Thursday, May 8, 2008

Mandatory furlough/Early retirement

Email to Rumblings:

There are many rumors and much anxiety about "mandatory furloughs" and early retirement"packages". The few facts suggest a highly politicized process.

Neither of the above is a done deal. The budget process for the past month has been fraught with the press releases of the week, usually on Fridays, just in time to stir people up before the weekend. One of the first examples was the announcement that 767 positions must be cut.

At the Civil Service Commission, representatives from EAA and from the Coalition of City Unions (SEIU, AFSCME, and four others) appeared in opposition to the rule change. The 21 day notice motion FAILED 2-2. If this rule change were reintroduced, it starts over again with another 21 day notice.

Also, consider the source of the press release about early retirement. It was read by Cheryl Parisi, who is on the staff of AFSCME. What she released might be a suggestion from the Coalition of Unions to the Villaraigosa administration,but it is NOT a statement by City management that there will be early retirement incentives.

The last time a so-called package was offered, the ITA employees who were targeted were ISMs and DBAs. They received individual letters and could accept or reject the offer. (It was not a case in which anyone who wanted to could go sign up to get service credit and leave.) This was around 1994.

There was a recent council motion requesting that the retirement with 30 years of service and 50 years of age be "studied". The study has not yet been finished, so 30/50 is not a done deal either.

Consider the possibility that the whole series of these announcements, agenda items, requests to verify your personnel record, pressure to take voluntary furlough days, and so on, may be intended to scare employees in order to gain concessions and to convince taxpayers that the budget is being cut.

No comments: