NEWS

Supervisors/Managers will have say in budget cut plans

Your hard work is paying off.

ACSS President Arlene Espinoza met with Acting DPA Director Julie Chapman on June 8th to discuss the 4/38 workweek and the multitude of problems with a "one size fits all" plan that ignores the input of the state's most skilled and dedicated employees.

In order to comply with the Governor's June 15th deadline for a savings plan submission, President Espinoza presented the various alternatives that you have proposed to the 4/38 workweek, as well as the fact that our polls show that to date 65% of you outright oppose the 4/38 plan.

Acting Director Chapman acknowledged that because administration and implementation of any plan to reduce costs will fall squarely on state supervisors and managers, their involvement in the planning stage is instrumental in developing a plan that works. DPA is analyzing the feasibility of your suggested alternatives to the 4/38 workweek, in addition to the wide range of concerns you have expressed with the 4/38 system.

Furthermore, the Director has stated that once a plan to achieve the 5% savings is selected and reviewed by the appropriate entities (such as the Legislative Analyst's Office), your ACSS will be approached to help guide the implementation process. In Acting Director Chapman's words, "Once we know what the plan's going to be, then we'll approach ACSS and the departments to figure out how it's going to work."

President Espinoza closed the meeting by stating, "The employees that have been on the ground for 10, 15, 20 years know where you can and can't cut without negating the savings the budget needs."

ACSS internal elections results for 2012

Here are the internal ACSS elections results for 2012, broken down by chapter.

ACSS Vice President Elnora Fretwell oversaw the independent ballot counting process and reviewed the tallies to ensure accuracy. Ties were resolved in accordance with the ACSS policy file. Vice President Fretwell signed each chapter's results page to confirm the accuracy of the counts.

All candidates were notified of the election results in late May. The protest period for elections ends on June 11th.

ACSS endorsed candidates headed to General Election

The California Primary has wrapped up, and 90% of the candidates endorsed by ACSS will continue on to the November General Election.

Your ACSS Political Action Committee (PAC) identified 60+ candidates that are most likely to meet the needs of state supervisors, managers, and confidential employees when they take office.

Curious about another race? See the full list of statewide election results, courtesy of the Sacramento Bee: www.sacbee.com/electionresults

Weigh in: Alternatives to 4/38 workweek

We need to hear from you!

Your ACSSis preparing to outline alternatives to the 4/38 workweek for the Brown administration.

Hundreds of state supervisors, managers, and confidential employees have sent us alternative solutions and we've grouped them into the six most often suggested proposals in a convenient poll on the left.

Take a moment to consider the alternatives and weigh in with your opinion to ensure your voice is heard by the Governor!

Check to see if your browser has Flash here:

Note:These are state excluded employee suggested alternatives to the 4/38 workweek proposed by Gov. Brown and do not necessarily reflect the opinon of ACSS.

ACSS Primary Election Endorsements

Are you ready for the California primary?

Before heading out to vote on Tuesday, take a moment to look at ACSS' officially endorsed State Senate and Assembly candidates, carefully selected by your ACSSboard of directors after recommendations from our non-partisan political action committee.

The endorsement process included a written survey and in-person interviews to help determine which candidates would best meet the needs of state supervisors, managers, and confidential employees once in office.

See the full list of ACSS-approved candidates after the jump.

Private pension bill headed to Assembly

Retirement security may be getting a boost in the private sector.

Senate Bill 1234, dubbed the "California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Act", passed through the Senate with a 23-13 vote. It now heads to the Assembly, where it is expected to face resistance from GOP legislators.

The bill would provide a state-managed modest retirement plan for the nearly 7 million Californians who don't have access to an employer-provided retirment plan.

What do you think? Will this bill help alleviate "pension envy" among non-state employees? Or will it further strain the public pension system?

5% cuts for all?

One for all and all for one?

The California Citizens Compensation Commission voted 5-1 in favor of a 5% pay cut for Gov. Brown and dozens of other high ranking state officials, in reaction to the same pay cut that has been proposed for all state employees.

Rumors have swirled that excluded employees may face cuts above 5%.

Acting DPA Director Julie Chapman confirmed in a meeting today with your ACSS that potential cuts above 5% would target "agency secretaries and higher officials", not state supervisors, managers, and confidential employees.

Charles Murray, the "Small Business" seat on the CCCC, lead his colleagues on a vote today on the egalitarian pay cut for higher ups, in order to get the cut on the books before the Commission's June 30th deadline for action.

Murray, appointed by ex-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, said he thinks the state's senior lawmakers should "lead by example". He has said that if the 5% cut does not go into effect for state employees, the cut to higher ups can be reversed.

What do you think? Does knowing that Gov. Brown will make $165,000 per year instead of $174,000 make the cuts easier to swallow?

Head to the Sac Bee to read the full article and weigh in: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/05/panel-cuts-pay-for-jerry-brown-lawmakers-other-california-officials.html

How will the reduced workweek impact taxpayers?

Attention ACSS members and fellow state excluded employees,

We need your help!

Your ACSS is - as always - committed to preventing attacks on your career. We are preparing to meet with Governor Brown to discuss how his proposed 4-day, 38-hour workweek will unfairly target supervisors, managers, and confidential employees.

We recognize that the reduced workweek will affect all of you personally: It will affect the way you pay your mortgage, the way you raise your children, the way you plan for retirment, and so much more.

However, in order for us to make a successful case against the reduced workweek that will resonate with the public, we need to show how California will suffer if the plan goes into place.

We need to present the Governor and the public with facts. Specifically, we need to show how the reduced workweek will impact California taxpayers.

Read more about how you can fight back against unfair budget cuts after the jump.

Reduced workweek will cost citizens now and later

Though Gov. Brown has pitched his reduced workweek as a means to save around $830 million, it is now clear that those savings will not be as great as expected.

If the state implements Brown's plan, which the Legislative Analyst's Office has called "problematic", not only will public services suffer a drop in quality and excluded employees face greater workload issues, but hidden costs will in fact reduce the savings Brown hopes to achieve.

Department of Finance spokesman H.D. Palmer confirmed in an interview with the Sacramento Bee that taxpayers will have to foot the bill for Gov. Brown's cuts in the near future.

The Bee's Jon Ortiz breaks down the savings drain:

"Let's say for the sake of easy math that state worker Hy Pothetical earns $1,000 per month in pensionable income. Like most employees, Hy contributes 8 percent to his pension, or $80 per month.

Then Brown's four-day, 9.5-hour workweek kicks in. Now Hy earns $950 per month and pays $76 in pension contributions, 8 percent of his new lower wage.

Since the retirement benefit will be calculated as though Hy still earned $1,000, the state - i.e., taxpayers - picks up the $4 difference."

Report: 40-hour workweek doesn't work

A 2010 report analyzing Utah's 4-day workweek that was implemented in 2008 shows that Gov. Brown's plan may not only jeopardize the level of services Californians will receive should his more drastic plan go into effect, but may in fact lead to greater costs due to productivity losses.

In 2008 then Utah Governor Jon Huntsman instituted a 4-day, 40-hour workweek in order to cut costs. A report by Utah's Legislative Auditor General states that savings from the plan - less severe than Gov. Brown's proposed 4-day, 38-hour workweek - were significantly less than expected.

Furthermore, the report states that "evidence suggests that a single work schedule may not be appropriate for all units of state government."

Your ACSS maintains that a reduced workweek will unfairly impact supervisors, managers, and confidential employees more so than rank and file employees.

As we prepare to bring your case to the Governor, we need to hear from you. Last week we asked how the 38-hour workweek would impact you. Now we need to hear how it will impact the services you provide to California taxpayers.

Tell us how the services you provide will suffer. As much as possible, give us numbers and facts.

Don't just tell us "It will be hard to meet quotas", tell us "My DMV office will process X fewer applications per week", or "My office will be able to hold x less hearings per week and utility costs will rise by x%" or "We will be able to process X fewer tax returns per month" or "It will take x weeks longer for California taxpayers to receive their returns", etc. etc.

Email us with the specific ways services you provide will suffer at budgetcuts@acss.org now!