The State Worker

The California Statewide Law Enforcement Association has made a furlough deal with Gov. Jerry Brown, leaving only two of the state's 21 bargaining units that have not agreed to a pay cut.

The side-letter deal with CSLEA, inked on Wednesday, mirrors others that have come in in recent days. Workers will take a 4.62 percent pay cut and be furloughed 12 days over the next year.

Only two units -- Professional Engineers in California Government and the International Union of Operating Engineers -- have yet to make a deal.

A bill that would require the California Public Employment Relations Board to allow sworn peace officers to separate from non-sworn employees in one of the state's bargaining units is facing some opposition from those who claim it would set a precedent for groups to be able to override the board's decisions.

Senate Bill 252 by Sen. Juan Vargas, D-San Diego, would grant a petition to allow the sworn peace officers in Bargaining Unit 7, Protective Services and Public Safety, represented by the California Statewide Law Enforcement Association (CSLEA), to form their own bargaining unit.

If the group, which calls itself the Peace Officers of California, is successful, the move would create a 22nd bargaining unit representing some 2,700 law enforcement officers currently in Bargaining Unit 7.

A website of unknown origin has launched with a not-so-subtle invitation:

"LEARN THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SIX UNIONS THAT WANT TO RAISE YOUR TAXES AND KILL CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMIC RECOVERY!"

It's not clear who is behind the website. Bee Capitol Bureau colleague Torey Van Oot checked the registration for the site's domain name, thenewcaliforniabandits.com, which led to a Florida-based administrative contact, Domain Discreet Privacy Service.

The State Worker contacted California Republican Party spokeswoman Jennifer Kerns to see if the state GOP was behind the site.

"Nope, not us," Kerns said in an email. "I don't know who it is."

The anti-tax, anti-organized labor website blasts "the union plan" to raise taxes, calls out "union bosses" and publishes the pay of top officials for AFSCME, the California Federation of Teachers, the California Teachers Association, SEIU and the California Nurses Association.

The site gives similar treatment to the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, which was formerly the California chapter of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). The libral and politically active group isn't a union but has strong ties with labor.

Visitors to the website are invited to "Report a bandit!" And, of course, there are the usual buttons to share the site via social media.

The State Worker is continuing to investigate the website's source.

California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges, and Hearing Officers in State Employment (CASE) has reached a side letter agreement on furloughs with the Brown administration.

Under the agreement, CASE members will take a 4.62 percent reduction in pay for 12 months, starting in July. Each member will receive 8 hours personal leave per month.

The side letter does not affect raises scheduled for July 2013.

During negotiations, the administration agreed to establish a committee that could lead to creation of higher job classifications, such as Attorney V and ALJ III.

According to the CASE release:

"This is significant because it represents the first time in the history of our negotiations with the State that an administration has been willing to seriously discuss new classifications to address the structural pay disparity suffered by the members of Bargaining Unit 2, and create a formal structure and a six-month timeline for doing so.
This creates a formal structure and new classifications to address pay disparity."

The agreement also establishes a committee to identify legal contracts that the union believes are improperly outsourcing work union members should be doing.

This decision came shortly after Gov. Jerry Brown signed a budget trailer bill that would allow him to furlough members of bargaining units that do not reach deals by July 1. All bargaining units that reach a deal will be protected from further furloughs.

The side letter agreement will be sent to members for ratification, likely early next week.

View the side letter agreement terms here.

The California Association of Professional Scientists reached a furlough deal this afternoon with Gov. Jerry Brown, leaving just four of the state's 21 bargaining units without an agreement.

The association, which represents some 2,500 state scientists, said it agreed to take 12 unpaid days off in the fiscal year starting July 1, resulting in a salary cut of nearly 5 percent.

"Too often in recent years, the dedicated scientists who serve the people of California have been asked to sacrifice to help balance the state budget.  This is another one of those times," CAPS President David Miller said in a prepared statement. "It's very painful and difficult for all of us.  But we sacrifice in hopes of a better future for everyone."

The agreement is similar to one tentatively accepted Saturday by the state's largest union, Service Employees International Union Local 1000.

Of California's 21 bargaining units, five have yet to reach a deal with Gov. Jerry Brown about proposed furloughs, according to the Department of Personnel Administration. They are:

• California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and Hearing Officers in State Employment (CASE)
• California Statewide Law Enforcement Association (CSLEA)
• Professional Engineers in California Government (PECG)
• California Association of Professional Scientists (CAPS)
• International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE)

"We're in active discussions with all of them," department spokeswoman Lynelle Jolley said this morning.

Patrick Whalen, general counsel for CASE, said that the attorney group had been in many meetings with the administration and has many more scheduled.

"We're bargaining, we're meeting with the state, and we've been having many discussions," Whalen said. He added that there had been dozens of offers made back and forth.

Will a deal be reached? "I honestly don't know," he said.

Joan Bryant, IUOE's director of public employees, said the union had been bargaining with the state and would most likely make a deal next week.

"I'm hopeful that Monday we could come to some sort of agreement with the state," Bryant said. She added that IUOE is negotiating a side letter agreement and not a contract change.

As The Bee has reported, a budget-related bill restored language to allow saving money through furloughing state workers, which could give the governor more leverage in negotiations with unions that have yet to reach deals.

SEIU Local 1000, the state's largest state employee union, tentatively accepted a side letter agreement on Saturday to take 12 unpaid leave days over the next year.

Here's a copy of the side letter that SEIU Local 1000 members will consider on Wednesday. It provides for a 4.62 percent pay cut, paring down of retired annuitants and a labor-administration committee to review contracts, among other things.

SEIU Tentative Agreement (1)

We can never get everything we learn into a news story. "From the notebook" posts give you some of the extra details behind the news.

So what's a "mission critical" retired annuitant, anyway?

We'll soon find out. As we've reported, the horse-trading between Gov. Jerry Brown and SEIU Local 1000 over furloughs included a mandate that departments purge their payrolls of RAs by Sept. 1. Only those deemed mission critical -- in other words, people whose departure would impair the normal function of the organization -- will be exempt.

A new budget bill has restored language that would allow Gov. Jerry Brown to furlough state workers without an agreement with their unions.

SEIU Local 1000, the state's largest state employee union, tentatively accepted a deal Saturday to take 12 unpaid leave days over the next year, but Gov. Jerry Brown still is seeking agreements with other state worker bargaining units.

The bill could give Brown leverage in negotiating with unions that have not yet struck deals or with SEIU should the rank and file turn the deal down in Wednesday's membership vote.

The furlough language was introduced in Brown's proposed budget in May, but eliminated from the Legislature's initial 2012-2013 state budget. The State Worker previously reported that unions pushed Democrats to make the change, strengthening their position during negotiations with the administration.

The furlough language is back in the budget trailer bills, Senate Bill 1037 and Assembly Bill 1497, lawmakers are expected to consider Wednesday.

A persistent rumor is wafting through state government that the California Association of Highway Patrolmen is pushing legislation that would reduce how much they contribute to their pensions.

While The State Worker loves a good pay-and-politics scandal as much as anybody, in this case the rumor is false.

Here's a recent email to The State Worker that succinctly explains the scuttlebutt we've been hearing:

As reported here, SEIU Local 1000 will let members cast ballots on Wednesday to register where they stand on a new furlough agreement negotiated with Gov. Jerry Brown.

The results of the vote will be announced on July 2. How do you think it will turn out?

California's largest public employees' union has tentatively agreed to accept furlough terms that will reduce employee pay by 5 percent starting July 1, but Gov. Jerry Brown's proposal to accomplish the savings with a shortened workweek isn't part of the deal.

Service Employees International Union Local 1000's deal with Brown, announced just a few minutes ago, accepts 12 unpaid leave days over the next 12 months. Although employees' paychecks will show the monthly hit on their wages, they have some flexibility to schedule the time off.

The agreement doesn't affect any other aspect of Local 1000's current contract, including a scheduled 3 percent raise for top-step employees scheduled for July 1, 2013.

The union said members will have a chance to vote on the agreement on Wednesday at one of about 100 polling places set up around the state. The results of the vote will be announced July 2.

Brown also gave Local 1000 two items on its wish list, agreeing to terminate all but the most essential state retired annuitants and student assistants and to set up a task force on state outsourcing.

Departments will have until Sept. 1 to purge retirees and students from their payrolls, with exemptions only for those whose jobs are deemed "mission critical." The state won't hire either during the 12-month furlough period for SEIU-covered workers.

The Union of American Physician and Dentists has agreed to an 8-hours-per-month furlough for its members that will begin July 1.

The agreement covers roughly 1,800 doctors and dentists. The union has posted the details of the side letter that avoids reopening the union's full contract. Under the terms of the so-called "personal leave program," or PLP, the state deducts 4.62 percent of gross pay from each employee's monthly paycheck. They have some flexibility to schedule the time off, according to the union's summary of the agreement:

PLP 2012 must be used in the month in which it is earned. PLP 2012 shall be requested and used by the employee in the same manner as vacation or annual leave. If the employee has not submitted a PLP 2012 leave request by the 20th of the month in which PLP 2012 is accrued, the time shall be scheduled by his/her supervisor. When this is not operationally feasible, PLP 2012 shall be used before any other leave except sick leave.

That provision lines up with furlough deals recently accepted by other groups, including state fire fighters and Highway Patrol officers. UAPD is the sixth state employees' union to accept furloughs that will contribute to an estimated $839 million in payroll savings during the 2012-13 fiscal year.

Brown also agreed to create a Contracting Out Committee comprised of four UAPD representatives and four state officials. The "CoCo" will meet at least once every two months with an agenda to curb state job outsourcing.

The state's largest public employees' union, SEIU Local 1000, has been in talks with Brown for two weeks, but hasn't yet announced a furlough agreement.

Click here to open UAPD's summary of the side-letter deal.

Add another item to the long list of structural failings that have plagued the Board of Equalization headquarters: corroded pipes.

Department of General Services spokesman Eric Lamoureaux this morning confirmed that pipes in the building are deteriorated. General Services acts as the BOE's landlord.

"At this point it's isolated to waste lines," Lamoureux said, adding that no employee's health has been endangered.

The trouble surfaced on May 4 during the clearing of a clogged drain on the building's sixth floor. The pipe ruptured on the fifth floor, revealing extensive corrosion. Inspectors have since found corroded pipes on floors 7, 14, and 21.

The 24-story HQ at 450 N Street has a long history of structural woes: leaks, mold, burst pipes, unreliable elevators, trace levels of toxic substances and falling exterior glass panels.

RELATED POSTS
Glass falls from Board of Equalization HQ in Sacramento
More mold found at California Board of Equalization HQ
$10.6 million in repairs needed for BOE headquarters
Consultant evaluates BOE building
Another toxic turn for Board of Equalization headquarters
Board of Equalization director: We need new headquarters

PHOTO: The Board of Equalization building in Sacramento. / Sacramento Bee 2005, Jay Mather

With just 400 to 450 words for our weekly State Worker column, most of what we learn each week never sees print. Column Extras give you some of the notes, the quotes and the observations that inform what's published.

Today's State Worker column looks at the arguments for and against the state's hiring of retired annuitants and notes that all of the positions have flaws.

Here's a breakdown of $15 billion that state departments paid their employees in calendar 2011, with a breakout of how much of that went to retired annuitants:

SEIU Local 1000 spokesman Jim Zamora emailed this statement to The State Worker in response to this morning's U.S. Supreme Court decision against the union in Knox v. SEIU Local 1000:

Unfortunately this decision continues the attack on the right of public sector workers to act collectively to impact their workplace on important issues However, we can make the narrow adjustments the court requires on our dues system.

It should be noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed the right of corporations to put millions of dollars into the political system. Yet shareholders currently have no right to object to the spending of that money against their political or ideological beliefs.

The high court ruled that the union should have given nonmembers an immediate chance to object when it unexpectedly increased fees in 2005 to fight two ballot initiatives backed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and to raise money for the upcoming 2006 election campaigns. The union said that the yearly opportunity workers have to opt out was sufficient.

RELATED POSTS
U.S. Supreme Court rules against SEIU Local 1000 in fee case
U.S. Supreme Court takes SEIU fee hike case
SEIU Local 1000 wins union fee case in 9th Circuit Court

IMAGE: www.yolocourts.ca.gov

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that SEIU Local 1000 didn't appropriately notify members and fair-share payers when it temporarily raised fees in 2005 and 2006.

The 7-2 decision released by the high court this morning in Knox v. SEIU Local 1000 means that unions must give nonmembers an immediate chance to opt out of unexpected fee increases or special assessments required of workers in closed-shop workplaces, such at California's state government.

The court said that Dianne Knox and other nonmembers represented by Local 1000 didn't receive the legally required notice in advance of a $12 million assessment the 93,000-state employee union charged them to raise money for the union's political fund.

In 2007, a district court ruled against the union and ordered refunds of the money with interest. San Francisco's 9th Circuit Court reversed that decision as "practically unworkable."

The high court said today that union opt-out fee policies "approach, if they do not cross, the limit of what the First Amendment can tolerate." Then this summary passage:

California's public retirement systems' pension obligations were a combined $112 billion beyond the value of their assets in 2010, according to a report released this week, with anticipated retiree health costs adding another $77 billion in unfunded liabilities.

The study issued by the nonprofit, nonpartisan Pew Center for the States, says that the combined pension and health costs are both a cause for serious concerns.

California's total long-term retirement and health costs two years ago totaled $593.7 billion, according to data collected by Pew, but the funds paid just 75 percent of the recommended contribution into pension plans and 29 percent of what the state should have paid to fund retiree health benefits.

Experts generally agree that healthy pension funds keep their unfunded liabilities to 20 percent or less.

Nationally, states continued to lose ground in 2010 to cover the long-term costs. In fiscal 2010, states fell a combined $1.38 trillion short of having saved enough to pay their long-term retirement bills, up 9 percent from the year before.

Here's an email from state employee Paul Warrick to SEIU Local 1000 leaders regarding the 5-percent pay reduction that union and Brown administration negotiators have been discussing since June 9.

Warrick cc'd The State Worker on Tuesday when he sent the email to Local 1000. With his permission, we're publishing it here, unedited:

Dear President Walker and SEIU 1000 Board Members,

Thousands of state workers are concerned that you won't stand up for us, and force the state to honor our contract. You need only mention the furloughs of the two years preceding our current contract, our increased contribution towards our retirement, the rare Unit 1 cost of living adjustments over the last decade- plus, and the scaling back of benefits for new employees to completely justify a firm stand.

We are sick and tired of the threats of layoffs. We don't want new employees to be laid off, but those of us who have been here for the long haul are weary of layoffs being characterized as our responsibility, when it is not.

Please don't act complicity with the Governor by continuing to further sacrifice our benefits and wages for political appearances aimed at persuading the electorate to support the Governor's tax increase in November.

When the Governor begins his campaign for the tax initiative, his recitation of cuts and concessions mentioned in the first paragraph above is more than sufficient to illustrate that rank and file state employees have done their fair share in these tough economic times.

Besides, the electorate are clamoring for pension reform, not more furloughs. They won't be impressed.

PHOTO: Yvonne Walker / Sacramento Bee 2008 file, Brian Baer

The American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO and the International Association of Fire Fighters - FIREPAC have given a combined $600,000 to defeat a California measure that would ban payroll-deducted money from use on political spending, according to the latest campaign filings with the state.

Meanwhile, Stanford physicist Charles T. Munger Jr. (left) donated more than $237,000 to the group promoting the measure on the November ballot.

Munger is a major GOP donor who backed California's redistricting reforms and is prodding the state Republican Party to the moderate middle by downplaying issues such as abortion, gun rights and same-sex marriage. He also gave $119,469 last year to a group that is now aligned with conservative interests backing the initiative. Supporters have given about $3.3 million to the campaign so far.

The organized labor opponents of the measure have raised more than $7 million so far.

The initiative would ban both unions and corporations from contributing directly to candidates, although both could still fund independent expenditure campaigns.

But should it pass, the measure would be a bigger blow to labor interests because it eliminates their primary method of raising political spending money -- payroll deductions. Corporations raise the bulk of their cash for those purposes from top executives and corporate funds.

PHOTO: Charles Munger Jr. of Santa Clara listens to debate during the California Republican Party convention held at the Hyatt in San Francisco in February 2008. / Sacramento Bee file, Brian Baer

The group backing a measure that would ban using payroll-deducted money for direct contributions to political candidates has launched a new web video that hammers state employee raises while the state is mired in a deficit.

The video, titled "Deficit," is embedded below. It follows an Internet broadside recently fired off by labor unions.

The raises the pro-initiative web ad references are top-step hikes negotiated in the last rounds of contract bargaining in 2010 and 2011. For the most part, the wage increases offset higher out-of-pocket pension costs the unions accepted in their last contracts. The pension contribution increases started immediately after the deals took effect, while the pay hikes were deferred.

The initiative would ban both unions and corporations from contributing directly to candidates, although both could still fund independent expenditure campaigns to support candidates.

The measure would hit labor interests, however, because it eliminates their primary method of raising money -- payroll deductions -- that they would use on IEs. Corporations, by contrast, raise the bulk of their political spending money from top executives and corporate funds.

State firefighters, correctional officers and psychiatric technicians will take a 5 percent pay hit starting next month under agreements their unions reached Friday with Gov. Jerry Brown.

The news came at the end of a week that saw several unions engaged in intense negotiations with the administration over the wage reduction. The largest group, the 93,000-member SEIU Local 1000, had submitted a proposal to Brown but as of this afternoon had yet to finalize the deal.

The agreements with the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, the California Department of Forestry Firefighters and the California Association of Psychiatric Technicians all mirror a deal reached with the CHP officers' union last week. Under those terms, employees' pay is docked eight hours per month for one year, but the time can be taken later.

The deal with the firefighters marks the first time that group has been furloughed since Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger launched the policy in February 2009.

Firefighters' union spokesman Terry McHale said that members have "given and continue to give" with budget hits to department staffing and equipment the last few years.

"We understand the tenor of the times," McHale said.

Spokesman JeVaughn Baker declined to talk specifics about CCPOA's deal with Brown until the union's leadership could evaluate it.

From Sacramento's News10, this Wednesday night story:

The Legislature's 2012-13 state budget proposal eliminates language that Gov. Jerry Brown proposed that would have allowed him to furlough or make other payroll-cutting moves against rank-and-file state workers if their unions refused to negotiate a 5 percent pay reduction.

The unions have been pushing Democrats in the Legislature to make the change, which strengthens their position in negotiations with the administration to cut a total $839 million from the state's payroll costs.

Lawmakers could make more language tweaks between now and Friday's budget deadline or later enact legislation that restores some or all of the authority Brown wanted.

The budget language indicates that Democrats are hoping that all the unions will negotiate payroll reductions for the coming budget year without legislative intervention. But just as the union's hand is strengthened at the bargaining table now, Brown's position is weakened. The unions, which all have current contracts, could view the watered-down bill as a reason to seek more at the table, give Brown less or refuse any pay-cut deal at all.

There's a question in this for Brown, too: How much does he want explicit authorization to enact payroll reductions if bargaining fails? Is he willing to veto a budget that fails to give him that leverage? Or is he certain that all the unions will accept a 5 percent pay reduction even if there's no imposed furlough threat backing him up?

Here's the pertinent language in Assembly Bill 1464 and Senate Bill 1004, which was released this morning. We've underlined the key phrase:

With just 400 to 450 words for our weekly State Worker column, most of what we learn each week never sees print. Column Extras give you some of the notes, the quotes and the observations that inform what's published.

Today's State Worker column highlights the tension between labor unions and Democrats over whether the Legislature will confer furlough authority on Gov. Jerry Brown. At the end of the piece, we quote Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, weighing in on union talks with the governor over pay reductions.

The brief video above captures our question about the negotiations and Steinberg's remark at the very end of a Wednesday morning Capitol press conference on the budget.

SEIU Local 1000 has submitted a pay- and cost-reduction proposal to the Brown administration that includes flexible furloughs, but as of this morning has not received a response.

"Local 1000 has proposed that any reduction in pay would be in exchange for time off," the union said in an online statement. "Our proposal would maximize flexibility in how members take their time off."

The union also wants the administration to create a task force "with real authority to cut private contracting," and reduce the ranks of state retired annuitants and student assistants.

With just 400 to 450 words for our weekly State Worker column, most of what we learn each week never sees print. Column Extras give you some of the notes, the quotes and the observations that inform what's published.

The Bee's State Worker column today dissects some of the politics in play over Gov. Jerry Brown's state worker pay reduction proposal as lawmakers prepare to pass a budget on Friday.

Here's the proposed budget language that confers authority on the governor to furlough state employees, among other things, to cut $839 million in the state's employee compensation costs.

Worth noting: Unlike the furlough era under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, all 21 bargaining units that represent some 183,000 organized state employees have current contracts through July 1, 2 or 3 of 2013, adding a new legal wrinkle to any litigation that imposing furloughs would spark.

RELATED POST:
Live Chat: The Bee's Jon Ortiz hosts: California Supreme Court rules on furloughs

Section 3.90

We can never get everything we learn into a news story. "From the notebook" posts give you some of the extra details behind the news.

Today's story about the costs and politics of how the state uses retired annuitants in today's Bee is the product of two days of number-crunching and interviews, most of which didn't see print.

That's often the case when reporting complex stories. Reporters and editors sift through what's known and written, making dozens of decisions about what to leave in and what to take out.

We made a decision to take out the following paragraphs from today's piece, concluding that they were probably number-heavy details that general readers either wouldn't easily follow or care about.

State Worker blog users, however, tend to be more knowledgeable about the fine details of state government and the bureaucracy. So rather deleting these paragraphs forever, we thought they would make for good blog item:

... Some agencies relied relatively little on retirees. The California Department of Transportation, the Highway Patrol and the State Compensation Insurance Fund spent less than 0.1 percent of total payroll last year on retired annuitants.

Others relied more on them. The departments of Mental Health, Water Resources and Social Services all spent at least 1.4 percent of their payroll on retired annuitants - twice the statewide average.

Among moderately-sized agencies, Department of Community Services and Development spent about 12 percent of its payroll on 42 retired annuitants in calendar 2011, 17 times the state average and the highest rate of any department.

Spokeswoman Rachel Arrezola attributed that to heavy workloads triggered by federal monitoring standards for how the department is spending $275 million in Recovery Act money received a few years ago.

"Given the increased federal requirements, CSD needed temporary support to meet the temporary workload," Arrezola said.

Before that, the department employed just 13 retirees and currently has 27, about one-third the number of its regular state-employee staff.

"Our Recovery Act program will wrap up in December," Arrezola said. "We'll reduce the department's temporary support accordingly."

RELATED POST:
Audit: State could lose $93 million in Recovery Act money

Our story in today's Bee looks at Gov. Jerry Brown's proposal to eliminate all but the most essential retired annuitants from the state workforce. An analysis of state payroll figures showed that about 5,800 state retirees last year drew both a pension and a paycheck at an overall cost to departments of about $110 million.

If you haven't read the story, check it out and then weigh in via our poll:

SEIU Local 1000 negotiators resumed bargaining with Gov. Jerry Brown's administration this morning, and are seeking cuts in outsourcing and ending the use of retired annuitants and student employees as conditions to accept a pay reduction.

The union said in a memo to members on its website that negotiators also want "maximum flexibility" for employees to take unpaid time off to meet Brown's goal to cut workers' hours and pay by 5 percent. The governor has suggested achieving the savings by putting state workers into a four-day workweek schedule of 9.5 hours per day, but is open to alternatives.

PHOTO: Gov. Jerry Brown / 2010 Sacramento Bee file, Hector Amezcua

SEIU Local 1000 President Yvonne Walker held an online town hall meeting on Saturday to discuss negotiations with Gov. Jerry Brown's administration over his proposal to cut employees' hours and pay by roughly 5 percent per month.

Formal talks started that day and continued Sunday. There's been no word on the status of the discussions or any agreement between the state's largest public employee's union and the administration.

In the following video, Walker says the union first proposed a four-day, 10-hours-per-day workweek, but that Brown's May budget revision give it a "twist": four 9.5-hour days.

Still, Walker gives Brown credit for including organized labor in his budget plans, for explaining to the unions why he wants $839 million in employee compensation cuts ($401 million from general fund wages) and for negotiating with the unions.

"I'm going to be honest with you. The 5 percent cut, that's real," Walker said, "But what's not real is how you get there. I think the bargaining teams have been spending a lot of time over this past week trying to get to that dollar amount in different ways."

The organized labor coalition fighting a November ballot measure that would end payroll-deducted money for political spending -- the channel through which unions raise funds to play in politics -- has launched a new video blasting the proposal.

The unions' message attacks the measure as an unfair idea that would put new limits on the influence of organizations that speak up for working people while exempting self-interested elites.

As we mentioned in our Sunday story on the battle ahead over the proposition, look for labor to continue connecting the words like "exempt" and "Wall Street" to tar the measure. Backers, meanwhile, will continue to insist that it's an even-handed proposal that would limit influence by both unions and corporations because it bans both sides from making direct contributions to candidates.

The measure does nothing to limit independent expenditure spending. Since unions raise political money through payroll deductions of their members and corporations spend money donated by executives or taken from company funds, the proposition would hit organized labor harder.

For the first time, California's Highway Patrol officers are going to be furloughed.

The union reached an agreement at with Gov. Jerry Brown that furloughs Patrol officers 8 hours per month for one year starting July 1. Officers can bank the hours to take later, but their paychecks will reflect the 5 percent pay reduction regardless.

Department of Personnel Administration spokeswoman Lynelle Jolley confirmed the agreement. Jon Hamm, CEO of the California Association of Highway Patrolmen, said that the language of the deal encourages officers to take their banked furlough time before taking paid vacation.

The Brown administration had said that it wanted to avoid a policy that allowed banking furlough hours because that leads to employees taking less paid leave, creating a deferred cost for the state when the leave credits with monetary value are cashed out at the end of an employees' career.

Brown proposed putting most state workers on 9.5-hour shifts four days per week and closing departments on either Fridays or Mondays. Labor and Workforce Development Secretary Marty Morgenstern has said that the administration wants the workweek furlough or equivalent cuts of 5 percent negotiated in time for scoring in the budget, which lawmakers must pass by next Friday.

Until now, CAHP members had never been furloughed. Hamm said union members understand that they need to make a sacrifice, given the state's $15.7 billion budget crisis.

"Our members' reaction has been pretty positive (to the furlough)," Hamm said this afternoon. "I think this is sinking in. They're saying, 'I'm lucky to have a job.'"

The agreement will go to members for a ratification vote starting next week, Hamm said.

Thursday's CAHP agreement signals that other unions representing workers in 24/7 jobs -- prison officers, psychiatric technicians, firefighters and others -- are under pressure to take similar deals if they haven't already.

It may also complicate talks scheduled with other unions, including Saturday's scheduled negotiations with SEIU Local 1000, that center around Brown's plan instead of the arrangement worked out with CAHP.

Look for a series of announcements in the next few days from Gov. Jerry Brown and several bargaining units that they have reached agreements to reduce employees' compensation.

Brown proposed putting most state workers on 9.5-hour shifts four days per week and closing departments on either Fridays or Mondays. Labor and Workforce Development Secretary Marty Morgenstern has said that the administration wants the workweek furlough or equivalent cuts of 5 percent negotiated in time for scoring in the budget, which lawmakers must pass by June 15.

That doesn't leave much time.

SEIU Local 1000 is meeting with the administration Saturday. California Association of Psychiatric Technicians is meeting Tuesday. We've heard -- but haven't confirmed -- that other unions have already met with the administration and that deals with those groups will soon be announced.

The Association of California State Supervisors is running a poll on its website to gauge the popularity of various alternatives to Gov. Jerry Brown's four-day workweek proposal.

The Brown administration has said it will consider alternatives that accomplish the 5 percent cut in employee compensation costs the governor wants in the 2012-13 state budget, so ACSS asked its members for ideas and then used them for the online poll. The options include:

• Reinstituting the Personal Leave Program.
• Going to a one-day-per-month furlough.
• A five-day workweek with 7.5-hour shifts.
• Closing offices at 3 p.m. on Fridays.
• A 5 percent pay cut, working hours not impacted. (0.8 percent picked that option)
• Letting departments design their own savings plans.

Editor's note, 5:51 p.m.: This post has been updated with a response from the Brown administration.
Editor's note, 2:40 p.m.: This post has been updated with a statement by CAPS President David Miller.

An Alameda County judge has ruled that state engineers and scientists are owed back wages because they were excessively furloughed last year.

The decision, which also includes a ruling to restore all the furlough wages withheld from a few hundred employees' paychecks, means some 13,000 workers could receive roughly $10.5 million in back pay. The payments would not affect the state's general fund, because the employees due the money are paid from special funds.

In an email to The State Worker, Department of Personnel Administration spokeswoman Lynelle Jolley said, "We are evaluating the ruling and are likely to appeal."

The Superior Court decision affirms that "this was an Illegal act by Gov. Schwarzenegger that cheated employees," said Bruce Blanning, executive director of the engineers' union. "They're entitled to the money illegally withheld from them."

California Association of Professional Scientists President David Miller issued a statement, "The ruling proves what CAPS has contended all along: the Schwarzenegger furlough plan was misguided, didn't save money, and was illegal. We look forward to working with the Brown Administration to implement the decision and avoid illegal furloughs in the future."

It's worth noting, however, that the extra two days of furlough that make up the bulk of the back wages awarded in the unions' lawsuit occurred in April 2011, when Jerry Brown was governor. The Bee has contacted the administration, seeking comment on whether Brown will appeal. We'll update this post with the response.

Several jittery state workers have called and emailed in the last week asking whether their pay might be withheld if lawmakers don't reach a budget deal by the June 30 fiscal year-end.

The short answer: No.

But you can understand why some folks might be nervous. Former GOP Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger twice tried to apply a 2003 Supreme Court decision that says without a budget appropriation for salaries by July 1, the state shouldn't pay employees more than the federal minimum wage. Once a budget is in place, the state would issue back pay.

Schwarzenegger tried to use the minimum wage threat to pressure majority Democrats into budget concessions. Then the state's chief paycheck writer, Democratic State Controller John Chiang, refused to comply. Litigation ensued. The state never withheld the money.

Three factors are in play now that didn't exist when Schwarzenegger was in office.

First, the Legislature is highly motivated to pass a budget by the June 15 constitutional deadline, even if the numbers are a sham. If they don't, 2-year-old Proposition 25 kicks in, docking their pay until a budget (which would include a state worker salary appropriation) is approved.

Second, Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown wouldn't hold state workers' pay hostage. The proof? One month after taking office, Brown dropped the Schwarzenegger lawsuit to force Chiang's compliance.

Additional note: Many employee contracts, including SEIU 1000's guarantee no minimum wage for their duration.

With just 400 to 450 words for our weekly State Worker column, most of what we learn each week never sees print. Column Extras give you some of the notes, the quotes and the observations that inform what's published.

Our column in today's Bee notes that Gov. Jerry Brown said Wednesday that pension reform is high on his agenda and that this week's public pension vote in San Jose is a wake-up call to lawmakers.

Hat tip to San Francisco Chronicle reporter @Carla Marinucci who tweeted video of her brief interview with Brown:

Some 60 percent of State worker blog users correctly predicted yesterday that voters in San Diego and San Jose would approve pension reform measures that roll back benefits for those cities' employees.

But what to make of the vote? Dave Low, who chairs labor coaltion Californians for Retirement Security, said in a statement last night that both measures won on the strength of heavy spending by proponents.

Pension reformers are claiming both wins as part of a soul-crushing trend for unions and a sign of bigger things to come. Marcia Fritz of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility, sent this spreadsheet of local pension reform ballot measures in California since 2010. The numbers indicate that 18 of 20 such measures have passed with an average 65 percent of the vote.

As voters head to the polls today, all eyes are on public pension measures on local ballots in San Diego and San Jose, the nation's eighth-largest and 10th-largest cities respectively. The measures both would put new hires into cheaper defined contribution retirement programs.

The San Jose proposal also would impact current employees by forcing them to choose between much higher out-of-pocket contributions to keep a defined benefit pension or switch to the cheaper defined contribution plan. The San Diego plan freezes employee pay used to calculate city pensions for six years, although the city council could override that provision with a two-thirds vote.

The measures have statewide and perhaps even national implications for the public pension reform movement as check on the electorate's mood on the issue.

Click here to read more about the San Jose's Measure B and click here for details about San Diego's Proposition B. Then take our poll:

This in from Bee reporter Jim Sanders on our sister blog, Capitol Alert:

Hurting financially, an initiative campaign to convert the Legislature to part-time has shut down its paid signature-gathering effort, essentially killing any hopes of submitting petitions to the state by a July 2 deadline.

Click here for more details.

PHOTO: Assemblywoman Shannon Grove, R-Bakersfield, and Sacramento anti-tax crusader Ted Costa talk with Bee Capitol Bureau reporters on Feb. 21 about their ballot measure to make the Legislature part-time. / Sacramento Bee, Paul Kitagaki Jr.

The Association of California State Supervisors is reporting on its blog that Gov. Jerry Brown's administration has narrowed down which state workers' pay will be cut by more than 5 percent in the 2012-13 fiscal year:

Acting DPA Director Julie Chapman confirmed in a meeting today with your ACSS that potential cuts above 5% would target "agency secretaries and higher officials," not state supervisors, managers, and confidential employees.

In his May budget revision, the governor proposed furloughing workers two hours per week and reducing the state workweek to four days to cut employee hours and pay by 5 percent. He wants to bargain the cuts and is open to other ideas to achieve the savings as part of closing the state's $15.7 billion budget gap (and that's a charitable administration estimate).

The supervisors' association report answers one of the questions raised when Labor and Workforce Development Secretary Marty Morgenstern told reporters last month, "No one will excluded (from a pay reduction), except people at the very top. We'll have to do a little better than that."

Morgenstern didn't define who at the "very top" would be hit with a heavier pay cut. That sparked speculation in some quarters that excluded workers might get dinged more. Apparently, that's not the case.

Next question: How much is "a little better than that"?

PHOTO: Gov. Jerry Brown discusses his revised state budget plan during a Capitol news conference on Monday, May 14, 2012. / Associated Press, Rich Pedroncelli

We can never get everything we learn into a news story. "From the notebook" posts give you some of the extra details behind the news.

Our story in today's fiber/cyber editions of The Bee includes a reference to a request for the State Personnel Board to review a $5 million legal services contract between a private law firm and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and Hearing Officers in State Employment filed the request and the board overturned the contract, albeit so late that the law firm will continue its work until the agreement expires on June 30.

Here's the paper trail:

CASE's Feb. 14 request that the State Personnel Board review the contract
CDCR's Mar. 23 response to the request for contract review
CASE's Mar. 30 reply to CDCR's response
The State Personnel Board's decision to disapprove the contract

James Ward, who has been fighting for the state job he lost three years ago, has lost his case before the State Personnel Board.

The five-member panel's decision last month was a rarity because it overturned an administrative law judge's proposed ruling. Most of the time the board goes along with what SPB judges decide.

Wendell Phillips, Ward's attorney, said today that his client wants to continue the fight in civil court. He will seek back pay with interest well in excess of $1 million in addition to being restored to his former job.

Ward learned of the SPB ruling last week, which says the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation didn't violate civil service rules when staff mistakenly promised him a full-time permanent position then changed his status to temporary.

Related post: The State Worker: Personnel case takes on how the state handles hiring

Ward sold his San Diego practice to take the dentist job at Ironwood State Prison in Blythe and hasn't worked since his release in 2009. He contends that the department should have stuck to its original offer, even though he signed papers acknowledging the change in employment terms after receiving assurances the job would eventually become permanent.

An SPB judge sided with Ward, but the board itself decided to set aside the proposed decision and hear the case on Feb. 7. The panel concluded that Ward lost the right to challenge the matter when he signed off on the change and didn't challenge it in writing within 30 days.

Here's the ruling:

A watered-down measure aimed at arming hospital police is now in the state Senate's hands after clearing the Assembly without opposition.

Assembly Bill 2623, authored by Santa Rosa Democratic Assemblyman Michael Allen, cleared the lower chamber on 71-0 vote Thursday.

The measure requires the Department of Mental Health and the Department of Developmental Services to develop a policy for arming state hospital peace officers are working outside the secure area of the hospital.

That's not much different than current law, which leaves it to the departments to decide whether those 800 or so cops can carry a weapon on the job. None do.