Furlough Friday in Court Wednesday

View Comments (
)
|
Email
|
Print

    NEWSLETTERS

    The California Supreme Court is set to grapple at a hearing in San  Francisco Wednesday with whether the governor has the power to furlough tens of thousands of state workers in response to the Golden State's budget  crisis.
         
    The high court will hear arguments on three lawsuits filed by  about 114,000 workers who were ordered by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to take  unpaid days off in the state's first round of furloughs between February 2009  and June 2010.

    But the court's eventual ruling could affect all of the 200,000  workers furloughed last year, as well as the 144,000 now ordered off work in  a second round of furloughs that began in August.

    The furloughs began with two days per month and were increased by  Schwarzenegger in July 2009 to three, giving the workers a 14 percent pay  cut.

    "What's at stake here long-term is the authority of the governor  to act unilaterally to reduce the pay and work time for public employees,"  said Bruce Blanning, executive director of Professional Engineers in  California Government, on Friday.

    "Can he do that?  How much legislative approval is required?"  Blanning asked.

    The state engineers and three other groups participating in the  three lawsuits contend that Schwarzenegger's executive orders violate a state  law setting a 40-hour work week as well as union contracts.

    But Schwarzenegger's lawyers have argued in court filings that the  state Constitution and laws empowered him to order furloughs "as one means of  addressing a fiscal crisis of unprecedented dimension."

    "The governor absolutely has the authority," spokesman Aaron  McLear said on Friday.

    McLear said, "We expect the California Supreme Court will uphold"  a Sacramento County Superior Court judge who ruled in favor of Schwarzenegger  in the three lawsuits.

    Thee court's seven justices will hear one and one-half hours of  arguments in their State Building courtroom and then will have up to three  months to issue a decision.

    The 9 a.m. hearing will be broadcast live on the California  Channel, a public affairs cable television network, and will also be  available both live and in archives on the network's website,  www.calchannel.com.

    The court's eventual decision is expected to address whether  Schwarzenegger had the power to mandate the unpaid days off through executive  orders. The question of financial remedies for the workers, if they win the  decision, may be left for future court proceedings.

    State Department of Personnel Administration spokeswoman Lynelle  Jolley said pay savings in the first 17 months of furloughs added $1.6  billion to the state's general fund.

    The three lawsuits before the court are among more than 30  filed to challenge various aspects of the furloughs. The others are pending  in Alameda, San Francisco, Sacramento and Los Angeles county superior courts,  in state appeals courts and in the California Supreme Court.

    The first round of furloughs ended on June 30, but Schwarzenegger  reinstated three days off per month for 144,000 workers beginning in August  after the Legislature failed to pass a budget in the current fiscal year to  address a $19 billion deficit.

    Schwarzenegger said at the time of his July 28 executive order,  "Every day brings California closer to a fiscal meltdown."

    The governor is opposed in the cases by state Controller John  Chiang, who contends the furloughs are illegal because it is up to the  Legislature to determine state employees' workweeks and pay.

    His attorneys wrote in a court filing, "This case is about  separation of powers.

    "Without legislative authorization, the controller cannot lawfully  implement the governor's orders," Chiang said in the brief.

    Jolley said the state has a total work force of about  238,000 positions, although some of those jobs are unfilled because of  attrition.
         
    Those exempted from the current furloughs include California  Highway Patrol officers and state firefighters, who were also exempted in the  first round, and 37,000 workers in six unions that agreed on contracts with  the administration.
         
    Several other agencies, including the state Franchise Tax Board  and the Employment Development Department, are now also exempted, Jolley  said.
         
    In addition, several state constitutional officers, including the  attorney general, controller and secretary of state, have refused to furlough  about 12,000 employees, although the governor has sought to include those  workers in his orders, Jolley said. That dispute is pending in a different  lawsuit.
     

    Bay City News