he could have made it effective now, AND it's better than a 100% pay reduction

I'm laid off so I'd be happy to trade your situation for mine.

California is in a budget crisis and has been for many months. I repeat CRISIS.

The Governor has been beating the drum for months. He asked for 10% cuts be made across the board in every state department a long time ago. As usual, what was seen and widely publicized was whining by major areas that THEIR budget simply could not be cut. The oft repeated mantra 'WE can't cut back 10%; take 20% from somewhere or somebody else.'
In my opinion based on years of working in corporate America, there is not a large corporation that cannot reduce their expenditures by 10%.

At least the Governor's Excutive Order gave everyone 6 weeks notice. That gives people time to take action to reduce their own household budgets -- even return some expensive Christmas gifts they may have splurged on.

If the Governor had waited until AFTER Christmas he would have been severely criticized for that.

Re-read what 'daveinla' and 'kec01' wrote. It is the truth -- it is reality.

Cuts hurt. However use it to your advantage. Take a class. Volunteer to help the homeless or elderly. Extra time off to spend with family and friends. If you want to talk crisis.....move to Detroit! We've been in a recession for 5 years. Now the rest of the country is catching up. We will get through it.

Duane

My hubby is losing 2 days (day after Christmas and the day after NY) plus at least 2 more later. He has had his job cut twice (and was called back - whew) so I am not going to complain.
It may get much worse.

But he GAVE a gift to every citizen of the state by reducing the cost of government. Sometimes, it works that way--a few have to sacrifice for the good of the general public.

That sounds like a very reasonable, workable situation. Most will get by, with 2 days less pay. You have plenty of lead time to reorganize. I wish our governor would cut some of the huge pay and perks our state workers get (who, in this day and age, gets fully covered (NOTHING out of pocket), fully paid health insurance? Our state workers and their families do. And the pension plan for state workers in my state is astronomical. Would love to see some of those things scaled down a bit here. And yes, I'd fully support our state workers being cut back a few days a month.

My son'r wages were cut 10% - no extra days off - same work - less pay - he's a guard. ...he'll hang tough - he'll give 110% - he'll be fine...

Should have added this:

The company my husband works for today, is a very old one--it was around before the Great Depression. During that tough time, they didn't lay off a SINGLE worker--they kept everyone working, but cut back on hours. To this day, 70+ years later, people still talk about how GOOD that company was to their employees--because they didn't lose their jobs. It's often better to have something, rather than nothing. It's all in your perspective, I suppose.

Sorry for the impact to your family. But I think I'd rather know about it before Christmas than after, so that I can plan (and spend) accordingly.

The company I work for is laying off 1800 people in the next couple of months. I have no idea whether I'll be one of them. I'd rather know now; the uncertainty is tough.

Yes, I'd gladly take a 10% reduction, and take 2 more days off, rather than lose my job. Heck, I'd even take the 10% reduction without the extra 2 days; I think I'd look at those days (and the retained job) as a gift.

Merry Christmas, and blessings to you.

Suzieque

I have to agree with the timing, better to know ahead of time. I got laid off from a job the day after I bought a new car. That hurt. If I had known I was going to be unemployed for a while, I wouldn't have bought the car.

And I haven't worked a single day since early October. My boss calls me in when he needs me. I wish I was only getting a 10% reduction in wages, that's better than 100%, which is what I have now. I love working for him, but if he can't use me, I'll have to look elsewhere.

"Nice of him to put that out right before Christmas, eh?"

Yes, it was. Now everyone has several weeks to get their affairs readjusted.

Better than immediate cuts... and way better than no job at all!

I have to agree. Here in Ontario, government jobs are fairly good wages compared to most. Given the option of a 10% pay cut and still working full time or two days off a month, I would much rather have the two days off. The majority of people are going to have to become smarter spenders and harder workers if our governments are going to get out of the financial mess. It is time for us all to work together. We have been spoiled for a long time, wanting more and having more and it has finally caught up with us. Corporations and Governments have been major offenders in extravagance. I only hope that the senior executives cut back as well as they are the most guilty of overspending.

Better than to (perhaps) put a financial strain on every employee instead of devastating some employees by taking away their jobs I'd say. Given the current economic conditions I'd breathe a sigh of relief if that situation was presented to me (instead of a layoff).

That's not to say that I don't feel your pain. I'm sure it hurts but like I said, considering the alternative...

I have heard a lot of people commenting about their hours and pay being cut back. It's just a sign of the times.
But most, if not all, end their comment with, 'at least I have a job'
Better to know now and be able to plan.

I was a federal employee for over 30 years. In December 1994 we were furloughed without pay for four days, never ever got that pay back. That might not seem like much, but I had 2 kids , a large mortgage to pay, and with Christmas coming the loss of nearly a weeks pay really hurt. Luckily I left in 2005. Some of my best friends are government employees.

Since one of the definitions of 'furlough' is: "temporary layoff," it is not surprising 4 days off without pay was not given back.

A basic recommendation of most financial analysts is that everyone should have in savings an amount equal to 6 month's wages.

I'm so sorry this has happened, Lindsey. It makes us wonder where it will all end. Bad times are just everywhere.

I spent almost 30 years in the federal government, and was in a senior-level position. Based on my experience, I would bet that if the Governor had told each department or agency head that they had to cut 10%...and they had the authority to choose where the cuts would be, there would have been cuts to program "fluff" before furloughs. I have never seen an agency that couldn't cut 10% from travel, equipment, contracts, etc., without significant program impact. As a manager, I would certainly have pared expenses to the bone before allowing my employees to be furloughed.

Maybe the Governor will give the agencies that option. I will hope so, for your sake. As to the timing, I agree that it is best to know before you give expensive gifts for Christmas. At least this way, you can plan ahead. Good luck!

Congress just "awarded" itself a 4.8% pay increase. Maybe we should ask them to voluntarily take 2 days furlough each month to share the pain of "real people." NO...forget that...they don't work enough now to take any more time off.

Sure it's a burden if you're in need of that money, but at least you have a job. Be thankful for that because alot of people dont have jobs.

His next order should be to somehow close that border and get rid of illegals who do not contribute to the State....there is a huge burden on these states that must pay for health care and housing for illegals when there is no tax on their income. It's getting worse, not better!

I agree that I'd rather know before Christmas than after. That way I could make decisions on cutting back for Christmas if necessary. I realize that for most people a 10% pay cut would mean adjustments to lifestyle, it is certainly better than being laid off. A lot of companies are doing what was done to grandma bonnie's son - reducing wages without giving days off. I would rather have the days off as unpaid & be doing something else that I need or want to do than have to work the same hours for less pay.

My company has been laying off for over a year. Because of state funding cuts to Medicaid, the company's income has dropped. I'm worried that this will continue. DH's company isn't planning any layoffs or wage cuts yet. But they have announced no overtime for hourly employees & they have frozen raises as well as hiring, along with some other changes. It was nice to see them react in this way instead of laying off.

The two-day furlough is just the beginning of it. He is also going to start a state-wide permanent layoff, where each agency that receives money from the state's general fund will have to lay off 10% of its employees, and there will be a hiring freeze. Well, there's currently a hiring freeze (started on July 1), so it will be extended.

The state went through another of this Governor's cutbacks a few years ago, with a hiring freeze and layoffs. My agency cut back significantly more than the Governor was asking, and we still haven't been able to bring staffing levels anywhere near where they should be, and now we'll lose more people. Layoffs are done by seniority, but it's a classification-based layoff, so someone in one classification who has 25 years on the job can get laid off, while someone who has 1 month in state service but in a different classification is safe. I have 19 years, but I'm one of the relative "newbies" if you look at the state service time of the folks in my classification, so there's a very real possibility that my position could be targeted.

I think it's more accurate to say 10% less work and you do have those days to get a part-time job to increase income. Or use it for activities at home to save money, or more accurately, cut expenditures. Things like once a week/month cooking or otherwise. Make it a "job" on those two days to examine the budget and see how there can be reductions without hurting the lifestyle you want. Track income and expenditures. Could you guy generic rather than brand names? etc. Can you cut some unnecessary lighting, adjust the thermostat, use CFLs instead of incandescent, eliminate unnecessary driving and maximixe the trips. You already have 2 days a month now that you will not have to spend anything to get to work. Now keep that going. Read, research and look for motivation. Losing income is not a good thing. But it doesn't always have to become a crisis.

My boss was notified this past Monday that her job is gone as of the 1st of January. She's been with the company for 15 years. There's an arguable point that someone who has been there that long should bump someone who's been there less time. Overall though they do it pretty fair, course the one who gets cut seldom thinks anything is fair. BTW, they are giving her 45 days "notice" so she's techincally employed until into February. The other advantage is she's part of a two-income family. What if it was a single person?

We in Minnesota have a crisis of our own and are stuck with a Governor who loves to raise taxes IF you title it a "fee", and then he can campaign that he "won't raise taxes" and stupid people bit on that like Tyson on an ear.

People need to realize that the past 8 years have affected this country financially in a sometimes devastating manner. The feds have pulled funds from the states, therefor the states pull funds from local communities and the local communities can't understand that they can't keep spending at the same levels, but there's still services like police/fire, road plows, etc that need to be funded. Schools cry like babies wanting more and more and try to sneak special levy referendums though. And the sad part is there's no miracle cure. We have to look out to the future, tighten our belts and be ready for more before things can start to turn around. A runaway train takes time to turn around.

I would hope that people have been making adjustments in the past to be prepared for an emergency. Otherwise it could be a big problem.

Add me to the list of those laid off! I have NO income in 3 weeks when WCB expires. I'd take the 10% reduction over laid off any day.

I agree with the others that I'd rather know beforehand. It's better than the alternative, which is what I have had to deal with. A job loss can be devastating, but it's best to know of the possibility beforehand rather than have what happened to me. We have had to cut back drastically on our spending in order to survive. I would have gladly taken a 10% cut in pay (even without any time off). If there is a possbility that your job may be eliminated start looking at your spending habits now, not later. And start cutting back where you can. Wish I had had the choice to do so...

If you are worried about your position perhaps you could start looking now for something else. I realize that there aren't a lot of jobs out there, especially in certain parts of the country. But it never hurts to check. I'm worried about the future of my company, so I've already started looking & networking.

Also definitely look at your budget now. Cut out things that are not necessary & try to put as much as you can in savings.

Do the people realize what this will do to the state? Every state employee could loose 2 day of pay each month. Therefore they will have less fire protection, police protection, could close state offices or have less people to serve them at least one day a month, less money to spend, less taxes to pay, and since these people are under a signed contract it may not go.
After living in CA for 65 years I am sad to see the direction has gone the last 20 years. Just be aware that the illegals and welfare are going to get the same money and better health etc and the working people will be getting less services and pay less taxes, and will be waiting longer time to get those state services.

My husband and I are both employed by the state, so both of us will see a 10% reduction in salary. We own two cars, but for several years now, we have used only one -- we carpool to work, and if we both have errands to run on the weekend, we work around each other's schedule so only the one car gets driven. Saves on gas, insurance, servicing/repairs, etc. We do have CFLs instead of incandescent lights, we don't have lights on in rooms that aren't occupied, we have a set-back thermostat.

It's not yet been announced how the two furlough days will be done -- we don't know, for example, if all agencies will be closed on the same two days, or if employees will be assigned random days off. If hubs and I don't have the same two days off, it will be a tremendous waste of gasoline for just one of us to drive to work those four days.

Yes, I agree that it's better for most folks to find out before spending big for Christmas, that they're going to see a pay cut. But for the folks that will really be impacted, it makes for a sucky holiday. My husband and I both earn a good salary, and our combined reduction will be more than some individual folks' total annual salary, so I know we'll be ok. I just think the whole thing stinks, though. There is a tremendous amount of waste/unnecessary spending that could be cut before workers' salaries/jobs should be cut.

For example, in each year's budget, there are specific amounts of money that are allocated to agencies. Each agency is listed individually. At the end of the fiscal year, if an agency has money left over, they will get less money the following year, on the premise that "if they didn't spend it this year, they don't need it next year." So, as the fiscal year draws to a close, all agencies go on a buying frenzy to use up all the money so they aren't cut the following year. Why not institute a change -- so that if an agency has money left over, it can go back into the general fund without the agency being penalized the next year? Why penalize an agency for being fiscally prudent one year? When new computers are purchased, they are purchased with a three-year warranty. The state doesn't hold on to equipment that's out of warranty, so at the end of each fiscal year there are thousands of new computers purchased. When a new version of software is released, the agencies jump on the bandwagon and buy it. My personal opinion is that unless there are significant improvements/changes in the newer version of software, don't buy it. Ya don't need Office 2007 just because it's out there if Office 2003 does everything you need it to do! And the majority of state employees that have computers are NOT "power users" so a basic computer with Microsoft Office (2003!) is more than sufficient for them. But the state continues to waste tremendous amounts of money on new equipment and new software licenses.

I'm not at all going to look for a new position. I plan on retiring in 2010, anyway, so if my position is eliminated in the Governor's latest go-round of let's-mess-with-the-workers, I'll simply retire.

"...since these people are under a signed contract it may not go."

Yes, that's a unilateral change in working conditions, which would be against the terms of the contracts. The state would have to reach agreement with all of the bargaining units before this could be instituted.

However, our contracts expired on June 30. There is a clause in the contracts that says that in the absence of a contract, all provisions of the contract are still in effect as long as collective bargaining is continuing in good faith. The state will just refuse to go to any bargaining meetings.

I like the things Lindsey said. It's too bad the governator didn't first ask employees how they wanted to handle things- cutback service, shorten workweeks, rotating days off, or even ask for "volunteers". It could have been done in a kinder way.

You're going to ask 238,816 how they want things handled? You'll get 238,826 different answers.

My father worked for New York State government for over 30 years. I recall a week of furlough every couple of years or so in the last 10 years he worked for the state. I think he lost 6 weeks by the time he "retired". Oh, that wasn't his decision either. Funny how those who were forced to retire all were over the age of 55.

Consider yourself lucky.

Enjoy those days off!

lindsey, I'm sorry to hear this. Michigan has been at the bottom of the barrel for a few years so I understand.

I'm really sorry, Lindsey. It's bad anytime of the year to hear bad news like that. I have a friend who works for a tile distribution company and they are down to 30 hours a week, for something like three weeks, and the fourth week they get a 40 hour week. It's hard when you were expecting a certain income.

I was going to say what Wanda already did about Congress and their pay raise. I just don't understand it, in light of what is going on with the bailouts and the deficit. I also found out that we are getting a cost of living raise in January (I work for the federal government). I'm happy, of course, but it really doesn't make any sense. How can they keep spending money that's not there?

In 1995 (maybe it was '94), HCA Hospitals were bought by another company. I was a 'premium pay' nurse- that meant I worked for more wage, but got NOTHING else- no vacation, insurance, no school/classes-, no 401k- nada. A couple of days before our payday, we were told that our pay- $23/hour would be cut by $4/hour- that was quite a chunk taken away. It happens. In todays world, I'd just be happy to still have a job. Still pretty crappy thing to do to nurses.

Like everyone has said-it could be worse.
SO just got his letter in the mail saturday-10% salary cut starting the last pay period in January.
I just found out that the small company I work for is going to a four day work week until the 1st of March.
This really hurts, but at least we both still have our jobs. I don't know how we will cut back we are already pretty frugal-probably the first thing will be the DSL, the phone and Dish-those three things there are a big chunk of money each month-they are things we like, but not things we can't live without.

When I wasa a young working mother with two young daughters, I would have actually "appreciated" a couple extra days to spend at home.

I know you are upset....but look at the thousands, (533,000 in October) that are now unemployed.

Suck it up. We all have to.

ML

sorry...just be glad you don't live in michigan...you could be facing permanent lay-offs, temps at 0 degrees today, and your house in foreclosure...

I know this is off topic, but the word is LOSE, not LOOSE. For some reason that just drives me crazy and I see it every day in print and on the internet. Did nobody attend english class in school? Even my MIL who was a home economics teacher spells it wrong. Sorry for the rant but it really BUGS me!

Duane

It bothers me, too, Duane but not to the point I have to use big capital letters in a post.
And I thought it was English class, not english class.
Have a great holiday season.

maddielee told me to "Suck it up."

There's really no need to get nasty about it.

As I said before, my husband and I each earn a very good salary. We can easily handle a 10% cut in pay. My "complaint" is only that I think the Governor is barking up the wrong tree, so to speak. There are so many other ways for the state to save money -- why put the burden on the employees? With unemployment at the rate it is in California, with the number of homes going into foreclosure, why risk sending even more families into financial crisis?

No, our home is not in danger. It's nearly paid off. Both cars are paid for. We really don't have much debt at all. I'm not worried about us, but I am worried about some of my coworkers.

Question asked: "Why put the burden on the employees?"

Well, maybe it is because the Governor started asking agency heads to cut their expenditures by 10% as far back as May of 2007 warning of serious budgets woes. It is up to the Agency Heads to do what Lindsey suggested in the post above at time of 17:44. One can hardly expect the Governor of a state with over 37 million people to have detailed knowledge of how computers/software is purchased -- so put the blame where it belongs -- on department managers and agency heads.

In early November 2007, Schwarzeneggers finance department ordered agency directors to formulate plans to cut budgets by 10%.

A year passes ....

In November 2008 Schwarzenegger pursued a plan that called for a 1 day per month furlough of all state employees which had to be approved by the Legislature.

Earlier he called for a special session which gives the Legislature 45 days to plug the shortfall. Lawmakers were unable to agree on a plan to close the gap during a three-week special session that expired the end of November, I think. Fiscal projections state that California will be broke by, at best, the end of March 2009 -- broke as in 'no money in the bank'.

So ...

Friday, 12/19/2008: the Governor took emergency action by announcing the now TWO (2) day a month furlough for state employees. Managers and non-union employees will receive an equivalent 10 percent pay decrease starting the same day, Feb. 1.

Monday, 12/22/08: Two public employee unions on Monday sued Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to block his effort to furlough state workers in a cost-cutting measure as California's treasury runs out of money.

Last week, Schwarzenegger issued an executive order to require that all state employees take two unpaid days off each month starting in February. The governor said the measure is needed to conserve cash, with the state budget gap estimated to reach $42 billion a year and a half from now.

The lawsuit, filed in Sacramento County Superior Court, asserts that only the Legislature can alter the pay of workers who have labor contracts with the state. It asks the courts to issue a temporary stay to stop Schwarzenegger's efforts, which could affect 230,000 workers.

As I said earlier, when it comes to cutting costs, no one want to be the one who takes a hit. It's always a case of: "it's not right or fair to cut MY pay/budget/etc. Take it from somewhere else."

And, while this conversation thread has been about California these fiscal crises will continue to spread throughout the country -- big time.

Back when I worked for the Indiana State government, there were full timers getting food stamps.
When our fire departments consolidated, I got cut $6,000. Well, they are now getting $6,000 less work out of me....... and yes, I am looking for another job.