When I returned from my trip to DC, my boss gave me the latest news on the governor's proposed actions to reduce spending. Since my job hangs on the chopping block depending on the level of reduction the governor requires and since buying a home and so many other things hang on whether I get to keep this job or not, everyone is anxious to find out if they're going to have to do without me.
The governor's new plan calls for a 14-15% reduction, which was the lowest level I believe coupled to a 6% salary reduction. This essentially rolls me back to before my merit increase or eliminates the COLA I've received thus far, to the tune of $150-200/month reduction in pay. Some people out there say that nobody in government is cutting back; to them I point their attention to our unpopular governor who I appreciate for having kept his promise not to raise taxes. I disagree with his plan, as I told him this morning:
When the chair notified me that my name was on the list, he told me that there were people with whom he preferred to dispense, but the tenure system renders them safe. Other people are protected by connections, and other people are being paid on administrative leave. If we have gotten along without them for the entire time I've been here, why do we need their positions? I say cut them, but by all means stop paying them to do no work. Have we already forgotten former judge Halverson who never heard a case in her term but still collected full pay? At least she lost the election...
The governor's new plan calls for a 14-15% reduction, which was the lowest level I believe coupled to a 6% salary reduction. This essentially rolls me back to before my merit increase or eliminates the COLA I've received thus far, to the tune of $150-200/month reduction in pay. Some people out there say that nobody in government is cutting back; to them I point their attention to our unpopular governor who I appreciate for having kept his promise not to raise taxes. I disagree with his plan, as I told him this morning:
Sir-
Much as I appreciate your efforts to forestall layoffs through a proposed 6% pay cut to state employees, I have to say I differ in my opinion on this. That being said, I have been notified by CSN that depending on the reduction for which you ask I may myself be laid off, and if I acquiesced to this new strategy it would protect my job. I want to keep my job, but I feel that the government has become bloated in every sector- that we could always do with fewer people, however surgically they might need to be excised. I know there are people at CSN we do not need despite what President Richards says and despite the fact that my department can't do without me in particular. The tenure system protects people without whom we would be better off, and connections protect others, but I will not get into the politics of that. I have no connections on which to hang my hat; I rest on my laurels and my ethics and trust that God will deliver me. For my own part, I prefer a permanent reduction if possible in the number of people on the public payroll. I have been laid off in the private sector and survived just fine, despite the so-called Bush recession. I prefer to risk my own job security for the greater good of reducing the state work force over your payroll deduction, which would cost me $200/month.
I appreciate as heretofore that you have decided not to raise taxes to solve the crisis. I know you take lots of flak for this. Whatever other faults you have, I salute you sir for this resolute refusal to run the same race as Republicans around the country. They say nobody's doing what is right as a steward. They have apparently not heard about you. May God bless you in your personal pursuits for acting in good faith as a steward of the fruits of our labor. Godspeed.
When the chair notified me that my name was on the list, he told me that there were people with whom he preferred to dispense, but the tenure system renders them safe. Other people are protected by connections, and other people are being paid on administrative leave. If we have gotten along without them for the entire time I've been here, why do we need their positions? I say cut them, but by all means stop paying them to do no work. Have we already forgotten former judge Halverson who never heard a case in her term but still collected full pay? At least she lost the election...
No comments:
Post a Comment