TimesArgus.com - We Are Vermont

State workers warn of fallout from cuts



Toolbox

By DANIEL BARLOW Vermont Press Bureau - Published: March 6, 2009

MONTPELIER – Lucas Herring of Barre called it the "multiplier effect."

When state workers are laid off, they stop shopping at local businesses. Those businesses see their sales drop off and lay off staff, increasing unemployment. Less taxes are paid to the state, compounding the problem of revenues.

"People are scared," said Herring, who works for the Vermont Department of Banking, Insurance, Securities and Health Care Administration. "And when they are scared, they're not spending."

Nearly a dozen Washington County lawmakers met at the Statehouse on Wednesday evening to hear from residents – including numerous state workers concerned that their jobs might be next in line to be cut – as the Vermont Legislature struggles with how to boost the state's sagging economy.

Rep. Mary Hooper, D-Montpelier, who also serves as the city's elected mayor, said future layoffs of state workers will have a dramatic affect on the region – including downtowns from the capital city to Waterbury.

She read an e-mail she received this week from the owner of Montpelier's Capital Stationers saying state workers equal about 25 percent of its business. The poor economy has already resulted in about a 20 percent loss in business for the store, the e-mail said, and the owner is worried about its future.

"Quite frankly, if the trend continues, I won't be here by the end of the year," Hooper said, reading the e-mail. "We have more going out than coming in."

Shelly Martin, a resident of Westfield who works at a state office in Waterbury, began her testimony by listing off the businesses that she and other co-workers frequent in the town they work in – businesses they could no longer support if they lost their jobs.

George Malek, the executive vice-president of the Central Vermont Chamber of Commerce, told lawmakers to hold the line on increasing taxes. He said he was especially worried with the possible increase in unemployment taxes on businesses to refill that account, which is quickly being drained as more and more people lose their jobs.

Dona Bate, a Montpelier small business owner and one of the organizers of the Lost Nation Theater, said the state needs to expand its Catamount Health program, adding that the "only way you can make [the program] work is by letting small businesses buy into it."

Lee Lauber, the executive director of the Family Center of Washington County, praised state officials and Gov. James Douglas for a proposal to allocate $7.2 million more toward child care assistance, explaining "If families don't have child care, they can't work."

But she warned that the subsidies to families for the program are based on a model that is 10 years out of date. Vermont uses a poverty guideline from the year 2000, she said, despite that the federal poverty guideline has been updated for 2009. This means less families who need this help will have access to it, she explained.

"It's heinous that Vermont is using poverty guidelines that are 10 years old," she said.

Sen. Ann Cummings, D-Washington, the chairwoman of the Senate Finance Committee, said talks continue on how best to bring Vermont's state government budget in line closer with revenues.

But even between cost-cutting measures, increased fees or taxes and the federal stimulus money – there will need to be some further staff reductions, she said.

"No matter what we do, we're still millions of dollars in the hole," Cummings said. "We can't make promises that it will all go away."



Contact Daniel Barlow at Daniel.Barlow@timesargus.com.








READER COMMENTS


Hi Jest Answering; don't worry, I pay my fair share. Raising some taxes (even mine) is better than adding to the unemployment lines, and making it harder for people to get services they need. Tax increases are not the best choice, but the worst choice is the one Jim Douglas is making. I didn't make that up, it's from a nobel prize winning economist., I happen to agree with it.

By any chance, have you looked at today's list of 320 proposed layoffs (www.vsea.org)? Notice there is not a single one of Jim Douglas's 277 new political appointees or one of his 14 speech writers. Here's a sample of who is on the list, however, 5 food safety inspectors, several public health nurses, a bunch of reach up case managers, some voc-rehab counselors, and 40 or so correctional officers so the State can close another prison and ship inmates to for-profit out of State prisons to learn how to be really bad.
-- Posted by Ski Frog on Wed, Mar 11, 2009, 10:49 pm EST

report this comment



Ski Frog I hope they take 50% taxes from you and then you will see how it is. THIS is not the time to be raising taxes...or spending a bunch of money...
-- Posted by Jest Answering on Wed, Mar 11, 2009, 3:50 pm EST

report this comment



ahh too bad so sad...the Southern States are far worse of then we are it is just hitting the North wait until your property falls 50%...it has not really even begun here. As for RUSH Limbaug you better get your facts straight...it was not coke...it was oxycontin he had too many prescriptions by too many Dr.'s. I believe Fox News over the others...the slobbering love affair with Barrack Obama.
-- Posted by Jest Answering on Wed, Mar 11, 2009, 3:48 pm EST

report this comment



Layoffs are to be announced today.
-- Posted by Hunter- Farmer on Wed, Mar 11, 2009, 12:49 pm EST

report this comment



The problem with blogs like this with comments from those that don't know what they are talking about (and republican-run rants that call themselves news shows like FOXNews, CNN and Coke-addict Rush Limbaugh) is that they are not based on any fact whatsoever...they are based merely on some persons personal opinions who is up on a soap box misleading people and promoting dishonesty. I urge anyone reading these messages to please keep informed and follow the facts to make informed decisions.

I would like to also thanks "Olde Man" and "Ski Frog None" who give facts...it is so much better than the mindless dribble that some people on here continue to mumble.
-- Posted by None None on Mon, Mar 9, 2009, 3:23 pm EST

report this comment



.

We'll see if Big Jim has the balls to actually cut 660 positions. I think he's hoping the legislature stops him just so he can claim he tried to do it later on.


.
-- Posted by Olde Man on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, 10:10 pm EST

report this comment



Darin said "The state is not allowed by statute to run a deficit like the federal government is so they must balance the budget"

This is not true. Vermont is the only State that is NOT required to balance it's budget by law. Gov. Snelling ran a deficit and raised some taxes. This can be done again, but Governor Douglas won't consider it. Vermont also has $80 to $100 million in RAINY DAY funds. Anyone look out the window lately?
-- Posted by Ski Frog on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, 9:44 pm EST

report this comment



Honestly, I kind of like to see where the economy is headed. Its societies wway of cleaning out the deadwood. For once in a long time, people will have to check to see where the important things in their life are. Maybe some principles, morals, family (taken for granted in search of the almighty dollar for a new boat etc) yea lets work 3 jobs for plasma tvs and credit cards, while the kids are neglected and babysat by police cause parents too busy working to get things when they miss the most importan things, the family and now they HAVE TO SPEND time with their family. Funny how things work out, back to where they shoudlve been to begin with. No one is hungry, i dont want to hear that rhetoric, food first, some of ya can throw away the beer & cigarettes, now buy some food
-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, 9:17 pm EST

report this comment



.

"The lady doth protest too much...."


.
-- Posted by Olde Man on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, 7:06 pm EST

report this comment



haha this is fun. If you put as much thought into your life and politics as you have into hating me, you would be much more satisfied. The great thing about being me is im not a politician, i dont have to be politically correct, i call em how i see em. Im not here to make friends, im here to make fun of you idiots and your ideas, im not going to convert any of you, and your not going to convert me. I know everything you will ever say and i have 10 points to refute each and every one. You dont have to like my style, you dont even have to keep coming here to read my dribble, but you do. This is the new form of writing, it is informal, there are no graders to correct our work, it is a free flow conversation, i can just keep on going, never putting in any periods, just commas, and you can not do anything but whine, so whine on, it must be nice to not have to work because you are living off the rest of us, do you feel guilty at all? no you dont, in your eyes you are entitled to all you have because of all that you have contributed to society, blah blah blah.

your turn
-- Posted by M. L. on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, 2:49 pm EST

report this comment



.

You mean people PAY YOU money? To do what? You sit at home, probably in Mom's basement, playing on the computer. From what I read, you have no reading or writing skills. Maybe you can count? Like an idiot savant? You have no personality. Even your fellow conservatives have told you: you have no credibility.

I don't believe you work, or have EVER worked. You're probably on SSDI for an antisocial personalty. That's a polite way of saying you're so much of a social 'tard' the government will give you money as it will be your only source of income.

Wait,,, we all know,,, you're a corporate GIANT. You make deals worth millions every day. You're the lifeblood of the capitalistic system. I forgot. How's Donald Trump?


.
-- Posted by Olde Man on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, 2:33 pm EST

report this comment



A few points:

Veronica Sunshine - You are absolutely on target. Many state workers WANT to streamline "the system", work smarter and have the best ideas about how to improve state government. Politics is a top down game. The very small minority of state employees that do speak up find their work life a lot more miserable. Today many employees are afraid they will be targeted for lay-off if they open their mouth. The state right now is in full: "To get along you better go along" mode.

Some examples: Why does the state buy new American made vehicles? How about a Toyota truck that will last a lot longer? How about buying cars slightly used? Hell no. The state computer system in some departments is so bad that there are days that hundreds of employees literally do nothing because the computer system is down. ALL work stops. Hell, the legislature had to pass a law to protect state employees just so they could truthfully tell the legislature what goes on.

Are you kidding - I have seen employee work areas just as you described. I have seen nicknack town both in the private and public sector. In fairness there's people like that in every organization.

A few thoughts on the "welfare system." It's not just democrats that vote for and create social programs. Contrary to popular myth, the Republicans have held their own when it comes to spending on social programs.

Jim Douglas for example, increasing spending for daycare. That's just wrong! George W. Bush increasing education spending. While it's true that Medicaid began under LBJ and the quest for a "Great Society", Richard M. Nixon both expanded welfare and proposed some of the most liberal social programs in history. Nixon created:OSHA, NOAA, added to the Clean Air Act, the Noise Control Act, the Marine Mammel Protection Act, The Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Drinking Act. That is by no means a complete list either!! Nixon greatly expanded Food Stamps and expanded SSI to include the elderly and the disabled. You know the old saying: "Only Nixon can go to China."

I know many state employees. They get a bad rap in the press, at the legislature and on these boards. I wish the biggest complainers could work at some of those "easy" state jobs for a year. ML - I'd like to see you working in a prison or the state hospital or with disabled kids or as a state trooper or plowing the interstate at night below zero. You'd hum a different tune.

.
-- Posted by Olde Man on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, 1:41 pm EST

report this comment



There is more to this than just helping people. This system was designed by the dems. They have worked to create an environment where people become increasingly dependant on govt assistance. Then when the republican come to the stage with their promise to create jobs and opportunity while cutting the assistance programs, the dems cry foul. The dems lead us to believe, with the medias help, that republicans do not care about poor people, they want to take away all the money that we [the dems] have been giving to you all!! And these people who are getting all this free money and doing nothing are like, "OMG, those evil republicans, im voting democrat!". So really, the dems take money from working class people, give it the unemployed and the just lazy, and in return they get the votes. The Dems are buying votes, with republican money....... That is my problem with a system that punishes success and reward failure.
-- Posted by M. L. on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, 9:45 am EST

report this comment



Demand for service? Well the bigger state govt gets, the more people have to call them to get their needs met. State govt creates its own problems. Has anyone tried to call a state office & gotten a person on first 4 rings? Never a person, always goes into voice mail everytime. Then to boot, they say they have 72hrs to get back to you. WELL this is nothing new! This has been happeneing for last 5 years, so laying off state workers now,,really wont change public service, it has been horrible to beign with. And if state workers purposely make it difficult for people that do contact them now as a revolt. Fire them,,there are plenty of people that would be more than happy to answer the phones or type something up for their job. Visit a state employess desk area. They have so many pictures and knicknacks, that show the span of their children and grandchildren all over the area, you can tell they've worked there so long, their whole walls are covered with personal items,,you wont find any work bulletins. Maybe its time to clean house like Reagan did with air traffic controllers.
-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, 9:29 am EST

report this comment



Olde Man, Veronica makes several good points. Those are good places to start. Most of the programs you list are federally funded programs, not state. I'm not the governor so I don't have a list right in front of me but the whole stimulus plan is a good place to start. Most of the programs funded by the stimulus are feel good programs where most of the money goes to administration not to the people they are meant to "help" We need to eliminate this welfare state that has developed where the state must take care of the people. What happened to the people taking care of themselves? It's not the governments job to make sure you have a place to live or a full belly, that's your responsibility as a citizen. I'm sorry that there is more demand for services but there is even less revenue coming in so the only responsible thing to do is cut services and expenses. I didn't say it was easy, but I don't want my kids having to pay off this debt that we as a country are racking up so people don't have to work or can have a house they really can't afford. There's no guaranties of happiness in this country, only that you can pursue it. We need to incentivize hard work and ingenuity not codependance.
-- Posted by Darin on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 11:21 pm EST

report this comment



Perhaps the state wouldn't have to cut if they strived for efficiency. I don't work for the state but I have interaction with state employees through my work (self-employed). Many state workers arrive with ideas and enthusiasm only to be beat down by the system, meeting after meeting and nothing moves forward. Then there are the outside consultant studies, thousands of dollars spent, the study sits on someone's desk until it is outdated and then has to be done again (I personally witnessed this one). Sone years ago thousands of dollars where spent on a computer system no one used. This is the kind of stuff our state auditor ought to zero in on.
-- Posted by Veronica Sunshine on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 10:26 pm EST

report this comment



.

Darin, I agree with you on the subject of "special" education. The schools keep making the net wider. It's a joke. I'm also glad to hear someone mention the pink elephant in the room: EDUCATION. The sacred cow. The runaway train.

Back to the executive branch of government: You still don't address the problem of increased demand for state service. Across the board cuts are politically popular but they are incredibly stupid from a management standpoint. Across the board cuts only make sense if there is an across the board drop in demand. The opposite is true. Someone has to decide to ELIMINATE specific programs and run the programs that are kept, properly.

The public likes to complain about state government when they need a service and it can't be provided. There's plenty to complain about too. Across the board cuts have already been made and vacant positions have not been filled. There is absolutely ZERO strategic management applied by across the board cuts and not filling vacant positions. Vacancies don't necessarily occur where they do the least harm. Jim Douglas may be a pleasant, personable, Governor but, he's a lousy manager.

What "social programs" should be eliminated? ADFC//WIC//MEDICAID//CPS// ???

.
-- Posted by Olde Man on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 9:15 pm EST

report this comment



Olde Man,
I don't "claim" to be a small business owner, I am. In the private sector when demand decreases you cut production & expenses, in government when revenue decreases you cut expenses. Like ML said, start with the programs that encourages dependence on the government. Food stamps, housing subsidies etc are good places. In the schools cutting special ed would go a long way to balancing budgets, way too many kids are "special" now. I think with the $150 million deficit a 10% across the board cut in state employees isn't out of line. Mangers and front line workers should all be on the block. I'd keep the police and other emergency personnel but all the social service programs should be fair game. I know I know someone had to plow the roads, but I doubt that there are 6000 plow drivers on the state roles. I know it sucks but I've had to cut 20% of my people and take a 20% pay cut. You do what you have to do to survive, that's what the state needs to do. I'm sorry its tough but life is tough.
-- Posted by Darin on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 8:00 pm EST

report this comment



Try some new tax laws. So many non-profit groups have plenty of money and pay no taxes. Washington county youth service bureau is non-profit, The guy that runs it makes over $100,000 and employs 40 people. And they only serve a handful of county families. So Y is this little group business not paying taxes to state?? Same as Washington County mental health.. Years back the times argus wrote a huge article on how the upper managements were making over $100,000. Right here in this poverty stricken central vermont. Washington county mental health also non-profit. Got news for you. They both make huge profits time they start paying taxes like a business
-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 6:52 pm EST

report this comment



Not all state programs need to be cut. But certainly how the state is spending their time can be looked at. How many state employed workers are going to be wasting their time making copies or typing crap for the civil-union-marriage whatever???
Perhaps state can use its workers to look at and write about property tax reform???? thats a novel idea. Or how many little state groups spin-offs do they need? coard commission on this that and the other, Haldf of these commissions already have protections on federal level, so redundent, and useless paychecks
-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 6:48 pm EST

report this comment



Why sure Helen.

Any program, like say welfare, that taxes an achiever (good ol working class and up) and gives that money, with no strings attached, to non-achievers (lazy worthless). Now, dont get me wrong, we need to help people when they are down. But the current system encourages people to become dependent of govt assistance. By handing money out with no requirement for these people to find a job or go back to school, no drug testing of the recipients, does not help them, the tax payers, or the economy. Not to mention the gargantuan amount of abuse of these programs. So get rid of em all and start with a clean slate.

Start by having certain requirements, like you must try to find work or obtain more marketable skills. drug testing, and frequent qudits of the system and the people.
-- Posted by M. L. on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 3:57 pm EST

report this comment



Could you clarify any further, M.L.? I haven't seen a Department of Wealth Redistribution on the VT.gov website recently. Maybe I should hit refresh...
-- Posted by Helen Pritchard on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 3:12 pm EST

report this comment



I TOLD YOU, ANY AND ALL WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION PROGRAMS.
-- Posted by M. L. on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 1:50 pm EST

report this comment



I have every right to complain about WHAT I AM PAYING FOR. easy for you to say as you surely dont pay taxes (or as much as me) that it doesnt bother you, if you are not part of the solution, YOU are part of the problem. There are bad bosses in ever industry, and if you have a problem with them talk to their boss, or get a new job. Stop reverting to you emotions so often and use your brain. I pay for these positions, I see a huge waste, i dont want to pay anymore for less than the best. And the best is never ever going to be provided to me or anyone else by the govt.

p.s. Hows your pension plan?
-- Posted by M. L. on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 1:39 pm EST

report this comment



.

Well "Darin", you left out an important point. You claim to be a small business owner. When your product doesn't sell because there is less demand, you have to make "tough decisions." GM is going out of business because there is little demand for GM products. We all understand this.

The state however, is not suffering from a lack of demand. Quite the opposite. Demand for state services has never been higher. Vermonters are demanding MORE state services not less. Demand is very high.

People like ML keep saying to "cut" the state. "Cut employees." Any imbecile can call for "cuts." No one has yet to identify specific programs they want eliminated.

Should we eliminate State Police? Corrections? VHAP? Medicaid? WIC? F&W? Tell me what programs we need to eliminate?

ML can't do it, he tried but flew into a filibuster like always.

WHAT PROGRAMS SHOULD BE ELIMINATED ????!!!!!?????


.
-- Posted by Olde Man on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 1:25 pm EST

report this comment



A lot of you are missing the point here, the point is there is $150-$200 million deficit next year. The state MUST cut spending. This is not an option and one of the most expensive aspects of government is labor, employees. Yeah it sucks to cut employees, as a small business owner I'm faced with the same prospect, you can only keep the employees you can pay. That's the states dilemma. I don't think there should be any sacred cows in the state, employees or programs. Money must be cut, it sucks but that's the way it is. We are all facing a bad situation caused by too much government interference in the housing market. We are now all paying the price. The state is not allowed by statute to run a deficit like the federal government is so they must balance the budget, which manyly means cuts in spending which means jobs and programs. People need to grow up and smell the coffee, things are tough right now and re going to be for the next year or so get used to it. It's much cheaper to pay unemployment to a former state employee than it is to pay their wages and benefits. Is there going to be a residual effect to other businesses? Sure there is but bo more than there is with private sector layoffs. State employees are no more special than private sector employees, the state is just a large employer that must balance it's budget. And hey Ski, how is your ranting about ML or Pam any different than their rantings? oh yeah, it's not, except maybe ML and Pam make more sense than you :)
-- Posted by Darin on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 12:54 pm EST

report this comment



ML The one thing that you do not get is the money paid is for services rendered. State employees are not getting a free ride. If you have never worked there then you do not know and really have nothing to say that is relevent. I was there and I also worked on some of the hardest jobs, the most errogant bosses in the private sector that there is. I really could not say that there was any difference in the way I worked. It is not the fair of you to put these people down when we all have enough to think about.
-- Posted by Steven DeForge on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 12:33 pm EST

report this comment



You must be fed up with me like the libs are at rush limbaugh, mad because i can see right through the normal flawed liberal arguments.
-- Posted by M. L. on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 11:51 am EST

report this comment



im fed up with mis informed liberals, cry about it. This is whats great about free speach, its not there to protect what everone says, its there to protect people who are thinking out side to box..... if im soo wrong, prove it, give me an example to show where i went astray.....
-- Posted by M. L. on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 11:48 am EST

report this comment



M.L. I am fed up with your personal attacks and rantings.
-- Posted by Ski Frog on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, 11:04 am EST

report this comment



Pam and M.L. I'm not sure how you get from the news article (anyone remember this is post is about a news article?) where some State employees are quoted saying they are worried about their jobs, and how if they lose those jobs they will not spend money at local business, to saying State employees think they are better than you. What do you find so arrogant about regular hard working Vermonters worrying about losing their job?

If you think a large percentage of State employees are worthless, I'll challenge you to provide numbers and departments. Would you like your roads not plowed or fixed? How long do you think people should wait for unemployment checks, or drivers licenses, or food stamps, or health insurance, or to get State permits to build something and create jobs? Do you think these things happen by magic?

State employees pay the same taxes as anyone else and spend their income at the same local businesses as you. Lay off 5, or 1,000 State employees and businesses will close, houses will be foreclosed upon, and the economy will absolutely get worse. State employees pay income, sales, property, excise, rooms and meals etc. Montpelier would be a ghost town without State employees.

Last thought: Vermont, in case everyone has forgoten (and it seems have) can borrow and deficit spend. What good do you think the federal stimulus bill will do in Vermont, if Jim Douglas counter-acts it by cutting on the State level?
-- Posted by Ski Frog on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 8:17 pm EST

report this comment



By rusty sparks
-----------------------
why does the VSEA think that everyone's jobs are important and saving every last one is the right thing to do...VSEA should only be fighting for the hard working state employee's, not the 10% that are worthless.

By Pam Bass
-------------------------
Why do the state employees thing they are more important than the rest of us? ...


** State government jobs are going to be sacrificed in gestures honoring these reasonable, natural, appropriate perspectives of people paying their taxes with non-tax money. State employees pay taxes, but we pay them with money that comes to us directly from tax coffers. Private sector workers, by definition, pay tax dollars but do not collect them (apart from special deductions, loopholes, etc.). When the private sector is suffering, our deepest human instincts will resent others living off money collected directly from us. I felt that way when I was in the private sector, especially seeing all the government cars riding around during business hours, every one of them nicer than mine, burning my gas. Ticks me off thinking about it still.

** As for protecting 100% of state jobs from cuts, I do not think it is correct to say that is VSEA's position. Regarding the allegedly slack employee, abusing the system, I feel that is a reasonable and fair price for us all to pay for protection from employer abuse.

** The anonymity of the private sector workers in this thread demonstrates the problem with the private sector. As practiced in the United States, private sector norms undermine liberty, such as freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. The public sector is a check on abuse of private sector power. So is collective bargaining. I think we need to start swinging the pendulum in America back toward organized labor. If there is area of the economy where we have a surplus, it is the labor sector. People are becoming less valuable, because of over population. If you are a user of humans as resources, you are against organized labor. The justification is we each can negotiate our best employment terms working each for our own self interest, with the bankers in New York setting the style bar in this regard. It's a fraud, and an argument for dividing and conquering the common person.

Now that the fraud is exposed, we have a few years to set our society into a new form. We have not a second to waste.
-- Posted by Dan Allen on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 7:57 pm EST

report this comment



Rusty S. I think you should give back your union card. VSEA is not a dozen people working in an office. It is 6,000 state employees who negotiate their contract, pay and benefits, with the State. State employees can, and do, get fired for misconduct and poor performance. The difference is because they are unionized there is due process so they are not fired for any reason, no reason, or no good reason. If you think the State would be a good place to work without VSEA, you should try the private sector sometime.

It is true that people who have given 10, 20 or 30 years of their career to public service tend to earn more than people starting out. But you can't just say fire the long-timers because there is a thing called age discrimination. In case you haven't heard of it. The VSEA has proposed early retirement options to the State that would let some long-timers go if they wanted, without discriminating, and save the State money. But in their wisdom, like with most proposals brought forward by the VSEA members, the State rejected this without thought. Please understand it has been Jim Douglas's goal to lay off 1,000 State workers and he seems to have found a good excuse to move forward with his plan. If the State was actually interested in running things like a business, they would start by getting rid of the hundreds of new, very highly paid political jobs Douglas has created for his friends, who aren't represented by the union so they would not be 'protected' even though most people understand they do not contribute much if anything at all to the State.
-- Posted by Ski Frog on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 7:54 pm EST

report this comment



Olde Man, you are right there are many great state employee's but there is roughly 10% that ruin the reputation for the rest of us. These are the people that the union spends there time and our dues representing. VSEA should be spending there time representing the hard working employee's. Rather then saying No Cuts, the union should be working with the administration to compromise on which positions/people need to go in order to trim the fat but still keep services running properly. They should NOT be looking at just the "amount of time served" and cutting the newest employee.
-- Posted by rusty sparks on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 6:17 pm EST

report this comment



.

I'll agree with real truth. Rusty, it's not nearly as bad as you think. You must work in a bad office. They're not all that way. There's a lot of very hard working state employees. I know many of them.

ML - Get a job son. You have way too much free time.

Pam Bass - You're obviously quite blonde but I'm sure you can earn some money working nights.


.
-- Posted by Olde Man on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 4:58 pm EST

report this comment



in response to ML,i am a proud state worker and the information you provided is totaly WRONG.ALL state workers pay taxes state and federal.get your story straight.
-- Posted by clayton cooke on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 4:54 pm EST

report this comment



"what a shame. there was actually some good point and counter point going on in the above posts."

My bad, i meant in the posts BELOW! lol.
-- Posted by truth real on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 4:42 pm EST

report this comment



what a shame. there was actually some good point and counter point going on in the above posts between rusty and none but then pipe in pam and M.L.

Pam: Ms. Works Harder then anyone else.
M.L. The usual bunch of garbage coming from you.

Why is it that neither of you will let it be known where you work? Where you both are obviously the stuff legends are made of. Why dont you go to the times argus and tell them to write stories about your place of work so people who post here can have their say about you?

I could say all kinds of crap about you and your job duties just like you say things about state employees duties and their character and work ethic. but i wouldnt know anymore about what you do than you know about what anyone of us state employees do. but i wont lower myself to be that kind of a human being.

As for rusty and none, i agree completely with none none! what a great series of posts! as for rusty, you are 1 of the employees that M.L and Pam take liberty to complain about. Funny how your posts are during the business day while you are at work and supposed to be working. hmmmmm, whats your bosses name?
-- Posted by truth real on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 4:39 pm EST

report this comment



Well said Pam. If anything it makes more sense to lay off state workers than the rest of us. Ponder this,

5 state workers get fired, that means that rest of us, do not have to pay the taxes on 5 state workers, plus benefits. These "local businesses" that get "harmed" will not have to pay as much income tax.... Then these fired workers get a job in the private sector. This would cause an additional decrease of tax burden on the rest of us because there are now 5 more people paying into a system that has 5 less employees to support. HHHMMM not sure how that hurts anyone.... Besides most state workers claim to be so passionate that forfeit higher wages in the private sector to help people in the public....

Here is what happens when 5 private sector jobs are eliminated. There are now 5 less people paying into the system, which means that the rest of us have to pick up the slack, causing an increased tax burden on those who still have a job and the companies that provide them. At the same time, the sate employees want more pay and benefits (teachers, city workers, legislature)........ See what I'm getting at here??

I know 5 people is a bit ridiculous, but what about 1,000. 1,000 private sector jobs lost, or 1,000 government jobs loss. Which do you prefer?
-- Posted by M. L. on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 2:46 pm EST

report this comment



Why do the state employees thing they are more important than the rest of us? I've never really understood this. Your jobs are no more important and will not harm the economy any more than the rest of us losing ours. A large percentage of the state jobs are pretty much worthless anyways. It's like a welfare check at a higher rate.
-- Posted by Pam Bass on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 1:10 pm EST

report this comment



Rusty,
I am a regular state employee...I have an 8 x 8 cubical with no windows and poor lighting. I still gladly fight for the jobs of my fellow employees who have mortgages, that have children in school, and work for a living so that prisoners are kept in jail, your water isn't contaminated, and the quality of life is better for everyone in Vermont.

If the Douglas Administration was doing its job, they wouldn't be looking at adding to the problem by putting more people in the unemployment line and cutting the number of people that can help you find work...that just compounds the issue (hence the "multiplier effect" stated in the original article). Douglas is making our economy spiral downward even more...maybe that is the one position you should look into firing.

I am sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree with your position.
-- Posted by None None on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 12:12 pm EST

report this comment



The VSEA like all unions are there to protect the DEADBEATS, if you go to work and do your job you don't need a union. I have a relative that works for the State and is one of those hard workers who does his job well, while he has deadbeats that work under him and the VSEA is always saving that persons job. The person spends more time out on workers comp for every reason possible and the minute there back to work, watch out because there looking for another way to be back out of work. When this person is at work they do as little as possible, everyone else carries the load. Keep the good workers and weed out the deadbeats that are just there collecting their check.Look at all the State employees from the top officials to the little people and I'm sure you could find a few to weed out.
-- Posted by BARREHELP on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 11:48 am EST

report this comment



I'm rigth and you know it! If VSEA wasn't giving you a nice corner office at VSEA head quarters you would have a realistic view on this matter. I'm with the administration that we need to cut jobs. As I said before, its too bad the Union makes it difficult for the administration to cut the wrong ones. I think there are a TON of VSEA members and Vermont Tax payers that will agree with me. thanks.
-- Posted by rusty sparks on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 11:04 am EST

report this comment



Rusty,
VSEA has proposed an early retirement option to the Douglas Administration that would add over 400 people to those already eligible for retirement, which the Douglas Administration rejected. This would allowed the people that are ready for retirement to leave and keep younger employees as you suggest. Don't look at VSEA as the ones causing the problem...they are looking for ideas.

It is the job of managers to make sure that the employees under them are performing adequately. If employees aren't performing, then managers know the actions to take to fire them. Again, not VSEA causing a problem...VSEA just makes sure that the process is done correctly and that people aren't fired for the wrong reasons.
-- Posted by None None on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 10:46 am EST

report this comment



Why is it that the VSEA feels its Vermont's obligation to be the biggest state employer? It is unrealistic and irresponsible to think that the state of Vermont should be held at a higher level while the rest of businesses in Vermont are having to cut back. Don't you see that the VSEA is perventing managers from cutting the right people when RIF's come? The managers should be able to eliminate the lowest common denominator rather then the shortest employeed person.

We should be looking at the employee's eligable for retirment before the guy with 3 years of Service. At least the guy with 30 years of service will have a pension when they leave. The guy with 3 years of service is more likely to have a new mortgage and young children. The guy with 30 years has had plenty of time to plan and prepare for retirement. Another good reason for cuting from the top of the eligability pool is those are usually the employee's that only have a couple years left and are usually the highest paid because they are maxed out on steps. does this not make sense to everyone?
-- Posted by rusty sparks on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 9:52 am EST

report this comment



Rusty Sparks,
VSEA doesn't prevent the bad seeds from being fired...they prevent people from being fired for the wrong reasons. How would you like to be given a pink slip for something blamed on you when you weren't even in the office? Things like that do happen.
As it relates to this issue, though, Douglas' proposal isn't getting rid of "bad seeds", it is getting rid of services that Vermonters need. He just wants a body count and is shooting in the dark to get it. It has nothing to do with job performance.
All Douglas is doing is increasing the unemployment rate, increasing the states obligation to pay for people on unemployment rather than working, and leaving all Vermonters worse off then before because they won't be able to get the services they need.
-- Posted by None None on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 9:18 am EST

report this comment



why does the VSEA think that everyone's jobs are important and saving every last one is the right thing to do. I'm sorry but its not the case. There should not be a sense of entitlement and the VSEA should only be fighting for the hard working state employee's, not the 10% that are worthless. The VSEA has a big roll in why we are at this stage. If the union was more interested in protecting its hard working employee's rather then every employee we would be able to weed out the bad seeds. The union should be something to be proud of and have a reputation for having the best workers, The VSEA has made it so thats not the case.The union has made it so the guy that has been working for the state for 18 year and has been doing the Minimum to get by for the past 8 is safe but, the new guy who has only been working for 4 years and comes to work and bust's his rear to do the best job he can, he is the one who ends up cut. I see major flaws with the VSEA and am not proud to be a member.
-- Posted by rusty sparks on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, 8:46 am EST

report this comment


You must be logged in to leave a comment. Register | Log In

Logout