STAMFORD--Gov. Dannel P. Malloy said today he worked over the weekend to limit the number of state employee layoffs he will impose this week in response to labor's rejection of a tentative agreement for concessions and other labor savings.
In remarks after delivering a pep talk on economic development to the Business Council of Fairfield County, Malloy said government must shrink, but he will try to reduce the impact where possible by not filling vacant jobs. He stressed, however, that there will be no early-retirement program.
It was a surprisingly conciliatory tone for a governor who was just rebuffed by a coalition of state employees, which rejected a tentative agreement for givebacks and forced him and the legislature to now quickly adjust a budget $700 million out of balance.
But Malloy indicated his remarks are not an invitation for new talks with the SEBAC coalition: Negotiations are over, and he will outline his plan for layoffs and other budget adjustments no later than Tuesday.
By the morning of July 1, the budget for the new fiscal year will be back in balance, he said.
The leaders of the union coalition, meanwhile, have postponed from 3 p.m. until 5:30 p.m. their first press conference since the deal they recommended was killed Friday. The leaders have been meeting all day, presumably to see if the deal can somehow be salvaged.
One leader of an AFSCME local that rejected the agreement warned in an email to reporters that anything less than a renegotiated deal is pointless.
"Let's get back to the bargaining table because any attempt by SEBAC to change the rules or reintroduce this agreement in its present form will have serious consequences to their respective organizations and will lead to exactly the same end result, but with a more pronounced NO VOTE," wrote Moises Padilla, the vice president of Local 387, which represents correction officers in Cheshire.
But the governor has ruled out new terms.
Malloy conceded that the layoffs he intends to make probably will harm the economy in the short term, but "the overarching concern has to be whether Connecticut can live within its means."
"That has to be the number one ruling factor, and it is," Malloy told his business audience.
Malloy had scheduled his speech to the business group's annual meeting as part of the kickoff of what he is calling his summer jobs tour, with Catherine H. Smith, his economic development commissioner.
In talking about the rejection of the tentative agreement for concessions and labor savings, Malloy said, "Having said that, that's not really the reason I came here."
But Malloy broke no new ground about his vision for economic development in a speech he delivered before department for a tour of Blue Sky Studios, a digital animation studio in Greenwich.
"I've heard it a million times," said Rep. Livvy Floren, R-Greenwich, but she added that his economic pep talk was welcome nonetheless. "I'm glad he was upbeat."
Prior to the luncheon, Malloy and Smith met private with the business council's board and other leaders, including representatives of area colleges.
"We want the governor to be successful," said Joseph McGee, the group's vice president for public affairs.
McGee also is one of Smith's predecessors. He oversaw economic development during the administration of Gov. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. 20 years ago.
Mark, the budget isn't $700M out of balance. You know that. It is $2.0B out of balance - you can call it $1.6B but the fictional concessions and savings fell short of the needed $2.0B by a tidy sum of $400M.
But who's counting. The tax increases were cut in stone, however.
Mark Pazniokas replies: It is out of balance by $1.6 billion over the biennium; $700 million in year one and $900 million in year two. Malloy set a goal of $2 billion for labor savings, but the legislature already made a $400 million adjustment, so
Read MoreWhat am I missing here? When the budget process started out Malloy called for "shared sacrifice" from all sectors of Connecticut. That sacrifice included the largest tax increase in state history, $700 million dollars in cuts to state service and $2 billion in concessions from the unions. In the end the tax increases are still there, and state budget spending increased by almost $1 billion. Now when the unions rejected a sweet heart deal that pro-union State Senator Edith Prague rightly claimed any private sector employee would die for Malloy needs to patch a $700 million whole?
Read MoreThe gutless wonder is backing off of layoffs already. I told you so. Congratuations also to those No voters who also said he wouldn't dare touch the union.
The Union owns him! He is in their back pocket.
Another day, another lie. This guy is unbeleiveable Watch what happens when he cuts town subsidies.
The Union will end up on top, and the People of Connecticut won't forget what happened.
"Another day, another lie. This guy is unbeleiveable Watch what happens when he cuts town subsidies. "
TOWNS WILL ACTUALLY PRACTICE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, MAYBE????
"Malloy is lying to every voter in the state, with every breath he takes. The only one sharing in the sacrifice is the middle class tax payers as our health insurance goes through the roof, electricity costs through the roof, and unaffordable union deals keep pushing both state and local taxes through the roof. Busineeses are fleeing Connecticut and taking our reminaing jobs with them, appears that the only stable job is state union job. Some shared sacrifice."
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!
"The Union owns him! He is in their back pocket. "
THE UNION???? THE UNION?????HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
AS IF THERE IS
Read MoreWhen people lie to save a life, it is not a lie. When people lie to save a job and a family from financial disaster it is not a lie. So also, when people lie to increase tax burden on citizens, it is not a lie because it may help illegals. Finally, when people lie to get re-elected it is not a lie at all. In short, lies are acceptable morally and legally. That is our new world order under Malloy, the lier-in-chief.
It's evident after reading many of these posts that some people simply hate State workers for just being State workers.
Jealousy?
They the unions do own him. In 2006 he ran for Governor as a moderate and lost the Democrat primary because he did not have union endorsements, money and volunteers. Malloy learned and reached out to organized labor and in 2010 with union backing he won the primary then the general election. Unions support might not win you a general election but they sure as hell will put you over the top in a Democrat primary. Now Malloy who is selling his house in Stamford, living in the one provided by the tax payers sure seems
Read MoreLets wait and see how it plays out
union press conference at 530 hopefully they will listen to rank and file for once
But wait, Helen said there would be a re-vote.
Union leaders, administration officials, lawmakers, and even one conservative radio host have tried, to no avail, to explain that there is no social experiment, SustiNet, or any other form of social health care experiment included in the plan. It’s the same health care state employees have been offered in the past, only they are being asked to keep up their schedule of annual and age appropriate visits to doctors. If they fail to see a doctor once a year, they will be penalized and asked to pay $100 more per month and could face up to a $350 deductible.
Read MoreLOL!
There can't be any re-vote on the CURRENT TA, and whether or not there'll be a return to re-negotiations is ANYONE'S guess at this point.
I *thought* I had Malloy "figured out" - as I'm sure SEBAC and the unions did - but lately he's seems to be changing his "tune" from one day to the next, and the issuance of "pink slips" keeps getting delayed.
The LEGISLATURE seems inclined to want to go along with whatever Malloy says, EXCEPT for giving him the increased rescission authority that he's asking for, AND they CONSISTENTLY look for the easiest way
Read More5:30pm Sebac press conference should tell the tale. Parse their words very closely.
Well said, Helen !! Now we could understand why you detest your own sisters and brothers in the state work force -- they are obese, and they smoke. How about drinking liquor and wine, or smoking pot, or inhaling whatever it is?
Any other cardinal sins that we should charge them with? Please make a complete and exhaustive list so that we could indict them all for such behavior and conduct. Do they do these things while on the job at the expense of the taxpayers? Tell us the total cost of all such unbecoming conduct. Also, identify
All the "Yes" voters will be THANKING the "No" voters for having the courage to STAND UP and make a difference when everyone else was caving in to the BULLY and the POS agreement concocted with SECRAP and our out of touch union leaders came up with.
Thank gosh there's still members with a little courage and not easily threatened by the schoolyard BULLY and yes, that definitely includes Helen and SteveHC for caving in so early and continuing to spew the pro-SECRAP rhetoric.
Why don't the two of you just take your toys from the sandbox and GO HOME!!!
And yes, announcing plans for a "bus route" between NB & Hartford, and an expansion of UConn Medical, while AT THE SAME TIME raising taxes and asking for concessions from employees, was just plain DUMB, DUMB, DUMB. So far, the only thing that Malloy got "right" (if you want to call it that) was to bank on the legislature's LAZINESS - which he did by effectively delaying final decisions on just about EVERYTHING until a summertime special legislative session... when the legislators want to do even LESS work than they're inclined to do during a REGULAR legislative session.
The leaders of the state employees unions will hold a press conference at 5:30 p.m. Monday on their next step as thousands of employees are facing layoffs.
The leaders were meeting throughout the day, but spokesmen have declined to comment on what announcement the State Employee Bargaining Agent Coalition might be making.
A ranking official with the Malloy administration said he did not know exactly what the unions would be saying.
SteveHC, there is a rumor going around (I know...why spread rumors)...but...I have heard that when the layoffs occur people who have more than 25 years of service and are over the age of 50 will be able to volunteer for a layoff.
It would spare a younger working from being laid off.
What do you know about the rules regarding that issue????
Helen - Technically there's no such thing as "volunteering" for a layoff per se. But what the State CAN do is target positions for layoff that would be *most likely* to "hit" people who are CURRENTLY eligible for retirement - or very, very close to it - if you catch my drift.
But this situation gets crazier every other day, so who knows how it's really going to play out? A LOT of it depends - *I* think - on what the LEGISLATURE has the "stomach" for, and whether or not they're willing and able to take some of the
Read MoreThank you for the comment on that SteveHC.
Malloy dialing back the 7500 number was a big surprise to me as was the fact that lay-off notices won't be going out for another 2 weeks.
Slurs, gratuitous profanity and personal attacks can get someone barred from commenting here. Unfortunately, just being stupid and offensive is allowed, perhaps even encouraged by the way people respond in kind. Pathetic.
That is why i am the bluffbeater, Malloy folded like i told you. This guy wants his name in the national debate, he thinks he is presidential material. dnc informed malloy that they need every dime he can get from the unions.it is all pretty simple if you pay attention.When this is all over, we will negotiate concessions that will save the state and malloy will save face. This is his first move towards more negotiations. we were and are not against concessions, just these concessions and the lack of shared sacrafice towards appointed positions and lack of seriousness with
Read MoreWho is behind the overwrought caustic comments on preserving hte right to get workers laid off. Do you hate your colleagues? Your boss? Is someone paying you to post these fantastic lies?
If the gov and the union leaders can find ways to keep people working I think should be complimented not derided.
"bluff beater" - BELIEVE me when I say I know fully well what you're talking about - I really do.
But just like I said before, it's STILL not over and won't be for quite awhile yet.
It's just that at this point in time there's NO way Malloy can publicly "save face" by not laying off thousands. On the other hand, the State plays so many games with its filled and unfilled "positions," who knows how many people would actually get laid off? Down in FL, Rick Scott was talking from day one about eliminating well over 5-6,000 State
Read More"Cassandra" - We have no way of determining who on this "blog" is a real State employee and who isn't, and I'm not even sure which posts you were actually referring to. But what I *CAN* tell you:
a) SEBAC, the unions AND the politicians are ALL very much aware of their perceived need for "public 'posturing' "
and
b) In spite of their awareness of "a" above, State employees are getting sick and tired of all of this CONSTANT, never-ending game playing. We all WISH that the State and the unions could just skip the crazy game playing, poll
Read MoreAs far as volunteer layoffs are concerned..... I think if you volunteer for a layoff, you wont be intitled to participate in the sebac layoff list.
Malloy is not folding. I do not know where you get your information at. I believe SEBAC is meeting today to discuss how to layoff, and what aid they can provide to effected employees. I would hope that they are looking to propose something else or looking into a loophole so that 7500 employees wont be laid off. Maybe they are looking at senority. Who knows.
Read MoreI agree 100% on the lack of polling done by the unions. They really should have known going into the "discussions"(negotiations) what they could or could not get ratified by their members.
On another note......making the voting rules so insanely complex serves no one and almost invites criticism. They need to be simplified so anyone can read them and understand them. It took me a few times where I read over and over the 80% thing until I got it right. The news media (especially today)continues to get the 80% thing wrong.
Yeah. If this thing EVER gets settled - or at least settles down - employees have a LOT of "business" to conduct with their unions. And not just regarding SEBAC's voting rules. But employees have got to become less apathetic regarding - and more actively involved with - their unions for ANY meaningful changes to occur.
Anyone here have a link to a live feed of the Sebac news conference?
Wow! It looks like Sebac might be throwing out the 80% rule and make it majority rules.
I watched 5 minutes of the Sebac news conference on Channel 8 it looks like Sebac is not accepting or denying ratification of the deal. The want to explore having the 57% majority rule take precedent saying the old 80% rule was in fact "out of date".
Bombshell!!!!
Following the conclusion of voting on the SEBAC 2011 tentative agreement (TA), leaders of the coalition’s 15 unions convened today to review results and to determine the next course of action.
The leaders of the unions in the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition (SEBAC) reported on the balloting that took place over the last two weeks. Official results showed that 57% of participating members voted in favor of the TA. Broken down further, the majority vote for 26 of the coalition’s 34 bargaining units was to approve the agreement. Coalition leaders also confirmed that 11 of the 15 SEBAC
Read MoreBrace yourself for a social media, forum commenting, nuclear explosion of emotion and opinion.
Duck and Cover!!!!!
helen, its amazing, do you only work weekends??
Why don't taxpayers unite and DEMAND the tax increase be rescinded?
NOBODY talks about the tax increases being cast in stone but 'everybody' and their brother talk about sweetening the deal for ratification.
How about sweetening the deal for taxpayers who pay for this incompetent government.
This could be fun and CT may make WI look like Mayberry RFD!!
Early retirement if inacted in some form would intice workers who are several years away to leave at a lesser rate than they would be eligible for in the next few years.This has a compounded effect lowering the actual amount of what they are eligible for over time,and for the period they collect.Real dollar savings now and for the future.
Connecticut has offered a plan several times in the recent past.New York recently offered this program as well as a partial solution.Many well run profitable corporations also offer these programs as they do work and viewed as
"Chicopee" AIN'T gonna happen, not in CT.
1) Maloy's BASIC approach - combined tax increases with cutting labor costs - was probably the best one, at least for now.
2) CT's general public's apathetic.
3) The CT legislature's basically lazy and full of inertia, but you really can't blame them because they're only paid for PART-TIME work... seriously! CT OFFICIALLY *still* has a PART-TIME legislature!
4) CT's problems are WAY too systemic and complex for simplistic solution.
4) Malloy's way over his head, and his Republican opponent (during the elections) would've been too.
5) The unions and their nationals
Read More"seriously" -
If you're referring to an "ERIP" or something like that, the problem's that the State's pension funds don't have enough money in them to pull it off, because past legislatures and governors DELIBERATELY and KNOWINGLY under-funded them over the years. It's potentially a VERY dangerous situation - for the State, its taxpayers, its current state employees and even the State's CURRENT retirees.
And all because of politicians' ineptitude. The State's employee UNIONS actually have more brains in this regard than the politicians - or even OPM and the OFA - do.
Pretty pathetic.
SEBAC changing the rule's, what a surprise. there is going to be a lot of pissed off state employee's. I wonder if I'm getting my 2 1/2% cola starting on friday. And if SEBAC changes the rules, and that's not certain, because in the bylaw's, 2/3 have to vote yes, when the revote is taken, don't be surprised, if more people vote no. That is, if report's are right, that there is going to be some serious "TWEAKING" of the deal.
Okay Lawyers......figure this one out:
http://inthistogetherct.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/SEBAC-0627-VOTES-...
Does the arrogance of SEBAC have no bounds?
Where is our friend, Aristotle, the no-voting attorney? What do you think, Aristotle? I agree that they cannot change the by-laws after the fact on a vote that has already occurred. I believe the by-laws in effect when the votes were CAST by members rule.
Sebac Postpones Contract Decision For 30 Days.
Click right here to read.
"jeff672" -
ACTIVE employees don't get a "COLA," only RETIREES do. If you're a retiree and you're due for a COLA with your 7/31 pension check, you'll get it. If you're an active State employee and you're talking about either an across-the-board pay raise or a "step" increase, that's determined by your bargaining unit's CURRENT contract terms, at least at this point in time.
As far as the rest of your post, try to "chill." The State (Malloy AND the legislature), SEBAC and its member unions HAVE to do whatever they can legally do to preserve the pension funds, continue
Read More"maria" - In case you haven't been reading the national news: We do NOT have a "class action" suit here. The Supreme Court just made it MUCH more difficult; in order to proceed with such a suit you now basically have to first "prove" that EVERYONE in the class was EQUALLY affected - and adversely at that.
"connie" -
State employees are NOT members of SEBAC - the individual UNIONS and their SEBAC *REPS* are members of SEBAC. And they can change their own (SEBAC) rules anytime they want to, as long as the process they use is consistent with SEBAC's by-laws (etc.) in effect.
SEBAC changing the rules??? A LOT OF PISSED OFF EMPLOYEES??? I DONT THINK SO. Will sebac change the rules?? Maybe. Put corrections all in a class of their own as their union leaders were biased and ENCOURAGED employees to vote against this. 2 union informational meetings i went to(different unions) both said something to the effect-I think its an ok deal, do i think its a great deal? Do we think its the best we can do, under the circumstances, yes....
As sebac said, the voting process was outdated and was created when there were
Read Morethere is no class action lawsuit! The union can change the rules and vote again within 30 days... Corrections wanted to do their own thing, well here is there chance to become more independent.
what will the "30 days" do to the 7/1 increases due to many union employees?
Maria count me in along with just about everybody else I have talked to. We also want the union form to donate our money to any other benifeciary other than AFSME. Clearly they no longer listen to their members they only "hear them". Some of my local members said they found the forms but I have yet to have one in hand. We need real attorneys representing us... not corrupt, bullying, political game players. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! like you said, if the tables were turned this would of been game over for the no voters, clearly they think we don't
Read Moreits so funny, 2 attorneys willing to take a case against sebac?? Only 2 out of how many?? There is no case. But keep on going.. You stated that you are offering to get together and file a lawsuit with someone on here?? Well go right ahead. EVERYONE, disclose your personal e mail, phone numbers etc on here. No one in their right mind would put their contact info with their screen name or a lawsuit would be imposed on YOU! WHY? For blogging lies and mis truths about the agreement. Plain
Read More"SteveHC"
I do realize that. However, four of the unions (via their members) shot this down. Are you saying that the leadership of those four unions would intentionally go along with a change of the by-laws so a simple majority can pass the package with their yes votes?
missy, you will get your increase. However, it can be rescinded once or if new vote-agreement passed. They cannot take the pay they gave you away. I would not bet that now our governor will have to make do and start laying off the Non-union employees as he originally promised. Which generally make 70G or more.
No, I'm not an attorney. My union voted for the package. Would I still be able to participate in the lawsuit?
According to our CURRENT contract, a 2 1/2% COLA is supposed to happen July 1st, and the Step increase was supposed to happen Jan 1 2012. These, by the way, is what they want us to give up as our first hard zero. Second, I well aware SEBAC has the right to change the rules, it say's so in their bylaws. But by the time they can do that, almost 2 pay period's will have been gone by, so I want my 2 1/2% COLA. What they should do is let the raises go through, then take
Read MoreHere is a visual display of what these forums will look like as soon as people get today's Bombshell! news about Sebac:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CFoJuRcjHU&feature=related
This is my take on what is going on. SEBAC has already changed its bylaws so that a simple majority is all that is needed to pass crappy deal. This also explains why Malloy is delaying the pink slips so that no one will actually get laid off. After 30 days they will hold the formal vote and it is a done deal. I guess SEBAC learned a lot from management on how to screw us! SEBAC has evolved into Chris Christie.
"connie" -
I have *no* idea what the union leadership or SEBAC reps of those 4 unions are actually willing - let alone going - to vote on at a SEBAC meeting about possible voting rule changes - or anything else regarding SEBAC for that matter. At this point in time I don't think that even *SEBAC* members know what they're going to do, thus the 30-day thing.
In the meantime, Malloy will probably have to start with layoff notices and *hope* that SEBAC - AND the state's LEGISLATURE - can get their acts together before anyone *actually* gets laid
Read MoreSeveHC,
That sounds about right. Thanks.
I have to say that I am very, very happy about all this.
I have stated in the past that in the end this concession package would indeed pass.
It looks like I was right all along. :)
"Helen" - I wouldn't start counting those "chickens" just yet... NOBODY knows what's going to really happen between now and the end of the summer.
But at least everyone's agreed to give each other some "breathing space."
In the meantime, I think it'd be best for SEBAC and its unions to get their own, SECURE and well-organized membership "blogging" sites so that we could stop posting on publicly-accessible sites like this one.
SteveHC said, """""I think it'd be best for SEBAC and its unions to get their own, SECURE and well-organized membership "blogging" sites so that we could stop posting on publicly-accessible sites like this one.""""
Best idea I have read in months.
This is just like management ignoring our contracts. They make up their own rules and force us to file grievances.
“We feel our bylaws were created at a different time for a different purpose,“ Kathy Sanner, president of UConn Professional Employees Association, said. “First of all there were fewer unions involved in SEBAC at the time and the purpose of the bylaws was to prevent problems with the pension—pension raiding.“
“We’re not saying right now we’re going to be changing our bylaws,” Peterson said. “What we’re saying is we’re going to take a look at the fact that a majority of our members voted to accept the tentative agreement. We also know for some of the people who voted no we’re hearing they didn’t have the correct information.”
Its clear to me "and the media" that the majority of union members are ok with the deal. Sebac
change bylaw vote yes and let the state of ct try and recover from an economic storm. I have been employed by the state of ct for over 20 years and think that this will be the best deal for future generations of all middle cla
ss state residents.
Asked if they would change the bylaws and then apply it to the vote it tabled, Daniel Livingston, chief SEBAC negotiator, said “this exact situation is unprecedented.”
“We have a set of rules that prevent accepting the agreement right now even though a majority favor it,” Livingston said. “We’re going to do everything we can to reach a different outcome.”
SEBAC just clarified that they're giving themselves *more* than 30 days - if necessary - for them to figure things out & get their act together.
Of course, what Malloy and the *legislature* do in the meantime - if anything - is a different story LOL
"balanced" -
I agree with you. But there are laws, rules and regulations that need to be adhered to. And there are a MILLION variables and "players" involved. So it's a VERY complicated matter, with NO really "simple" solution immediately available - no matter WHAT anybody says.
Let's face it - Malloy, SEBAC and the unions tried to address WAY too many "issues" all at once... and the WAY they tried to address those issues was certainly not the *best* way...
WOW danny boy sure talked a good game now he is backing off. he looks like the ass he is. everyone is laughing at him. he will not touch the ones who voted him in the welfares, and the unions.
Its pretty confusing seems they want to change the rules after the game is played. If it were a yes vote would they do this. I doubt it. Something is not right they cannot be trusted. It was a no vote the pink slips should be going out. Something is not right.
bunny06 it is very clear. Daniel Livingston is smarter than you and he will dictate your pension and healthcare benefits.
The vote is NO... WTH do they have to figure out...??? Why do we pay dues if we are not represented..???
43% and 4 unions shot this down... Why is it not over...??? We need a lawyer if they change the rules after this vote...
"state_employee" - Nothing illegal's occurred, and there's been no contract violation... so if you've got the dough to throw away on a lawyer by all means do so... I can even recommend one or two who'd be THRILLED to take your (big) retainer money...
State_employee-i bet you voted no??? If you voted yes, you would fight to have the bill naysayed?? Recommend a lawyer and when you do, be sure to include your contact information on here so WE ALL can go in with you on a lawsuit(not a chance).
If you are anti state or against this package, then you should be worried just like the yes voters are. It is a 50/50 chance for both yes and no voters.
BTW, SEBAC did try to do a blog. People like HELEN who tried to convince
Read Moreplease excuse my typos... But email nancy wyman and tell her you want a copy of that letter she sent out to state employees.
It is out of balance by $1.6 billion over the biennium; $700 million in year one and $900 million in year two. Malloy set a goal of $2 billion for labor savings, but the legislature already made a $400 million adjustment, so the shortfall number we're using is $1.6 billion.
Now, as far as the accuracy of the administration's estimate that the negotiated labor savings were worth $1.6 billion, there is plenty of room for debate there. As we reported, the non-partisan Office of Fiscal Analysis has been unable to confirm anything close to the full amount.
Changing the bylaws? Sorry, no. There are mechanisms to prevent this exact occurrence. A 30 day notice is required before the meeting in which a vote to amend is to be taken, and a vote to amend this article requires a 2/3 majority per capita vote, which means another vote put to the membership. Thats the way the SEBAC bylaws read.
SteveHC,
Thank you for your information regarding the ERIP plan.The plans prior were underfunded as you reference,they would have to be approved and agreed to by SEBAC at that time.
99.99% of the reason why we're even IN this situation in the 1st place is because the State over the years has so severely and DELIBERATELY failed to contribute its share to our pension funds.
We need to start applying pressure - REAL pressure - on the LEGISLATURE to put an end to all of this craziness by allocating money into our pension funds to make up for all that THEY FAILED to put in over the years.
The members of the State's General Assembly think they can *continue* to pit EVERY Governor against state employees while they just take
Read MoreObviously Helen and Steve hc are SEBAC plants..they would not be on this and other sites 24 hours a day spreading their message...I'm surprised the Mirror has let them take over the site..the vote was NO!! Thats it..no interpretation needed. Cancel the UCONn thing and the bus to balance the budget..now when you hear the phrase "Tax and Spend" you know it is real and true. For those who talk about a "sweetheart deal" give me a break..there is nothing in it for the employees except concessions. If you boss came to you and said "we are
Read MoreIt used to be known that CT was one of the richest states in the US....with what the gov has planned he is going to force individuals to leave this state (especially if he lays off 7500 people) & then CT will be known as the poorest state. What I see is there is a lot more room for cuts inside the political offices....such as dog warden's & Fire Chief's (West Haven, Prospect, Waterbury) being able to drive state vehicles all the time...for personal use as well as professional...how does something like that not get cut? I've lived in
Read MoreIt used to be known that CT was one of the richest states in the US....with what the gov has planned he is going to force individuals to leave this state (especially if he lays off 7500 people) & then CT will be known as the poorest state. What I see is there is a lot more room for cuts inside the political offices....such as dog warden's & Fire Chief's (West Haven, Prospect, Waterbury) being able to drive state vehicles all the time...for personal use as well as professional...how does something like that not get cut? I've lived in
Read MoreSTATE EMPLOYEES:
"truth hurts" - like so many OTHER "posters" here online - is a NOT a State Employee, who simply wants REAL State employees to be LAID OFF and their hard-earned pensions to be *eliminated* from the budget ALTOGETHER. *Read* his post (3 posts above) CAREFULLY and you'll see his *not so hidden* PERSONAL political and ideological agenda... like so many others who post online.
Hope fully soon us REAL State employees and retirees will have our OWN, SECURE site to post to. In the meantime, be CAREFUL - READ online posts CAREFULLY! MANY posters are trying to
Read MoreDear SteveHC,
Sorry, union greed and arrogance has brought about what no outside union buster could do. The union is on the way out. The legislature will eliminate collective bargaining, and probably nullify contracts. The governor will start eliminating union positions and replacing them with private employees. In the end, Connecticut will win. The time of the union is long past, and Connecticut citizens are now waking up to that fact, after witnessing the Union turn down a sweetheart deal. The Union has lost all respect, and shown its true colors.
Bytheway, I am not
Read More"Dave Z." - I don't think it was really "UNION greed and arrogance" that did this. It was the sheer STUPIDITY of around 25% - 45% of the current crop of active state employees that did it. I mean, they are DUMB - REALLY dumb. The State of Connecticut has suffered a SERIOUS "brain drain" among its state employees over the past 10 years or so.
Malloy and SEBAC SERIOUSLY over-estimated the intelligence of this group of employees. Oh well, it is what it is...
"He brings experience. He's been elected."
Mike Clark on endorsing State Sen. Andrew Roraback for the Republican nomination for the 5th Congressional District race.
Get the latest headlines right to your mobile
Visit m.ctmirror.org on your mobile device
FOLLOW US ON: 
PROUD SPONSOR
MINIMUM WAGE IN CONNECTICUT
January 1, 1980 $3.12
January 1, 1981 $3.37
October 1, 1987 $3.75
October 1, 1988 $4.25
April 1, 1991 $4.27
October 1, 1996 $4.77
Septem 1, 1997 $5.18
January 1, 1999 $5.65
January 1, 2000 $6.15
January 1, 2001 $6.40
January 1, 2002 $6.70
January 1, 2003 $6.90
January 1, 2004 $7.10
January 1, 2006 $7.40
January 1, 2007 $7.65
January 1, 2009 $8.00
January 1, 2010 $8.25
PROUD SPONSOR
Printer-friendly version
Send to a friend