U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 06-24-2011, 11:10 AM
 
Location: Out in the stix
1,264 posts, read 1,044,381 times
Reputation: 681
Default state layoffs

so think this will come to fruition? I think so this time. The 2nd union said no to the proposed concessions, so approximately 7500 state workers will join the unemployed fairly quickly.

This one I have mixed emotions on.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-24-2011, 11:26 AM
 
Location: CT
82 posts, read 143,793 times
Reputation: 41
It looks like the deal is dead and lay offs are going to happen. While I do think many of the state departments are bloated, I'm not sure this will help.

IMO, the problem is a skewed management/ employee ratio. There are too many middle to high end managers/supervisors in many departments. I dont think the problem is the average state worker making 50K. If they take the approach to lay off the most recent employees it will not address the crux of the problem.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2011, 11:47 AM
 
Location: Out in the stix
1,264 posts, read 1,044,381 times
Reputation: 681
Correct last in first out isn't going to help here.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2011, 11:51 AM
 
Location: New England
8,156 posts, read 12,273,686 times
Reputation: 3152
They are stupid to vote this down. 7500 layoffs is only going to save about 450 million. I say only because there is a 2 billion dollar gap to fill.

The whole thing, the entire process has been a circus and a joke. The state needs to bring spending under control and REDUCE the budget, not grow it slower. Period.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2011, 11:56 AM
 
740 posts, read 995,840 times
Reputation: 400
I've got my bags packed if it happens. Going back out west somewhere.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2011, 12:11 PM
 
2,335 posts, read 4,855,420 times
Reputation: 1647
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe143 View Post
IMO, the problem is a skewed management/ employee ratio. There are too many middle to high end managers/supervisors in many departments. I dont think the problem is the average state worker making 50K. If they take the approach to lay off the most recent employees it will not address the crux of the problem.
I agree 100%. The bloated middle management is where cuts need to be made. I don't want to see anyone lose their job but as a taxpayer I don't think my money should be wasted to keep up an unsustainable manager/supervisor to employee ratio. The few state agencies I currently work with have a management layer about 4 times larger than any private company I have ever worked for.

Unfortunately the last one in, first out rule will keep the current structure in place, never resulting in any savings. Speaking of savings, I just learned the state has a Department of Information Technology that employs about 200 people. Mind you, every state agency also has their own in-house IT people. From my experience in the private sector, that number is pretty outrageous.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2011, 12:42 PM
 
Location: Fairfield County, CT
6,770 posts, read 4,457,844 times
Reputation: 3675
For my $.02 I'll say good-- Labor was give more then their fare chance to provide concessions. It's a shame that the cuts will likely come more from the workers than the administrators and managers.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2011, 12:47 PM
 
263 posts, read 379,503 times
Reputation: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlassoff View Post
For my $.02 I'll say good-- Labor was give more then their fare chance to provide concessions. It's a shame that the cuts will likely come more from the workers than the administrators and managers.
I just want to point out that a majority of "labor" did in fact vote for concessions. The SEBAC rules require a super-supermajority to approve.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2011, 12:56 PM
 
Location: Out in the stix
1,264 posts, read 1,044,381 times
Reputation: 681
wonder if Molloy is giving himself any concessions to help lower the budget defecit, like maybe buying dunkin donuts instead of Starbucks and not super sizing his McDonalds

I'm afraid you guys are right these layoffs are a pittance of what needs to be done....sad for those that will lose their jobs for sure.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2011, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Fairfield County, CT
6,770 posts, read 4,457,844 times
Reputation: 3675
Quote:
Originally Posted by ctwhitechin View Post
wonder if Molloy is giving himself any concessions to help lower the budget defecit, like maybe buying dunkin donuts instead of Starbucks and not super sizing his McDonalds

I'm afraid you guys are right these layoffs are a pittance of what needs to be done....sad for those that will lose their jobs for sure.
So in other words, no matter what Malloy does, you'll complain? When he raised taxes no one was extolling the virtues of saving jobs... Now that layoffs are required due to the union vote-- You're hedging against layoffs?

Good grief.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top