Government
500 transportation dept. workers to take furloughs
Posted on Nov 07, 2009 by Admin.
AMES, Iowa (AP) — About 500 Iowa Department of Transportation workers will be among the state employees required to take furlough days.
Iowa Gov. Chet Culver announced the seven-day furloughs last month to meet the state’s budget needs. More than 3,200 workers who aren’t covered by union contracts will be affected statewide.
Lee Wilkinson is director of the transportation department’s Operations and Finance Division. He says about 500 of the department’s 3,100 employees will take the furlough days.
DOT employees will be required to take their seven days of unpaid leave between Friday and June 24. They can take up to two days per pay period.
Culver is looking to reduce state spending by more than $565 million for the current budget year.
imirishalex
07. Nov, 2009
thanks Barack!! you are the best president that has ever been elected. More job cuts =happy workers!!
vintonmom
07. Nov, 2009
Once again, everyone but the unions have to give up something.
Hugs4u
07. Nov, 2009
It pays to be a union worker. That is why they pay dues, to get benefits guaranteed. People who don't like it can not pay the dues and be scabs.
satinsheets
08. Nov, 2009
how do you know they haven't?
SWSideguy
07. Nov, 2009
an example of why unions suck
satinsheets
08. Nov, 2009
why do unions suck? Union memebers pay there dues. Union does good things. Nobody can afford to take off, unpaid! Have you looked at the state of California? There 6,7,8. times worse the the state of Iowa. Go live there! Presidents fault? This has been coming for years. President, Gov. of our state? Yes, money for whatever reason has been spent like no other in Iowa. now were all screwd! doesn't look any better for next fical either.
vintonmom
08. Nov, 2009
The article says 3200 employees not covered by a union contract. It does not say anything about union contract employees being furloughed. If they are, then it should be stated in the article. Perhaps the Gazette didn't put that in.
HiawathaBob
07. Nov, 2009
Yup, your right. It is the union's fault they negotiated contracts in good faith with the state. The budget crisis is the employees fault. Not the department managers, not the governors, not the legislatures, and not the people that elected all of the above. Your a genius mom.
vintonmom
08. Nov, 2009
I didn't say it was the union's fault that the state is in the mess it is in. I was stating that the article did not mention that the unions were going to be giving up unpaid days like the non-union people are being told to do. Why should only part of the employees have to give up part of their pay, why not all?
HiawathaBob
08. Nov, 2009
If the state would like to renegotiate a deal they made then they have to ask the union to open the contract. Then the union has to agree to open the contract. That is why it is called a contract.
if they would like to make significant changes, the state will have to bargain for it during the next contract cycle.
People are acting like the union employees "owe" the state something. They do owe the state something, their work for the pay they receive which incidentally the state agreed to when they signed this contract.
johnfifty
08. Nov, 2009
If you read the article correctly 3,200 non-union employees statewide(in various departments and agencies)will be furloughed. Of the 3,200, 500 are in the DOT, and the DOT has a a total of 3,100(including the 500 to be furloughed). The Governor is waiting on what the unionized employees may or may not concede in wages, benefits, or voluntary furloughs by renegotiating their contracts with the State. If their are no meaningful concessions by the various unions and their memberships, then the Governor will necessarily make mandatory layoffs. He is giving his union supporters a chance to try to forego major layoffs by giving major concessions in their contracts. You can have a great contract on paper, but if the employer(or the State)is not profitable and can't meet expenses(look at GM, Chrysler, California,etc.)it's not worth the paper it's written on. Nor is the job it was supposed to protect or enhance.
WWJD1
08. Nov, 2009
A few more days off would be good for all workers. Most people work to much and don't spend enough time with families, vacationing, hobbies, friends, relatives … etc.
ctiger
08. Nov, 2009
It's because most of them can't afford it.
Baum
11. Nov, 2009
Yes, for the older employee this is asking them to do something that will effect their retirement benefits. State employees should not be the only ones asked to give the state money to balance he budget. It is the state's budget and ALL the citizens should share in the burden of fixing this.
ctiger
11. Nov, 2009
Actually, there are interventions that would save a lot of money, without any tax increases.
But the Governor and law makers are too timid to go with them. One is to create community-based sanctions for non violent criminals, the other is to repeal the Adam Walsh Act and restore the sex offender registry to it's original purpose of keeping track of the worst offenders.
All that would save millions every year.
Baum
11. Nov, 2009
I like those ideas. These along with a serious overhaul of the corporate income tax program along with rolling back the tax credits could go a long way to relieve our financial woes. We need to make our representatives know how we feel.
ctiger
11. Nov, 2009
Yes they would work. But look at what those law makers would be up against, the voters who have been terrorized into believing stranger danger is real and Marijuana is the De vil's lure for us, plus the corporations who feel deprived as long as any of us still have a dime left.
Awhile back, this paper had an invitation from law makers in Des Moines to e-mail ideas about cost cutting and I did sent one.