41 Comments - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 10:47 am: Quinn has said a lot of things. But I think the unified message yesterday was to AFSCME: There will be no tax increase in the veto session to mitigate layoffs. The ball’s in your court. - Sewanee - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 10:49 am: Anyone else shocked that IL sells 365,000,000 packs of cigarettes a year? My concern is that added taxes, combined with anti-smoking and pro-health initiatives, will discourage people from smoking as much or starting smoking. That’s a good thing. Except when you have programs that depend on smokes for funding. If sales and taxes decline, should we ask courts to stop mandating that tobacco companies fund smoking cessation and anti-smoking ads? I don’t like the idea of creating situations in which we have, in ourselves, competing interests. - reformer - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 10:49 am: Hynes criticizes Quinn (what else is new?) for postponing a vote on the income tax. I wonder when Hynes would like the legislature to vote on his proposed income tax amendment, which requires a 60 percent vote? If Quinn’s timing is poor, when — if ever — is the timing good for Hynes’ amendment? - Tired of the mess... - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 10:56 am: Flip, flop, flip, flop! Does the governor remember what he said even last week? This is a disgrace that he continues to hold state employees hostage and refuses to clean up the “fat” that he and his running mate put into place. - cassandra - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 10:59 am: It’s always the same questions on Quinn’s budget numbers. Can he count? Was he plumping up the supposed deficit in order to get a tax increase?. If not, why are layoffs avoidable now if AFSCME gives up next year’s raise (like that’s going to happen). That is far less draconian than his original proposal, which involved layoffs and tax increases. And if things are so bad, why has he sent out only a few hundred actual layoff notices (it takes months to lay off union employees) and kept on nearly 100 percent of the highly-paid Blago appointees, those of the Blago ties and the six figure salaries unconnected to actual performance. Every time he talks about the budget he contradicts himself one way or another. Do we want this man managing our money? Couldn’t he find a competent budget director? - Niles Township - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 11:11 am: But I think the unified message yesterday was to AFSCME: There will be no tax increase in the veto session to mitigate layoffs. The ball’s in your court. ———————— Totally agree with that. By the way, I continue to be annoyed with Hynes and his press staff. - Reality is - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 11:12 am: I think they should have one consistent message. First they said layoffs, furloughs and tax increases. Then they said layoffs and furloughs and now they are saying pay cut. How can you negotiate with someone who doesnt know what they want. Do they have actual numbers to back this up or are they just making it up as they go ? It seems to me they just want to say they got some concession and the money saved is a secondary concern. - Ghost - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 11:13 am: AFSCME is not oging to give up those raises. The leislature can get rid of the current union contract by abolishing the labor act and efftively abolishing unnionization of State employees which exists only by legislative fiat). So the real question is, will madigan, Quinn etc use the only tool they have left, i.e. legislativly abolish the union or just give up asking for what they are not going to get. Your not oing to guilt afscme, and afscme knows those politicians need their support in elections. - Anon - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 11:24 am: ==The leislature can get rid of the current union contract by abolishing the labor act and efftively abolishing unnionization of State employees which exists only by legislative fiat). == Well, there is that silly little “impairment of contracts” clause in the federal constitution, but maybe Quinn doesn’t have time this fall to focus on his tax increase or on amending the Illinois constitution to allow a graduated tax because he is dedicating his time amending the federal constitution. - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 11:29 am: Ghost, they’d still have to live up to the current contracts under the federal and state constitutions. - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 11:34 am: –Anyone else shocked that IL sells 365,000,000 packs of cigarettes a year?– Not at all. That number’s gone down a lot. Back in the day, people smoked everywhere — offices, restaurants, planes, trains. My elementary school gym teacher smoked during class, even indoors. My middle school math teacher would send a kid across the street to the gas station to pick him up a couple of packs Luckys. It’s a different world. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 11:37 am: Yeah, the ball is in AFSCME’s court, and everyone knows how they will serve it back to Quinn. These political leaders are playing for time, and are playing politics over an issue with which they cannot win. The Democrats are opening themselves up to a split with their voter base by the actions they threaten to take. Let see them do it. As for the GOP, they are pretty stupid to join in this lose-lose game. If they were as savvy as Dick Durbin, they would be all empathetic and pouty-lipped for AFSCME’s situation - but no - these dummies just don’t know how to catch a break, do they? - Reality Check - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 11:41 am: Lay-offs won’t happen “if the AFSCME union would enter into meaningful negotiations,” Madigan said. “I think the governor would say there’s no need to do the lay-offs if the AFSCME union would give up on the scheduled pay increase next year. Wrong and wronger. Quinn never said “layoffs won’t happen.” He never asked the union to give up one scheduled pay increase to stop all layoffs. Here’s what the union said after meeting with the gov’s staff: “The Quinn Administration proposed employee concessions that would cut every state worker’s pay by 11 to 15 percent over the next year and a half, and still result in 1,000 layoffs.” 11 to 15 percent is FAR more than one scheduled pay increase, and Quinn never offered to stop the layoffs even if workers gave up that much - he still wanted at least 1,000 layoffs! - dupage dan - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 11:53 am: Reality is makes a valid point. AFSCME is supposed to, in Madigan’s words, ” enter into meaningful negotiations”. It defies logic that the union will enter into negotiations when the other side keeps shifting the target and increasing/decreasing the size of the crisis as it suites current political needs. I am a member of AFSCME. I believe that we should bear our fair share of the crisis. Fair being the operative word. The union is being held up as the roadblock to fiscal salvation. Drivel. Fire all State employees and reduce the deficit by only a fraction. There is no voice of reason on either side of the aisle - only posturing. Who can trust these weasels? - cassandra - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 11:57 am: But in order for these layoffs to have a meaningful effect on this year’s budget, always assuming such concessions are fiscally necessary, wouldn’t we want to start them before long. Yet, I believe that the guv has only put out a few hundred layoff notices. If only a few hundred union layoffs are needed, the guv could get more bang for his buck by laying off a few hundred Blago appointees in the upper echelons. The agencies won’t feel it–these are mostly makework or duplicative jobs– and the frontlines at least don’t lose staff. Yet the guv seems absolutely devoted to his Blago appointees. It is beyond comprehension…but then, with all the flipflops, so is the guv. Nevertheless, AFSCME should raise the question. - Irish - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 12:07 pm: I wonder what Madigan’s position will be when GA raises are brought up again in the veto session. If AFSCME/state employees are made to look like the bad guy/scapegoat by not renegotiating their contract what would the GA response be to a 11% to 15% pay cut? Someone should ask them. Also why are we not mentioning teachers? I do not want to see any state employee take a cut or be laid off. And I am tired of the budget problems being laid on state employees and the GA and PQ trying to balance the budget on state employee’s backs. But if AFSCME is going to take the heat why are we not mentioning the teachers unions? Is it because PQ promised them earlier that he would not make any cuts in their ranks or compensation? Does he think that teachers are the only state emplyees that are smart enough to vote? I think he is going to find out he is wrong. - Hank - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 12:14 pm: Somewhat related to the college funding item; Terry Savage in today’s Sun Times indicates that Bright Star monies don’t appear to be retored back from their losses anytime soon.The article is in response to a reader question and is accompanied by a photo of Alexi - DnSttsAnon - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 12:19 pm: From what everyone has said about Quinn and his flip flopping maybe the problem is he should come up with some meaningful numbers before he asks AFSCME for meaningful negotiations. - Tired of the mess... - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 12:20 pm: PQ and Madigan do not understand the definition of “negotiate”. They have the idea of give and take from the Blago/dictator book of “I’ll tell you what I will give you and then tell you what I will take away from you.” - Just Observing - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 12:25 pm: What is the rationale to increase cigarette taxes to fund college scholarships? Just because smokers are an easy target? I agree with Sewanee (above) that you create competing interests with such a tax — you depend on smokers to buy the packs but you don’t want them to buy the packs. - Johnnyc - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 12:53 pm: “PQ and Madigan do not understand the definition of “negotiate”.” Actually, the negotiation is pretty simple. Take a pay cut, and we’ll save many of your jobs. AFSCME, however, refuses to see the forest through the trees. Those jobs aren’t coming back anytime soon and a cut to keep those jobs would serve their union membership in the long term. But as they proved during their stand off w/ the City, raises that were negoiated under completely different economic circumstances are more important than the livelihood of a substanial number of their members. - Ghost - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 1:00 pm: Ahh but the contract would not be impaired by State law. The State is not passing a law, it is simply repealling the labor act. The Unions ight to organize exists only if the law exists. neither the State or Federal consitution prevents the State from abolishing or repealin an exisiting law. Once the law is gone, because the State is a soveriegn entity, so goes the authority for its workers to unuioize. There is absolutly no contractural prohibition against repealling the law and tossing the current contract. Several other states have taken the same route to fincial poblems; they abolished the authority granted by the State for the State workers to unionize. - Cindy Lou - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 1:07 pm: –”If not, why are layoffs avoidable now if AFSCME gives up next year’s raise “– Cassandra, layoffs are not avoidable and it was not just ‘next years’ raises being asked for. Yeah, Jan 10 and July 10 were part of it, but there was a good chuck of money currently in workers pockets now that was also wanting to be yanked out. –”I believe that the guv has only put out a few hundred layoff notices”– As of Septmeber 1st there were double a few hundred, of course as Quinn says he got rid of a few bum apples higher up, I don’t think I’ve heard an actual headcount on the apples. And while Speaker Madigan may like to lay the ills of layoffs at workers feet, I see he did nothing to address whether these workers were actually needed, if they were being laid off due to lack of lesser workload and/or lesser demand for services they perform. You know, the usual reasons for cutting back on workforce. Nor did the Speaker address as to how those nameless/faceless workers he’d like to give it up would continue to stay afloat in their households budgets ; giving no account to what may have already happened in these households due to economic reasons in other areas of their household, for example, children, married, spouse already laid off ect ect ect. Workers dont come all the same nor do they all make the same amount of money, so to understand what a wage cut means to one does not equal what a wage cut means to another. If Speaker Madigan thinks it is okay and perfectly reasonable to yank over $4,000 dollars over the next 16 months out of my pocket that does not include future raise increases, that’s fine and dandy and he can spin it that way. That man is entitled to his opinion. Now I’m waiting for him to spin again as to why I can’t be expected to cough that up and out but someone else making the same wage can not possible pay an extra few or so hundred in income taxes. - Arthur Andersen - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 1:22 pm: ~Terry Savage in today’s Sun Times indicates that Bright Star monies don’t appear to be retored back from their losses anytime soon.The article is in response to a reader question and is accompanied by a photo of Alexi~ AA notes that Ms. Savage has markedly changed “The Savage Truth” about the wannabe Senator. She complains loudly re: being jacked around for weeks concerning when the BrightStart settlement cash Alexi bragged about would be received. She couldn’t get as much as “The check’s in the mail” from any party involved in this mess. A much different tone to this column than the previous puff pieces she has mailed in on this subject. - Cindy Lou - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 1:29 pm: johnnyc–”Actually, the negotiation is pretty simple. Take a pay cut, and we’ll save many of your jobs. AFSCME, however, refuses to see the forest through the trees. Those jobs aren’t coming back anytime soon and a cut to keep those jobs would serve their union membership in the long term. But as they proved during their stand off w/ the City, raises that were negoiated under completely different economic circumstances are more important than the livelihood of a substanial number of their members”.– johnnyc, while you’re saying you look at the forest and not trees, can you tell me how many jobs might actually be affected? When Quinn says only 1,000 if concessions are agreed to you forgot to mention that that 1,000 figure does not take into consideration any additional layoffs due to any reorganization and/or fac. closures. - cassandra - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 2:14 pm: Getting rid of bad apples should be done regardless of the state’s fiscal situation. We shouldn’t have to pay for a permanent welfare home for incompetent (and very highly paid) political appointees. Management layoffs should track frontline layoffs at least to some degree. Plus, it’s well known that the upper ranks of state government are chock a block with Blago (even Ryan) appointees who got their jobs because of their connections. And many agencies have excessive, duplicative layers of management that could and should be stripped, regardless of how the managers got their jobs or whether they are connected. Corporations reorganize all the time. State agencies, rarely. Not sure what our Pat means by shared sacrifice…perhaps he’ll explain later…in between cutting ribbons for various stimulus projects. - SIUPROF - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 2:14 pm: It is awful that MAP money got cut in half in the first place. We are talking about kids from very low income families that are trying their best to make themselves better. That the state would yank the modest support they provide is an example of government at its worst. Then to propose restoring that funding through a cigarette tax (another tax that hits the lower income people the hardest)is like a half Robin Hood-steal from the poor to give to the poor. Do the right thing-restore-no, increase MAP funding back to where it was. When I went to school in the 70s, between Pell and state support, tuition was free for poor kids-And that is what it should be. - Anon - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 3:00 pm: ==Ahh but the contract would not be impaired by State law. == Good luck trying to sell a judge on that one. If it’s not impaired, it’s still binding. Look at those other states again and see if their legislation didn’t take effect AFTER the union contract ended. - steve schnorf - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 3:06 pm: Think about the numbers. If the union doesn’t agree to what Quinn wants, 2600 of it’s members are completely screwed. If it does agree, all 55,000 of it’s members are harmed. Easy math if you have to run for election. - Irish - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 3:39 pm: Steve, The leadership and members of all state employee unions have to stand together and decide that if one is harmed all vote against the one doing harm. Too often in the end the union leadership fall for promises and disregard realities that have happened and urge their members to vote for the idiots. Case in point the IFT urging it’s members to back Blago in his second election for Gov. The factions the unions vote for what benefits their group only, that is why they are not always a block to be reckoned with. - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 3:39 pm: –The Democrats are opening themselves up to a split with their voter base by the actions they threaten to take. Let see them do it. As for the GOP, they are pretty stupid to join in this lose-lose game.– 2,600 state employee layoffs in a recession are going to split the Dems base? It’s a state of 12 million. Guess how many NEA teachers are being laid off due to state budget cuts? As for what the GOP is doing, your guess is as good as mine. - Ghost - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 4:22 pm: === As for what the GOP is doing… === Thats easy. they are knocking off their viable canidates in favor of far right conservatives who will help ensure the Dems get the independent voters. - Stoned Prophet - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 6:24 pm: AFSCME was asking the governor’s people to find cost-cutting measures that involve healthcare and laying off non-bargaining-unit employees and/or political appointees, among other measures. AFSCME’s cost-savings estimate is in the tens- or hundreds of millions of dollars. If AFSCME is accurate, many layoffs can be averted. The ball is now in the governor’s court. AFSCME was in court today in its suit to prevent or delay layoffs. AFSCME wants to protect bargaining-unit members. While AFSCME clearly does not want any layoffs, it’s striving to ensure that non-bargaining-unit employees are laid off first. Frontline staff who are in the union absolutely must be protected, especially in my agency, DHS, as we are teetering on the brink of major inefficiency with our swelling caseload sizes and extremely-low staffing levels. - Cindy Lou - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 6:49 pm: –”AFSCME was in court today “– psst, Stoned P., hearing was rescheduled for 9 am next week on the 23rd. - Stoned Prophet - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 7:12 pm: Cindy Lou, Yes, I just found out on AFSCME’s web site. For some of us, it feels like a temporary stay of execution. I was speculating today (pointless exercize) with an AFSCME Local president as to whether in the end, Quinn will spare as many frontline workers as possible and cut the management fat. If he is planning on doing this, we agreed that he should just say so. His office should give an indication as to what positions will be targeted for layoff. From what I gather, I don’t think the governor’s office yet has a clue as to who will be laid off. - Emily Booth - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 8:39 pm: Just more political football, you know, to avoid having a government conduct business based on a strategy of values and ethics. Elected officials, managers and staff come and go but values and ethics? I guess it’s a reach. - state worker - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 8:49 pm: You want to see a waste of money?….look at the Juvenile Justice audit report that just came out. The agency director didn’t use millions of dollars handed right to him. A typical Blago hire kept by Quinn. - Anon - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 9:07 pm: I had such high hopes when Quinn took over, but I am so disappointed. He has flip flopped on any major decision and we still have all the employees hired under Blago that make good money and do nothing. I work at IDOT, and in my office alone, we have 2 new hires in the past month that were not even asked for. One is an individual in the same job title as me and started out making $70k. I have been with the state for more than 30 years, and don’t make near that much. When is the madness going to stop. Before any layoffs should occur, they need to implement a hiring freeze and only absolutely necessary postions get filled by qualified people in job interviews. - Bobs yer - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 9:18 pm: Starting to see the pattern: Dem’s cut emotionally sensitive program, then propose new tax as the only way to protect this poor constituency. Meanwhile keeping in place every Emil Jones/Blago goofey new initiative. And all us 70 IQ voters are supposed to accept the new tax. Saw the statistic on today’s blog (can’t find it to cite): Blago won Chicago 4-1 over Judy BT in 2006. Not 2-1, but 4-1. Over a liberal R, not a wacko. That continues, Dems keep the Gov., no spending gets cut, and all sorts of additional taxes. Why fight it? The City is more Blago than not, and they rule the state. - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 10:00 pm: Saw the statistic on today’s blog (can’t find it to cite): Blago won ==Chicago 4-1 over Judy BT in 2006. Not 2-1, but 4-1. Over a liberal R, not a wacko. That continues, Dems keep the Gov., no spending gets cut, and all sorts of additional taxes. Why fight it? The City is more Blago than not, and they rule the state.== That’s one way of looking at it. Another way, is that there were 650,000 votes cast in Chicago and about 2.8 million in the rest of the state. So Chicago, obviously, can’t rule the state without a lot of help. Blago got 504,000 votes in the city, and 1.23 million in the rest of the state. JBT got about 100,000 votes in the city and 1.26 million in the rest of the state. So if your contention is the GOP can’t win because they’re not competitive in the city — with 23% of the vote — I’d suggest it’s because the Dems are very competitive everywhere else, with 77% of the vote. Didn’t used to be that way — and it’s a much bigger problem for the GOP, and one they’re going to have to stop denying. - state employee - Thursday, Sep 10, 09 @ 10:38 pm: What, they’re HIRING cronies NOW, at IDOT at 70,000 per year starting?? Wow, D of C and DHS are clearly the neglected agencies of the state. They keep Blago appointee people running DHS, and no front line new hires in SEVERAL YEARS, PEOPLE LEAVING AND RETIRING, AND CASELOADS GROWING, DEMAND WAY UP IN THE DOWN ECONOMY. YET we’re the ones still threatened with layoffs. WOW!!!! Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.