NY State furloughs: attempt to wring concessions
Governor Paterson’s furloughs flew through the State Assembly and Senate yesterday. Under the bill, State workers will work one less day each week and get 20% less pay. The governor and the legislators are using the furloughs to force contract concessions from the workers (really, from their unions).
John Sampson, the Democratic leader in the Senate, voted for the bill, then hoped out loud that the unions would challenge its legality in court.
Local coverage from media in Albany. Coverage in the NY Times.
The Professional Staff Congress (AFT Local 2334, at CUNY) sent members two letters in the last few days, organized a protest, and is challenging the furloughs in court.
CUNY Vice Chancellor Dobrin issued a brief statement before the bill passed:
I want to take this opportunity to update you on recent events in connection with the State budget, which is now five weeks overdue.
Governor Paterson has sent to the legislature a draft budget extender bill that includes a mandatory one-day furlough during the week of May 17, 2010 through May 23, 2010. The bill specifically names The City University of New York as one of the agencies that is subject to the mandatory furlough. If the bill is enacted by the legislature and signed into law by Governor Paterson, the furlough would apply to employees on the New York State payroll (primarily employees in the senior colleges), but not to employees in the community colleges.
We are carefully monitoring the status of this bill. If it becomes law, we will provide specific guidance regarding the steps that CUNY must take to comply.
Thank you for your cooperation during these difficult times.
JD2718 
>John Sampson, the Democratic leader in the Senate, voted for the bill, then hoped out loud that the unions would challenge its legality in court.
Huh? Did he say why he voted for it then?
It was pretty clearly an attempt to vote for it and claim he was really against it. I hope his constituents learn well and show their support for him by choosing a better nominee.
I wonder if he did it as a convoluted way to make sure a bill like that could never pass again, if it was deemed illegal.
Easier to just vote no on the first place, though, but then again that won’t stop it from being brought up over and over again.
As a former state worker creedmor dietary dept I am dismayed at what Mr paterson is doing to the rank and file members of my former union,by implementing furloughs.It,s bad enough when some of these workers are only g-5,s which make very little compared to todays standards.My suggestion:why not furlough some of his staff which are grade 22,s and up,but then again since he has no chance of winning in november he,s gonna cause as much damage as he possibly can.