, and visiting them in their home offices is one of the most effective ways to approach them.

What do you make of this?

Here's the pay letter
that DPA sent to the Controller's office on Friday regarding Constitutional Officers' employee furloughs. The document includes a pertinent link to DPA's Web site.

These related documents detail furlough differentials for various classes of excluded and rank and file employees:

PAY DIFFERENTIAL 378
FURLOUGH HOURS - RANK AND FILE AND EXCLUDED EMPLOYEES

PAY DIFFERENTIAL 379
ASSISTANT CHIEF DIFFERENTIAL; EXTENDED DUTY PAY - EXCLUDED EMPLOYEES

PAY DIFFERENTIAL 380
PHYSICAL FITNESS INCENTIVE PAY; RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION - HOUSING STIPEND - UNIT 06 AND EXCLUDED

PAY DIFFERENTIAL 381
BILINGUAL DIFFERENTIAL PAY; EDUCATIONAL INCENTIVE PAY -
UNIT 06 AND EXCLUDED

We've been asking the folks at CalPERS whether the fund will be furloughing its 2,300 employees.

Like every department and agency we spoke with before last Thursday, CalPERS didn't want to commit until Superior Court Judge Patrick Marlette ruled whether Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has emergency furlough power. After the affirmative decision, we sent this e-mail to CalPERS spokeswoman Pat Macht:

From: Ortiz, Jon - Sacramento Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 3:17 PM To: Macht, Pat Subject: Sooooo...anything new to say about furloughs?

Hi Pat:

Now we have a ruling in the governor's favor, what are you guys going to do?

JO

Jon Ortiz
Reporter and Columnist, The State Worker
http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/the_state_worker
The Sacramento Bee
916-321-1043

As we combed through our mountain of e-mail this morning, we found Pat's Sunday night reply:

From: Macht, Pat Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2009 9:31 PM To: Ortiz, Jon - Sacramento Subject: RE: Sooooo...anything new to say about furloughs?

Jon - we are planning on participating in the furloughs - put us on the "participating" list.