Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Yes, the cuts are totally unacceptable, but so is everything else these days
Next Post: Remap red herrings
Posted in:
* As you might imagine, this isn’t going over too well…
The House plan would challenge the unions representing state employees, said Rep. Frank Mautino, D-Spring Valley. He said the budget won’t contain money for raises that were promised in the latest contract.
Mautino, a House leader on budget issues, said the unions can agree to give up their raises or agencies would run out of money and have to cut [positions].
AFSCME has a “no layoff” agreement with Gov. Pat Quinn. So, the state would have to eliminate positions instead of just laying people off.
* But the union contends that the House’s proposed cuts go way beyond a simple defunding of the contract’s pay raises…
AFSCME said its analysis of the proposed House budgets show significant cuts in personnel spending in a variety of areas. The departments of Corrections, Children and Family Services and Healthcare and Family Services all show reductions in personnel expenses of 6.5 percent to 7 percent. Cuts in the Department of Human Services range from 10.4 percent to 21 percent, depending on the division.
“Those cuts are much, much more than the scheduled pay increase for this year,” said AFSCME spokesman Anders Lindall.
AFSCME agreed to defer some raises called for in its contract negotiated three years ago. Union employees are now scheduled to receive a 2 percent increase on July 1, another 1.25 percent on Jan. 1 and a final 2 percent Feb. 1. The annualized increase is 3.5 percent, AFSCME said.
“It’s disgusting for these politicians to blame hard-working state employees who have already given up pay increases and unpaid furlough days,” Lindall said. “The politicians are trying to divert focus from what is a deeply irresponsible budget, maybe the most reckless budget plan ever introduced in the state of Illinois.”
* And some legislators agreed with the union…
State Rep. Bill Mitchell, R-Forsyth, said the pay raise issue was one reason he voted “no” on the latest budget plans.
“I don’t think its going to be realistic,” Mitchell said. “I don’t think these are going to be the final product.”
Ten House members voted “No” yesterday. Six Democrats and four Republicans.
* In other budget news, the Illinois Hospital Association prefers more payment delays to big cuts…
The Illinois House Human Services Appropriations Committee is proposing a $463 million payment reduction of Medicaid to hospitals for next year’s budget. But the Illinois Hospital Association is offering an alternative – why not delay reimbursement payments than making deeper cuts?
“The state could extend the payment cycle rather than do cuts across the board,” said Howard Peters, executive vice president of Illinois Hospital Association. “Hospitals would rather be paid timely payments, (and it’s) better to be paid late than taking inadequate payment, because the Medicaid program is already paying less than the cost to deliver Medicaid care.”
Hospitals are familiar with delayed Medicaid reimbursements. Illinois’ Medicaid backlog bill is $448.6 million with the oldest bill dating back to Jan. 3, said Brad Hahn, spokesman for the state’s comptroller’s office. Illinois’ total backlog of unpaid bills is hovering around $4.5 billion for the same period.
“It’s not a new notion that the state would pay slower,” Peters said. “So when we say, ‘We would agree to extend the payment cycle,’ that’s been what’s more normal than a prompt payment approach.”
State Rep. Patti Bellock, R-Westmont, said the House Human Services Appropriations Committee is taking everything, including suggestions, into consideration to meet service providers’ needs.
“Well we don’t like to (delay payments) but to extend the cycle out that is what the hospitals have asked us to do rather than taking more cuts,” said Bellock, a committee member. “By extending the (payment) cycle out, (the state would save) around $250 million.”
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, May 13, 11 @ 10:35 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Yes, the cuts are totally unacceptable, but so is everything else these days
Next Post: Remap red herrings
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
–AFSCME has a “no layoff” agreement with Gov. Pat Quinn. So, the state would have to eliminate positions instead of just laying people off.–
I never understood that deal, and exactly for the reason that’s unfolding. If the GA doesn’t appropriate the funds, what good is an “agreement” with the executive?
Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 13, 11 @ 10:42 am
“Well we don’t like to (delay payments) but to extend the cycle out that is what the hospitals have asked us to do rather than taking more cuts. By extending the (payment) cycle out, (the state would save) around $250 million.”
I thought Republicans were against budget gimmicks and borrowing?
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, May 13, 11 @ 10:44 am
@wordslinger -
The simple solution is to extend the payment cycle for state workers.
Just don’t mail their May and June paychecks until July.
Mischief Managed!
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, May 13, 11 @ 10:46 am
==“It’s disgusting for these politicians to blame hard-working state employees who have already given up pay increases and unpaid furlough days,” Lindall said. ==
Unionized state workers were not FORCED to take furloughs. They were given an option to with a bonus of an extra compensation day. Only merit-compensation (about 4% of the State of Illinois employees) were required to take part in the furlough program. We might actually see a cost savings if they were required of all employees, but it was not exactly a fair statement.
Comment by Really? Friday, May 13, 11 @ 10:52 am
First of all AFSCME should learn that they cannot open the contract because you cannot trust the Governor or the Legislators.
This budget will set precident and basically contract negotiations are worthless, as any part of the agreement can be voided by legislators.
By the way, what is Mr Mautino’s record on past pay raises for himself and the rest of the legislators?
Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Friday, May 13, 11 @ 10:58 am
It’s good to see that the Hospital Association won’t be crying about late payments anymore. It’s becoming more and more clear that they are a part of the problem.
Comment by Old Milwaukee Friday, May 13, 11 @ 10:58 am
Really? Your statement is not completely accurate. Union employees were not forced to take furlough days, but more than 4% of the state work force were required. My boss is not merit comp, but she had to take 2 furlough days. And, I’m not sure that furlough days actually save any money. Some one has to do the job while that person is out, just as if they were on vacation, etc. In many cases, that means overtime. Where’s the savings?
Comment by lincolnlover Friday, May 13, 11 @ 11:00 am
Really?– perhaps if EVERYONES furlough days were calculated the same they would get more people to take them. State employees are figured on a 240 day year while the PART TIME Legislators are figured on a 365 day year. Whats up with that?
Maybe they should sell the perks they have, State Plane, fancy state owned (Non U Plate) cars, excessive Per Diem etc. THAT would bring savings.
Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Friday, May 13, 11 @ 11:06 am
“‘“Those cuts are much, much more than the scheduled pay increase for this year,’ said AFSCME spokesman Anders Lindall.”
Of course it is, because a zero growth budget is still in deficit. To balance the budget, there needs to be real, net cuts, an increase in revenue (taxes), or a combination of the two. We’ve already seen the tax increase part…
Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, May 13, 11 @ 11:11 am
I’m off today. For starters. I’m a state worker. Let me explain something. I don’t make that much money even after working for the state over 12 years. My brother-in-law makes a better living working for a soda delivery company. I’m here because I wanted to work for Illinois and do some good things for the state. I have a dentist bill from last July 2010 that was to be covered by state insurance and I have not received any reimbursement for that yet. I have a few bills, small house, older parent to care for and I struggle to make all my bill payments on time. I don’t gamble, smoke, drink or spend my $$ on anything but bills, food, gas, and other needs. I’m years away from retirement but also have a medical condition (at 45 yrs old) that makes it so that I probably won’t even see retirement. So talk of medical plan changes, require furlough days, drastic changes in pension - though I may not need that - take away from my dedication to this once great state. Sure, I’d love to get a job somewhere else right now that I’d feel more secure in… but guess that is as rare as can be now. But please show some decency when talking about “state employees”. We all do not make 60,000-150,000 thousand a year.. we all do not get the best benefits anywhere.. (I can’t go to the Dentist now because I can’t afford it and I know I won’t get reimbursed by state insurance.. for a long time if ever). I’m very low-middle class average and struggling like many others. But I also have a job that provides service and benefits to others around the entire state. I don’t want to jeopardize that… but it sure takes my enthusiasm to do my best.. when so many people cut ME down.
Comment by open Friday, May 13, 11 @ 11:12 am
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, May 13, 11 @ 10:44 am:
“I thought Republicans were against budget gimmicks and borrowing?”
Not quite a true statement. Conservatives are against budget gimmicks and borrowing. And over spending. And over taxing. And for limited government. It is unclear what Illinois Republicans stand for…
Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, May 13, 11 @ 11:13 am
have you looked at state employees pay rates…really. What state employee should make $88,000/yr?????? That is more than the employees director makes and that director oversees these programs. http://agency.governmentjobs.com/illinois/default.cfm?clearsearch=1
Comment by Doubt it Friday, May 13, 11 @ 11:17 am
I wonder if the state employees can get a refund on the money and endorsement they gave Quinn. Its terrible when you buy something and it doesn’t work like you thought it would.
Comment by Fed up Friday, May 13, 11 @ 11:39 am
AFSCME is up against it, Fed up. They couldn’t very well support the ILGOP slate whose historic philosophy has been, “more or less”, clear re cuts in spending. Instead, they pinned their hopes on PQ et al and are reaping the benefits. Kudos to those who are looking at the pie and realizing that now matter how you cut it up, it’s still a smaller pie.
As a state employee I will be affected by the cuts and changes. As I see it, I’m not alone.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, May 13, 11 @ 11:53 am
@ Doubt It - “What state employee should make $88,000/year?” How about Doctors, Physicists, Engineers, the Director of the Division of Developmental Disabilites in Human Services, the Home Administrator for the Veteran’s Home in Union County, the Director of Nursing at Alton Mental Health Center and other highly PROFESSIONAL positions! How much do you think these positions pay in the private sector? If you had bothered to take the list you reference and sort it by pay range, you would find you have to get to page 8.5 of the barely 10 page list to meet the $88,000 salary you mention. And those potentially receiving that salary are for highly specialized positions. The highest possible pay in this list is for a doctor at the Veteran’s Home in Quincy and the most he can make after working for many years is $141,000. How many doctors do you know only making $141,000/year at the Hospitals, Clinics, or in private practice?
The reality is the vast majority of state workers are paid a salary that is equitable to (or less than) the private sector, but are the first on the chopping block when it comes to the budget.
Comment by Both Sides Now Friday, May 13, 11 @ 12:32 pm
Fed up - Because Brady would have treated them so much better right? “10% across the board” would mean no raises and layoffs. Sheesh!
Comment by Jimbo Friday, May 13, 11 @ 12:32 pm
OMG! Does anyone remember how we got where we are now? This budget, with some $7B in new revenue in it, is our chance to get well.
We have to get base spending down to base revenues, and live there. Extending payment cycles slightly to avoid cuts is sometimes a reasonable strategy when the reason is temporary revenue shortfalls, and the numbers make it clear that you can pay the cycle back down over the next couple of years.
We have a huge revenue influx, not a shortfall. If the base is set too high this year, the next 3 years, already very difficult, become as impossible as the last few were.
What’s next, a pension holiday and paying current operating expenses with borrowing?. BTW, I told folks for years the way to pass a tax increase was to force my fellow Rs to vote on the cuts, and and many of us would be as unwilling as the Ds. And these are tiny cuts compared to what would have been necessary without the tax increase.
Comment by steve schnorf Friday, May 13, 11 @ 1:47 pm
Question: Are some agencies cutting operating expenses to put more of their budget allocations into meeting payroll? And does this leave some employees with few resources to perform their roles? In this case, does it not make more sense to weed out the least needed positions to free up resources for the remaining employees?
Comment by vole Friday, May 13, 11 @ 1:51 pm
Steve Schnorf makes the point I have been saying for months. A baseline established on overspending revenues can practically never be brought back into balance since the amount of spending cuts required to do so will be considered draconian when compared to the baseline, and the tax increase required to rebalance would be stifling to the economy. This describes more than the politics, it is the reality of the numbers.
Steve’s point about the tax increase already instituted is right on, this is the best moment we will have in the foreseeable future to institute fiscal discipline, but to do so requires REAL cuts, not budget shenanigans and slowing the rate of growth in programs.
I hate the word unsustainable, and the way it is too often used, but the budgets being proposed by everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike is just that. This problem cannot be nibbled, it must be chomped. Otherwise, we are looking at 10 or more years of the argument we are now having, and still won’t have a resolution. Something’s gotta give.
Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, May 13, 11 @ 3:00 pm
Believe me I don’t think Brady would be better I was just pointing out that afscme bought and paid for Quinn for $50k and an endorsement. Now it might be a bad investment. Quinn is in a bad way on the budget and I don’t think he will be able to keep his promise to afscme so they should see what the refund policy is.
Comment by Fed up Friday, May 13, 11 @ 4:43 pm