Malloy/SEBAC Deal Reached: Malloy’s “Classy” Response Slams State Employees – Yet Again

Jul 23

jonpeltoLayoffs, Malloy, State Employees , , , 13 Comments

(Cross-posted from Pelto’s Point at the New Haven Advocate)

Once again Dan Malloy’s rhetoric seeks to scapegoat Connecticut’s public employees and trivialize the fact that they have already voted in favor (and are working to fully adopt) the largest concession package in state history.

From his budget announcement last February to his press statement last night Dan Malloy has consistently said the wrong thing at the wrong time.

At 10pm last night Governor Malloy released a statement that an agreement has been reached between his administration and SEBAC and that another vote would be taken on a concession package.

According to Malloy, “This agreement saves the same amount of money as the last agreement– $1.6 billion over 2 years, $21.5 billion over 20 years – and it contains all of the same cost-saving provisions as the last agreement.”

With that, the Governor then concludes;

“I hope state employees ratify this agreement, but I am assuming nothing. If they ratify it, the vast majority of layoffs and painful spending cuts can be undone.  If this agreement fails, then we’ll unfortunately have to continue to lay people off and implement the spending cuts.”

And with that the Governor renews his familiar role of making this process as difficult as possible.

With the SEBAC by-law changes, 50% of state employees must now adopt this plan to fully authorize it.  Originally 57% voted yes (when 80% was needed).  The language related to the health care change that worried many state employees as been removed to ensure that no one thinks this agreement is part of SustiNet – the State’s comprehensive health care reform law.

Governor, continuing to lay people off pending the vote is mean-spirited, bad for the employees and the families of those being laid off, bad for the people who rely on the essential services these employees provide and bad for the state’s economy during the greatest recession of our lives.

Malloy could and should have suspended the layoffs pending the vote.

And yet again we see the double standard.

If a Republican governor was doing what this Governor is doing and if a Republican governor put out a press release like the one Malloy put out last night, Democratic elected officials would be condemning the action.

But regardless of whether Democratic legislators are silent, Malloy’s actions deserve to be criticized.

Thankfully, Connecticut’s state employees care more than this Governor when it comes to preserving vital
services and doing the right thing.

Be Sociable, Share!

  • George Frank

    Give it a rest already Jon. This man can do nothing right in your book. He should continue the layoffs. He isn’t, just like you wouldn’t counting the chickens before they hatch! He, nor the unions can safely assume anything at this point.

    First with you and the employees it was called bullying, and threatening. Then you all said he wouldn’t lay off people, then he did. Then he was acting like a dictator (if he didn’t keep his word you would have called him (and you have) a liar.

    The state employees, as the past Governors and legistators are PART OF THE CREATORS of this financial mess. Everyone must do their part. Don’t keep screaming poor state employees. I never saw them say, oh gee thanks Gov Rell or Thanks State Senator sir, but you’re being too generous in this package that you are giving us…please take some back. No they haven’t, they took it to the bank with a smile.

    So, it’s everyone’s fault. You keep saying tax the rich. Seems to me the state employees have in the past been enriched. They are part of the problem. They played chicken with this vote and they lost. Now it’s time to pay the piper.

    This is an austerity plan deal with it. I am tired of hearing the staties whine about how much they give, and give back. How hard they work (I called two weeks ago to a state agency for hours only to get a recording. I had a question that needed claryifing) The recording said, please leave a message and someone will get back to you by the end of the biz day. GUESS WHAT, those hard working, dedicated employees STILL HAVEN’T CALLED BACK (and I left as did two others, numerous messages). What about the public who have no choice. Whether it be higher taxes, or fewer services, it is the taxpayer that has to pay. The average tax payer cannot get up and move when they don’t like that they have to suffer…however, the state employee can QUIT and look for another job.

    Funny thing about that…the employees are so upset, I haven’t heard of anyone quitting for another job yet….THAT SAYS A LOT!

    Now get off the Governor’s back already! Give the man at least some slack. Jon, how bout you give the Gov 1/1,000,000th of the slack, support, and breaks you give the state employees?

  • sharewhut

    He just doesn’t get it. His mucho-macho posturing is making the ‘no’ voters more determined to defy him and some ‘yes’ voters to rethink. Please do continue the slips! You’ll guarantee a super-majority ‘NO!’ that even Sal & Dan will find hard to overrule.
    Still haven’t got my email from Sal yet. Maybe before the vote.
    (Anything else has gotten an almost instant sales flyer from Council 4)

  • http://www.EconomicUprising.com Stanley Heller

    An interview with an opponent of the deal can be found at http://www.EconomicUprising.com Concessions only lead to more concessions. Tax the rich, bring the war dollars home.

  • THE TRUTH

    Well written and it gives the other side of the story left out by the liberal media.

  • iamjh

    Jon — the state employees have an extended layoff notification provision, maybe 60 days? Isn’t it a little misleading to imply, as your column does, that people are now actually getting laid off & losing their jobs?
    If I was a state employee, I would want to know before voting where I stood. If I were the Governor, I would definitely want to make sure everyone affected understood their situation. If Malloy suspended layoffs, I can already hear the complaints that he kept workers on the layoff list in the dark.

  • http://none William

    Malloy’s words do not bother me in this instance. He was brutally burned last time by the union members voting no on a sweetheart deal. It brings to mind the old saying, “Fool me once shame on you, Fool me twice shame on me”.

    Malloy must keep up the pressure and keep it as hot as possible in order to assure the deal gets ratified. After that he will have plenty of time to make nice with the State workers.

  • Steve

    Once again, sebac oversteps it’s authority beyond health insurance and pension issues. Sebac negotiated my cost of living and step/lump sum pay raises away. Earnings issues are suppose to be up to each union to negotiate for itself. If sebac doesn’t have the backbone to stand up to what was agreed upon from the concessions of ’09, then what is being agreed to today, can be thrown away with the concessions of ’15. I see that around my agency, union stewards/delegates are going around wanting to see the previous vote thrown out, then the rules changed to usher in their ‘yes’ win. Of course, they say it’s for ‘the greater good’. I’ve lost respect for everyone and everything connected with this. Jon, perhaps you can do a piece if sebac is going beyond the original intent of it’s scope, and I’m sure they will say; ‘It’s for the greater good’. You can also get information on what sebac employees makes, the full package, and what their ‘shared sacrifice’ will be.

    • mo boss

      you have it wrong. sebac didn;t act on it’s own authority to give back your raise. all the union leaders authorized sebac to do it. blame them. and no, i’m not a fan of sebac or the unions. i’m just stuck with their mess just like you.

  • perturbed

    “The language related to the health care change that worried many state employees as been removed to ensure that no one thinks this agreement is part of SustiNet – the State’s comprehensive health care reform law.”

    Jon,

    You lost me there. With the exception of the second sentence on the first page of the original agreement (no longer applicable), and minor revisions to the original text (effective dates, mail-order pharmacy option), all I’ve identified is additional text. None of the original language has been removed.

    What language have you found to be removed?

    Were you referring to the fact that the PDF document available on SEBAC’s website no longer includes a helpful glossary? All that means in we have to look up the terms elsewhere, it doesn’t mean any language has been removed from the agreement. I don’t even think that glossary was part of the official agreement anyway — it had no “attachment” letter designation. As far as I can tell, there has been absolutely no health care language removed from the agreement.

    It’s not that I had any issue with the health care provisions *in the agreement* anyway, but this statement just doesn’t seem correct.

    (How much of our pension reduction was political capital spent by SEBAC on passing the pooling bill, or supporting Malloy or the legislature in some other way, now that’s where I have a big problem.)

    –perturbed

  • perturbed

    Jon,

    You’ve been incredibly supportive of state workers over these many months. I, for one, am extremely appreciative. Unfortunately, if “doing the right thing” involves voting for this “clarified” agreement, I’m going to have to let you down.

    It’s hard to tell anymore what is the right thing to do…

    –perturbed

  • DrHunterSThompson

    I can’t vote no fast enough!

  • http://j0esixpack.wordpress.com j0esixpack

    I don’t see where the Governor is slamming the state employees. Is this the passage in question?

    [With that, the Governor then concludes; “I hope state employees ratify this agreement, but I am assuming nothing. If they ratify it, the vast majority of layoffs and painful spending cuts can be undone. If this agreement fails, then we’ll unfortunately have to continue to lay people off and implement the spending cuts.”]

    Isn’t that the reality? And is there any reason why the Governor shouldn’t accurately reflect the consequence of rejecting this offer?

    Many think these “concessions” don’t go anywhere near far enough – that the union leaders and elected officials themselves are making promises with taxpayers money that they both know can’t be kept…

    If the revenue coming in is less than the revenue going out, the system is unsustainable and will eventually collapse, regardless of what promises of pension pay and perks the union rank and file might have on paper.

    This agreement may make the system LESS unsustainable – but unsustainable is unsustainable – and it may have only slowed defacto state bankruptcy – not prevented it. If the system remains insolvent (only less insolvent than before) taxpayers will continue to move out of state and no businesses (who provide the revenue) will move in – and the revenue picture on which this “agreement” relies will get worse, not better.

    Still, for stability sake, I believe it makes sense for the state, taxpayers, and state workers to approve this deal now, and work together over the next few years to create a system of pay, perks and pensions that is reasonable and affordable, so that employees can count on those promised benefits being there for them when they need them.

    The first states that get their unfunded public employee liabilities under control will see a windfall in terms of improved bond ratings and business relocation and creation, generation revenues that the existing and retired public employees will need if they ever hope to see their pay, perks and pensions on paper become reality.

    Even with this agreement, CT isn’t close to being there – but it’s a step in the right direction.

  • Steve

    To mo boss: If I have it wrong, then why has Senior Assistant State Attorney Lisa Herskowitz brought a complaint to the Board of Labor Relations about sebac violating it’s own rules by agreeing to the pay freeze package?