( – promoted by odum)

VSEA members were relieved to hear that the number of state employee layoffs this round were far fewer than projected – about 25 in total. However, we couldn’t help wondering why 25 people had to lose their jobs at all, particularly given that the Union offered $7.4 million to avoid this outcome.

Not only were these layoffs needless, but by rejecting VSEA’s offer of furloughs and unpaid holidays, the Douglas Administration cost taxpayers almost $5 million!

Representative Mark Larson was quick to point this out to Finance Commissioner Jim Reardon when he testified at the Legislative Joint Fiscal Committee on Tuesday:

Rep. Mark Larson, D-Burlington, reacted to Reardon’s report with sharp criticism. He said the state would be in a better position to cope with the looming budget pressures if the administration had accepted an offer from the Vermont State Employees Association that all employees take off four days without pay and give up three paid holidays.

Larson argued that taking the union’s offer would have avoided layoffs and left for the next budget crisis all the options the administration used — eliminating vacancies, taking savings from the health insurance program and asking departments to absorb more of the increase in the cost of personnel.

“Refusing to accept the deal that was put on the table has put us in a weaker place,” Larson said.

BFP – 10/29/09/

Here’s the math:

Laying off 25 state workers = approximately $1 million + using health plan surplus ($1.7 million) = $2.7 million

Accepting VSEA proposal = $7.4 million

$7.4 million in exchange for saving 25 positions seems like a pretty good deal for the State! There was never a provision in VSEA’s proposal that precluded the Administration from eliminating the 133 vacant positions they used to meet their target. How does this make sense fiscally or even politically? Why would you pass up an offer that saves both jobs and money?  

When the Administration began eliminating federally funded positions last year, I thought they had lost their minds. I mean, isn’t sending money back to DC a “reverse stimulus package?”

The Governor’s latest actions continue to defy logic. How do you bargain with someone who would cut his entire workforce just to spite you?

( – promoted by odum)

When Secretary of Administration Neale Lunderville presented his rescission plan to the Joint Fiscal Committee on Wednesday, it was clear the Governor wasn’t content with cutting the state workforce by 8% over the course of 3 years. His latest proposal calls for putting an additional 200-300 workers on the unemployment line, bringing the total body count up to 10%:

http://www.burlingtonfreepress…

Absent from the Administration’s plan to chop $7.4 million from the workforce is any mention of which positions are targeted or what services they provide to Vermonters. If the Joint Fiscal Committee votes to approve this plan on August 18th, they will be doing so without knowing how it will impact the state programs – most of which are already struggling from previous rescissions.  

While other states have successfully negotiated furlough days with state worker unions, the Administration promptly rejected this offer when it was made by VSEA last legislative session, claiming it didn’t achieve “structural change.” VSEA’s offer would have saved $8.4 million in the general fund – only $100,000 less than the $8.5 million that was saved by laying off 123 workers. While Lunderville testified that he’ll “aggressively pursue” discussions with the union to find alternatives, the Administration has been an unwilling partner in negotiations with both VSEA and the Legislature in the past.

Like most conservatives, Governor Douglas has used the recession as an opportunity to shrink government to the size where he can drown it in his bathtub. Understaffing programs sets them up for failure, which in turn opens the door for privatization. It’s no accident that Vermont’s private contract line item has grown by 190% since he took office.

In times of economic downturn, people need services more than ever. Laying off 200-300 more hard working Vermonters and gutting programs will only prolong this economic crisis and deprive people of the help they need. The Joint Fiscal Committee should oppose any further downsizing of state government and put a stop to the Governor’s ideological rampage.

Conor Casey

VSEA Legislative Coordinator  

To: Vermont Media

From: Judy Bevans, Chair, Vermont Democratic Party Release Date: 3/24/09

Subject: Vermont Democrats Support VSEA¹s Campaign Against Job Cuts

Contact: Judy Bevans, 802-755-6280 or 802-229-1783

Randolph, VT – At a special meeting called on March 21 to elect its new chair, the Vermont Democratic Party endorsed a resolution supporting the Vermont State Employees Association in working to keep jobs in the face of severe budget cuts.

The resolution, proposed by Lamoille County delegate Virginia Burgess, reads, “Be it resolved that the Democratic State Committee expresses its support to the working people of Vermont, and specifically the members of the VSEA, in their efforts to retain essential services by essential personnel for the benefit of the most vulnerable Vermonters.”

The resolution continues, “We further urge that the members of the State Committee contact both their legislators and members of their community in an effort to explain the devastating consequences of the cuts being considered.”

Referring to the resolution, newly elected VDP Chair Judy Bevans said, “What we have in the budget shortfall is a lack of revenue, not an excess of employees. Cutting jobs, especially with no plan beyond a body count, decreases the effectiveness of government and denies access by the neediest Vermonters to the services government provides. It continues Governor Douglas’s attempts to balance the budget on the backs of our vulnerable neighbors: elderly, poor, and disabled people and their families. Cutting jobs is more expensive than raising taxes to keep people working.”