CA Senate Committee Approves Contract Deals for Three Unions
The Senate Public Employment and Retirement Committee this morning passed AB 1592, a measure that if lawmakers ratify it would make recently reached labor agreements binding for Bargaining Units 8 (California Department of Forestry Firefighters), 16 (Union of American Physicians and Dentists) and 19 (American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees).

The bill also continuously appropriates wages for employees represented by those unions, in keeping with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's promise to shield them from any minimum-wage action triggered by a budget impasse:

This bill would, in the event that the annual Budget Act is not enacted prior to July 1 of each year covered by the memoranda of understanding for State Bargaining Units 5, 8, 12, 16, 18, and 19, provide for a continuous appropriation for the amount necessary for the payment of compensation and benefits to members of those bargaining units.

The measure passed on a 6-0 vote. It now goes to the Senate Appropriations Committee and from there to the Senate floor. If it gains the two-thirds votes required for passage of an urgency measure, it will go back to the Assembly for a two-thirds concurrence vote and then on to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's desk for a signature.

Another amended bill, SB 846, covers the labor deals and minimum-wage protections for Units 5 (California Association of Highway Patrolmen), 12 (International Union of Operating Engineers) and 18 (California Association of Psychiatric Technicians). It's being heard this afternoon by the Assembly Public Employees, Retirement and Social Security Committee.
Read more: http://blogs.sacbee.com/the_state_worker/2010/08/senate-committee-signs-off-on.html#ixzz0veiRvCwY

Pension reform: Brown picks up where he left off
By Ed Mendel
In his last year as governor, Jerry Brown’s budget proposal said it was possible for state workers to retire at age 62 and receive more than 100 percent of their final salary from CalPERS and federal Social Security.
He proposed lower pensions for new hires, arguing that 70 percent of final salary is a “common standard” for maintaining a standard of living in retirement that is similar to the one when working.
The lower pension would result in lower annual contributions to CalPERS, savings that could be passed on to both the state and the workers. The change would have to be negotiated with labor unions and enacted through legislation.
Last week, Brown, now the Democratic candidate for governor running against Republican Meg Whitman, made a brief reference to his “record” as he outlined an eight-point pension reform plan on his campaign website.
“As governor in 1982, I signed into law SB 1326 that called for a Two-Tiered Retirement System to reduce overall pension costs,” Brown said on the website. “Pension spiking (manipulating final pay to boost pensions) was not permitted.”
A Brown campaign spokesman, Sterling Clifford, said the budget bill that year, SB 1326, contained language calling for a two-tier pension system, but the change was never enacted.
The governor’s Department of Personnel Administration director, Marty Morgenstern, recalled that 1982 was a difficult budget year. The state faced a deficit during an economic recession.
“Gov. Brown’s idea was to have DPA and CalPERS work out a second tier pension that would save money for both the state and the employees, while still maintaining a defined benefit pension plan that would maintain the employees’ standard of living in retirement,” said Morgenstern.
http://calpensions.com/2010/07/31/pension-reform-brown-picks-up-where-he-left-off/

Governor orders new furloughs for state workers
By John Howard | 07/28/10 12:00 AM PST
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger ordered state employees to take three unpaid days off each month, although he exempted a several public-employee unions that had reached tentative collective bargaining agreements with the administration. The governor’s order also gave a pass to workers at revenue-producing agencies, such as the Franchise Tax Bard, which collects income taxes, and public-safety agencies such as the Highway Patrol, state firefighters and the California Earthquake Authority.

The workers beginning Aug. 1 will be required to take the second, third and fourth Fridays off each month until a state budget agreement is reached.

Perhaps 180,000 state employees will be affected. The unpaid days amount to nearly a 15 percent pay cut. State employees earn an average of about $63,000 annually.


The state began the 2010-11 fiscal year July 1 without a budget in place, as required by the constitution. The governor has suggested publicly he would be willing to let the budget impasse continue into the administration of the next governor, who will be elected Nov. 2 and take office in January.
Thus far, there is little indication of serious budget negotiations in the Capitol, where the Legislature is in its summer recess.
The state faces a $19 billion deficit. Passage of the budget requires two-thirds votes in each house. Democrats control both houses but lack the two-thirds majorities. Thus far Republicans and Democrats have been unable to reach agreement, with Democrats generally favoring new revenue – taxes – and Republicans favoring cuts.
The governor, meanwhile, noted that he opposes a potential change in law that would allow budgets to be approved with only a simple majority vote.
The governor’s budget policies have been challenged repeatedly in court in more than two-dozen lawsuits, most of them filed by public-employee groups.
Most recently, a Sacramento Superior Court ruled against him in his efforts to cut state workers’ pay to the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour absent a state budget. Judge Patrick Marlette, seeking more information on the issue, scheduled an Aug. 26 hearing.
The governor has said the cuts are needed to help balance the state’s books, but others disagree.
http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=z0ojkddetoplk2

Written by Robert Cruickshank
July 29, 2010
As progressive activists across America organize to fight the looming "cat food commission" proposals to destroy the futures of working Americans by slashing Social Security benefits and raise the retirement age, Jerry Brown is now proposing to do the same here in California - in this case with cuts to public employee pensions:
On his campaign website and in recent comments to the media, California's attorney general and former governor has advocated rolling back state retirement benefits. Many of his points mirror changes pushed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and tentatively accepted by some unions, but don't cut into pensions as deeply as policies proposed by Brown's Republican opponent, Meg Whitman.
Whitman, the former eBay CEO, wants to raise the retirement age for most state employees from 55 to 65 and require increased employee contributions. New hires under her plan would receive 401(k)-style plans instead of defined benefit pensions state workers now receive.
Brown's plan would keep defined plans in place, but with lower benefits for new hires, lengthen the retirement age for most state workers to age 60 and increase what workers pay toward their own retirements.
This is not only profoundly unhelpful to those of us fighting against similar proposals that would affect all Americans by cutting Social Security benefits - it's also a bad idea.
Good pensions are good economic policy. They help fuel economic growth by ensuring seniors have enough to live on in retirement and not requiring financial support from their younger relatives. Retirees play an important role in sustaining the economy with their spending, and with the cost of living in California likely to be high for some time to come, a good pension helps retirees avoid financial ruin at a time when they literally cannot afford to have it.
A lower retirement age also helps ensure there are jobs available to younger workers, especially outside the major metro areas of California, where state and local government are a key source of employment for smaller towns and counties. Raising the retirement age, on the other hand, worsens the already-dire unemployment situation for younger workers and does little to help the older workers.
http://www.publicceo.com/index.php/local-governments/151-local-governments-publicceo-exclusive/1762-jerry-browns-flawed-pension-plan

Pension Reform: Can Arnold Lift SB 400?

Written by Ed Mendel, Calpensions.com
July 19, 2010
More stories are at http://calpensions.com

A 17-page CalPERS sales brochure told legislators a decade ago that a major increase in state worker pension benefits would not increase state costs, but annual state payments to the pension fund have soared from $159 million to $3.9 billion since then.
The professionally designed pamphlet apparently helped build a persuasive case in 1999 for SB 400, which sailed through the Senate on a 39-to-0 vote and passed the Assembly 70-to-7.
But now Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to roll back pensions for new state hires to pre-SB 400 levels. The governor with only a half year left in office has said he won't sign a new state budget without pension reform.
"The single biggest threat to the fiscal health and to California's future obviously is our public pension system and the crisis that we have," Schwarzenegger said in April as he endorsed a Republican-backed reform bill rejected by the Democratic majority.
The e-mail version of a news release for the governor's round table pension discussion last week has an Internet link to the CalPERS brochure. The governor's pension advisor, David Crane, quoted from the brochure at a legislative hearing in May.
The brochure contains several unequivocal statements that replacing a pension cut enacted in 1991 with major pension increases (some up to 50 percent), while also boosting payments to current retirees, would not increase state costs.
"NO INCREASE OVER CURRENT EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS IS NEEDED FOR THESE BENEFIT IMPROVEMENTS," says a line written in capital letters describing the impact on taxpayers.
"This is a special opportunity to restore equity among CalPERS members without it costing a dime of additional taxpayer money," says a quote attributed to "Dr. William D. Crist, President, CalPERS board, June 16, 1999."


Crane told the hearing the brochure failed to say the state would have to pay for investment shortfalls, the stock market would have to boom, CalPERS employees would get bigger pensions, and CalPERS board members get campaign money from beneficiaries. http://publicceo.com/index.php/local-governments/151-local-governments-publicceo-exclusive/1712-pension-reform-can-arnold-lift-sb-40

School year shrinking as budget crisis grows
Louis Freedberg, California Watch
Monday, July 19, 2010
Rich Pedroncelli / AP
State schools chief Jack O'Connell says reducing the school year "is a major setback" for students.
Just as education experts are encouraging more classroom time to improve student grades and test scores, many California districts are moving in the opposite direction by shortening their school year amid a sustained and draining budget crisis.
Sixteen of the state's 30 largest school districts, including San Francisco, San Jose and Fremont in the Bay Area, are reducing the number of days in the academic year, according to a survey by California Watch. The changes are expected to affect about 1.4 million students.
Educators say a shrinking school year, along with other cuts, could depress hard-won academic gains in recent years. It is a dramatic illustration, they say, of how the state's budget crisis is eroding the core of public education in California.
The move comes amid cutbacks in other aspects of public education, including rolling back or eliminating the state's program intended to limit class sizes in the early grades to 20 students.
"This is a major setback," said Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell. "We're reducing opportunities for our students, which puts California students at a competitive disadvantage relative to other states."
A little more than a decade ago, California increased the number of instructional days to 180, catching up with most other states. Two years ago, as the state's economy deteriorated, the state gave districts permission to reduce the calendar to 175 days, but few exercised the option.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/07/19/MNQ01EFBET.DTL&feed=rss.news_pageone#ixzz0u9Z9vzjw

Schwarzenegger's minimum-wage fight enrages state workers
By Kevin Yamamura and Jon Ortiz
kyamamura@sacbee.com
Published: Sunday, Jul. 18, 2010 - 12:00 am | Page 1A
Five years ago, the state correctional officers' union paraded a mobile billboard around the Capitol bearing an unflattering picture of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in his bathing suit.
That demonstration seems mild compared to the frustration state employees feel this year toward the Republican governor. Schwarzenegger has incurred the wrath of rank-and-file employees through efforts to reduce pay and benefits, particularly his latest push to impose minimum wage.

Schwarzenegger was heckled by fairgoers when he toured the State Fair this week. His office has received a flood of e-mails critical of his actions toward state workers, some so colorful they were reviewed by the California Highway Patrol. Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/07/18/2897615/schwarzeneggers-minimum-wage-fight.html#ixzz0u3WYIxiR

 
Nurses Union Needs to Pay Attention to Patients Instead of Politics
Written by CA Political News on July 17, 2010, 10:33 AM
Those who can't, organize

CalWatchdog, 7/17/10

When did nurses, teachers, cops and firefighters become card-carrying union brotherhood and sisterhood thugs? Service jobs used to be defined as jobs where caring for others was the priority; teaching children, providing health and medical care, and protecting society from bad guys and catastrophic events, was job-one.

But with the advent of political power from within the unions, service jobs seem to have taken a back seat to union activities for many in these professions. Job-one became Union YES!

Thursday of this week, looking more like a CodePink gathering than nursing professionals, a rally took place by nurses at the home of gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman in Atherton, CA. More than 1,100 well-organized nurses arrived in buses carrying signs and banners stating, Nurses wont be pushed around.

CBS5 reported several nurses claiming, Our pensions, our union rights, were threatened, and We need to stand up and fight this person. Protesting nurses yelled and chanted, Were going to beat back the Whitman attack. The union hired a plane to fly over Whitmans house with a banner that read, Nurses say no to Whitman.

Sarah Pompei, the spokeswoman for the Whitman campaign said that Whitman has requested many meetings with the nurses. Pompei provided six letters written to the nurses asking for opportunities to meet and explain Whitmans positions on issues pertaining to nursing and health care. Whitman has also asked for the mailing list of the nurses union membership in order to send a letter to members, but the request was denied.

In a statement, Pompei said of the rally, The radical leadership of the California Nurses Association has decided to spend untold thousands of dollars from members dues on a stunt. Have they surveyed their membership to ask whether they agree with the expenditure? How many nurses are being forced to use sick days to attend this political theater? in a statement?

In an attempt to quell the myths surrounding her positions on health care, Whitmans campaign created a website called TRUTH FOR NURSES to reach out to nurse members, and explain Whitmans positions on nursing and health care, as well as the explosive issue of nursing ratios. The site also provides reports on how the California Nurses Association spends the dues money of member nurses.
http://capoliticalnews.com/blog_post/show/5708

Most Americans Not Willing To Pay Higher Taxes For Public Employees, Entitlement Programs
Wednesday, July 07, 2010
Most Americans would not pay higher taxes for specific public services in their states, but they are more supportive of paying for education and staffing law enforcement than supporting state employees and entitlement programs.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Adults shows that only 19% would be willing to pay higher taxes to avoid layoffs of state employees. Sixty-nine percent (69%) say they would not be willing to pay more in taxes for this reason. Another 11% are undecided.

Adults feel similarly when it comes to funding entitlement programs. Twenty-two percent (22%) would pay higher taxes to prevent cuts in entitlement programs for low-income Americans. Sixty-three percent (63%) say they would not pay more to keep these programs afloat. Another 15% are undecided.

Americans are slightly less opposed to paying higher taxes for education. Thirty-four percent (34%) say they are willing to pay higher taxes to provide funding for public education, but 54% say they are not. Another 12% aren’t sure.
Thirty-seven percent (37%) say they are willing to pay higher taxes to increase the number of police and firemen in their communities. Still, 52% say they would not be willing to do so. Another 10% are not sure. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/general_business/july_2010/most_americans_not_willing_to_pay_higher_taxes_for_public_employees_entitlement_programs

Biggest Threat on November Ballot
By Loren Kaye
President of the California Foundation for Commerce and Education
Thu, July 8th, 2010
An initiative sponsored by government worker unions has qualified for the November ballot - and it may well be the most threatening issue facing businesses and taxpayers in 2010.
So what does it do? According to sponsors, Proposition 25, the "On Time Budget Act," merely reduces the legislative vote requirement to pass the state budget from two-thirds to a simple majority, and stops paying legislators if the budget is late.
But when you think about it, why would the California Federation of Teachers, California Faculty Association, California School Employees Association, California Professional Firefighters, Professional Engineers in California Government, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, and California Nurses Association invest millions of dollars in a measure simply to reduce the vote on the state budget? What else does it do that its sponsors are not talking about?
A more accurate title would be the Majority Vote for Everything and Bye-Bye Referendum Act.
First, the measure eliminates - yes, eliminates - the ability to subject certain bills to voter referendum. That is, bills "providing for appropriations related to the budget bill" may be approved by a majority vote of the Legislature, and take effect immediately without voter recourse to using the referendum process (see new paragraph (e)(1) in Section 12 of the measure).
Second, the measure effectively repeals the protection of the legislative two-thirds vote requirement for certain bills that increase taxes, enact general obligation bonds, and allow the Legislature to increase its living expenses, among others. That is, bills that likewise provide "for appropriations related to the budget bill" that would otherwise require a two-thirds vote to take effect would no longer be subject to that vote threshold (see the first clause of new paragraph (e)(1) in Section 12 of the measure).
Imagine the implications of this measure.
http://foxandhoundsdaily.com/blog/loren-kaye/7280-biggest-threat-november-ballot

California local governments push to cut pension benefits
Share
By Robert Lewis
rlewis@sacbee.com
Published: Friday, Jul. 9, 2010 - 12:00 am | Page 1A
Local governments across California are poised to roll back pension benefits for public employees.
Sacramento County officials have had more than a half dozen meetings with their counterparts in nearby counties and cities as part of a collaborative effort to set more conservative, uniform pension guidelines.
Other agencies, including Placer County, already are negotiating with unions to lower retirement benefits for new hires. In Alameda County, sheriff's deputies agreed to such a rollback earlier this year.
And at least four pension-related local initiatives appear headed to the ballot this November, including one in San Francisco that would require workers to pay more into their retirement systems.
The momentum could push changes past employee unions, which for years have resisted compromising their hard-won pay and benefit packages.
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/07/09/2878734/california-local-governments-push.html#ixzz0tEPEoq5t

Governor leans on Willie Brown to pressure for pension change

At a Capitol meeting with the press Thursday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger relied on the support of a Democratic icon - former Assembly Speaker Willie Brown - to bolster a new demand that a specific change in state worker pensions be made before he signs off on a budget.
At a minimum, the governor said, he wants legislators to roll back current pension terms to those that existed before 1999 legislation created more generous rules.
"All I'm asking is for them to reform and roll it back and we will be home free," and saving billions that would otherwise go to finance retirement for public employees, Schwarzenegger said.
He argued that because of the budget deficit, social programs are being sacrificed to meet pension obligations that should be changed for new state workers.
Then he introduced "my friend" Willie Brown, the San Francisco Democrat who led the Assembly for years. Brown backs pension changes but was not specific about what he thinks legislators should do.
"I'm sure glad you said 1999 because I had departed" the Legislature by then, Brown told the governor with a chuckle. "It's one of the few things I can't be blamed on."
Read more: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2010/07/governor-leans-on-willie-brown.html#ixzz0t8Q2s93t

Why union-households don't loathe Whitman as much you'd think they would...
Among the many nuggets in Wednesday's just-emancipated Field Poll on the CA guv race is this one: In California households where a union member lives, Jerry Brown leads Meg Whitman by 47 percent to 41 percent.
OK, so a lead's a lead -- and Jerry's got waaaaay bigger problems in this poll, as our story notes. But when you think about all the union-backed independent expenditures that have been pounding Meg-a-millions -- not the least of which is the California Nurses Association -- you'd think that would be more of a yawning gap, no?
"Not necessarily," Henry Brady, dean of UC-Berkeley's Goldman School of Public Policy, told us. "The rank-and-file union membership is not as liberal as its leadership."
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=67296#ixzz0t0rei9Cc

 

Zero-interest loans to help state workers
Banks and credit unions will offer zero-interest loans and other assistance to the 200,000 California government employees who may see their pay reduced to the minimum wage as a result of the state's budget stalemate.
The Golden 1 Credit Union, a lender that caters to state workers, will offer zero-interest loans to customers whose pay falls because of the stalled spending plan, according to a statement Friday. About 1,100 legislative aides and gubernatorial appointees whose pay was stopped on Thursday already have access to so-called budget-impasse loans, said Donna A. Bland, the company's chief financial officer.
"We're trying to show our support for our state-employee members," Bland said in a telephone interview. Golden 1, based in Sacramento, describes itself as the sixth-largest credit union in the nation with about $7 billion in assets.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/07/07/BUJ21E9VT7.DTL&feed=rss.business#ixzz0t0s0hOVc

 

DWP officials spurn LA council meeting on audit
By Rick Orlov Staff Writer
Posted: 07/06/2010 07:06:32 PM PDT
Simmering tension between the Los Angeles City Council and the DWP erupted Tuesday after utility officials skipped a hearing scheduled to discuss an audit that accused the agency of lying in order to push through a rate hike.
An angry Councilman Paul Koretz threatened to use the council's subpoena power to compel Austin Beutner, a deputy mayor and the DWP's interim general manager, to appear before the full City Council within the next two weeks.
"I've been watching the city for over 40 years and I don't remember anything like this," said Koretz, who chairs the council's audits committee. "We asked them to be here before and they refused.
"They have 10,000 employees. They could have someone here."
Councilmen Bernard Parks and Greig Smith, each of whom has worked for the city for more than 35 years, said they could not recall a department refusing to appear before a committee.
"It just hasn't happened," Smith said.
During the afternoon session, the Audits and Governmental Efficiency Committee had planned to meet jointly with the Energy and Environment Committee to discuss a recent audit of the Department of Water and Power. In her report, Controller Wendy Greuel said the DWP lied when it said it could afford to transfer $73 million to the cash-strapped city only if the council approved a controversial hike in electric rates.
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_15451506?source=rss