Malloy's Budget Balancing Plan Calls for the Elimination of More Than 6,500 State Workers

The governor's plan to cut 6,560 Connecticut workers, more than 14 percent of the state's workforce, would affect almost all levels of state government.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy released a revised proposal to balance Connecticut’s $1.6 billion deficit Thursday by eliminating 6,560 state positions through layoffs, retirements, unfilled vacancies, and the cancelation of part-time and per diem positions.

Although the job losses are about 1,000 less than a tentative proposal that would have called for the elimination of 1,000 vacant positions and layoffs of more than 6,500 state employees, the cuts are deep and severe and will affect almost all levels of state government.

The loss of 6,560 positions in state government represents more than 14 percent of the state’s workforce of 46,290 employees.

In a joint statement released with the summary of his proposal, Malloy and Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman said the massive layoffs were not “the road down which either of us wanted to go,” but that they were faced with no alternative to balance Connecticut’s budget after that would have plugged the gap through wage freezes and changes to employee health and benefit plans, but with a guarantee of no layoffs for state workers over the next four years.

“It’s the reason we both worked hard and in good faith to come to an agreement with SEBAC that would have avoided the layoffs of rank-and-file state employees and managers,” Malloy said. “But at this point, with no clear path to reach a ratified agreement with SEBAC, it’s our job to find a way to fill the $1.6 billion hole in the budget and ensure our budget is balanced honestly. Tomorrow we’ll send our full plan to the legislature, including these layoff numbers and additional service and programmatic cuts totaling $1.6 billion.  And then we’ll work as hard as we can to mitigate the impact these layoffs and cuts will have on the people of Connecticut.”

The state agencies hit hardest under Malloy’s proposal include: the Department of Transportation, which will lose 884 positions; the Department of Correction, which will lose 863 positions; the Department of Developmental Services, which will lose 500 positions; the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, which will lose 474 positions; the University of Connecticut, which will lose 345 positions and an additional 165 positions at its Farmington-based health center; and the Department of Children and Families, which will lose 362 positions.

Malloy’s proposal eliminates 6,060 positions from the Executive Branch, including 4,328 that are currently filled, 1,599 that are vacant, and 133 temporary or per diem jobs. In addition, the governor’s plan also asks the Judicial Branch to reduce 450 jobs, and the Legislative Branch to shave an additional 50 jobs. Malloy’s plan also refers to retirements, but it does not delineate which losses will be the result of layoffs, and which from retirements.

Included in the cuts are , the state’s newest recruiting class, which would put the overall state police workforce 213 troopers short of its statutory goal of 1,248 sworn state police officers; that mandate has not been met since February 2008.

Shortly after Malloy released the summary of his proposal, House Speaker Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden, released a statement urging state employees to ratify the concession agreement, because Malloy’s plan “would harm our state in significant ways.”

"The plan submitted by the Governor today makes it abundantly clear that the interests of the state, the people of Connecticut and state employees are best served by a concessions agreement between the Administration and state employees,” Donovan said. “…That is why I am urging the Governor and SEBAC to reach an agreement - that is the most responsible action available.”

, Matt O’Connor, a spokesman for the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition, which represents the bulk of the state’s unionized employees, said that union leaders remained “committed to a mutual agreement with the administration” to avoid all layoffs, but O’Connor said that no negotiations between the Malloy administration and union leaders were currently taking place.

Malloy has repeatedly stated that he would not negotiate a new agreement with the unions

Donovan said that the legislature would conduct a public hearing on specific items in Malloy’s plan on or before Aug. 15.

A summary of the governor’s budget balancing proposal is attached as a PDF to this article; Malloy said he would submit the full plan, including programmatic details, to the General Assembly Friday.

R Eleveld July 19, 2011 at 07:02 PM
Here Here as they say in England. The problem is that many State employees, as reported, seem to put in a less productive work week than in the non union private sector. This has been reported anecdotally. I got another call today on this exact issue. What about the multiple layers of management that no longer exists in corporate america. Productivity regresses to the mean, and then the mean moves lower. We need to think smart. Provide the services, outsourced if necessary, and have the 'unions' bid on the work like every other organization. I was at Disney a few years ago. The shop foreman and I were talking. His department refreshes the rides, and fabricates various elements. Each scheduled job is bid out to the private sector AND his shop. His shop bids and wins or loses with risk of getting laid off. Its called competition. This keeps ticket prices lower than otherwise, granted they are expensive! This also benefits the stake holders, including the shareholders which included the foreman and most of the people in the shop. Shall we outsource mowing?, plowing?, basic road repair? Why can't we outsource more of the paper pushing functions of the DPW, DOT, DMV, the DRS, the Insurance, Banking, Lottery, and Info. Tech. to name a few? Look at this list of state agencies: http://www.ct.gov/ctportal/cwp/view.asp?a=843&q=246466 Which ones do we really need today?
R Eleveld July 19, 2011 at 07:14 PM
Malloy is praying that the economy picks up, (read as the rich on the gold coast), thus bailing him out of the mess he is unwilling to face. The budget system used is what I call political accounting. To borrow from "tchjjal": "Wow! Our current year spending budget (FY2011) is $19.1 billion. The 1st year of the next 2 year budget signed by Malloy (FY2012) is $20.14 billion. Where is the decrease in spending when our state is well above 9.2 percent unemployment and people are leaving the state like rats on a sinking ship? ... Malloy... will not cut a significant amount of "union" jobs because they are the ones who put him in power."
Jim G. July 19, 2011 at 07:26 PM
(It's "hear, hear," Ron.) :) I'm pleased to see you admit the basis for your claims is anecdotal, at least in this case. Everyone "knows a story" about this kind of inefficiency, waste, fraud etc. but the sober, complete investigations rarely back up what "everyone knows." (Quite the opposite, in some cases... but it doesn't stop Cousin Bob's story about the lazy janitor from trumping facts.) I don't, and haven't, seen any evidence that state government is more "over managed" than any equivalent private sector company. Yes, there are companies that have flattened the hierarchy (often to the detriment of their operation) or (I'm looking at you, HP) have claimed to without really reducing the proportion of management. There are companies, typically older and well-entrenched ones, that go through eras of overmanagement. But overall, large companies tend to stay at a consistent level of management hierarchy. I've looked; I don't see any evidence that CT is grossly overloaded with managers relative to the numbers of subordinates and the volume of work each department handles. Anyone got something besides Cousin Bob's story or a generalized hatred of gummint to substantiate the claims?
R Eleveld July 19, 2011 at 07:53 PM
Jim, I should thank you hear, LOL No disagreement on the anecdotes. Without a 'profit' motive -- This is not only financial -- personal or organizational, it is difficult to achieve high productivity. I have said before Unions do not Advocate Excellence, they Motivate Mediocrity. It is human nature to do as little as possible. I am guilty as charged, as I am sure you are also, as we all are. The difference is that a profit motive as noed above keeps us on task for our own persoinal gain. I have written in other articles here on Patch about this. You may have missed the article in the Hartford Courant about management layers in the State of CT vs other states, and the private sector. CT was relatively bloated based upon the comparisons. I have also been told again, anecdotal of course, the sae thing. I will say thank you Hartford Courant for your analysis. That is not anecdotal.
Chris July 24, 2011 at 05:01 AM
Wake up and smell the bacon Jay!!!!!! I have been working in the private sector all my life and I have not recieved any sort of raise in the 7-9 years!!!! While my heathcare costs have risen substatially and the benefits have gone down. The unions need to look at the private sector to see what really going on and not in thier little 'whoa is me' bubble'!!!!!!


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »