As a state employee in the middle of my initial probationary period, I was elated last week when the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition, known as SEBAC, and Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's negotiating team announced a tentative agreement on wage and benefit concessions.The deal meant I could keep the job I genuinely enjoy coming to each day; that no more of my colleagues would be laid off; and that Connecticut's $3.7 billion budget deficit nightmare would be over. My enthusiasm was short-lived, however, as just minutes after hearing of the tentative bargain, I learned that some of my fellow state employees would be voting "no" to any concessions — a decision they had reached before even learning the details of the agreement. Before casting their "no" vote, I ask simply that my fellow state employees consider the following:
First, this agreement must be considered within the broader context of the recent backlash against public sector workers. Without delving into the particulars, consider what's happened in Wisconsin, New Jersey, Ohio and a host of other states. Although the familiar refrain that "we state employees didn't create this mess" is no doubt true, it is also true that the state employee compensation structure is unsustainable.
To take just two examples, the state pension fund is woefully underfunded, and the system of providing health insurance to retirees — at no cost to the vast majority of current state employees — is out of touch with broader market realities. In short, changes need to be made, and the present agreement is a reasonable, relatively painless way to modify an outmoded system of compensation.
Second, the rejection of this tentative agreement would result in rising costs to all state residents, including state employees. Although the details of Gov. Malloy's infamous "Plan B" are far from clear, the alternative budget is certain to include reduced state aid to Connecticut's cities and towns in addition to a variety of other highly distasteful outcomes.
As municipalities grapple with decreased funding at this late date in the budget cycle, they would undoubtedly be forced to raise taxes to compensate for the lost revenue as well as slash their own budgets. The result would inevitably be layoffs of local employees — including teachers and other school employees — which would lead to increased class sizes and the elimination of countless programs and services on which residents rely.
Third, while the SEBAC agreement is clearly about more than just job security, no current union employees could be laid off for the next four years — an enviable assurance indeed in the present economic environment.
With the current Connecticut unemployment rate at 9 percent, cutting thousands of employees from the state payroll would ruin the lives of countless families while compounding the state's unemployment crisis. It goes without saying that this would exacerbate the state's financial situation as unemployment insurance payments are made and displaced workers and their families curtail spending precipitously.
I am not asking all state employees blindly to vote in favor of the agreement regardless of its terms and irrespective of employees' individual circumstances. Rather, I respectfully request that all state employees carefully consider the implications of a rejection of this tentative agreement, and to think about more than just themselves when casting their vote.
Matt Venhorst of West Hartford is a staff attorney for the state Department of Education.
5 comments:
Spoken like a mole from the Governor's office.
I am not looking for full time employment with afscme after retiring. I say no. This is a bad deal. Almost daily one of our parolees is on the news charged with murder , shooting or robbery. We should not be negotiating with the Governor. The Governor is spending at a record level on complete boondocle expansions of Uconn med center, high speed rail, and the idiot bus to no where system. Value based health care is very very bad. Still all of our suggestions to reduce spending have been ignored in an arrogant manner of elite snobbery. Send a message to the Governor: cut spending, cut the waste, cut the excessive nopotism , cut the excessive supervisors and over population of managers, then we can sit down and negotiate. Every felon you put on parole with lowered standards increases the risk to the public. Have watched our early out inmates kill for the last few months on the news/ Time to turn the table and ask the Governor why?
The state is expanding union jobs between the UConn med center and the New Britain to Hartford bus line. The unions will make extra in dues as well as many new positions in AFSCME and SEIU will be available. All member benefits will have to be reduced to help pay for this. Union leadership is now advising the membership to vote against their self interest so they can acquire a coveted union job.
Hello! When you reach 60 days on the job and start to realize that 50,000 state employee's didn't create this problem but we sure are being asked to solve it. Remember one thing most of us have given 4 years of zero's 4 years of delays. So shared sacrifice means state employee's bend over because here it comes again! Our pension plan's wouldn't be an issue if the thieves, Rowland and Rell, would have put the more than 700 million dollars that they used to start another social services program back into our pension. So wake up rookie state employee. I could go on much longer but I will spare you for now.
Where does it say in the agreement that you can not be laid off.... Try rading it again, it says that there will not be any lay off of employyes hired BEFORE july 1 2011 for the time period between july 1 2011 and june 30 2015, if you were hired after july 1 2011 you can still be laud of..... oh sorry did you read the next paragraph, the one that says, nothing in this agreement precludes the state from e restructering or elimating postions? .... fancy way of saying lay offs .... and when the senior staff members bump down guess who is going to be going bye bye... learn to read and not just listen to salesmen...
Post a Comment