250 State Workers to Lose Their Jobs

By Dan Gorenstein on Tuesday, October 13, 2009.

Governor John Lynch has announced he will be able to meet his goal to save the state $25 million dollars.

But he’s going to have to lay off 250 people to do it.

New Hampshire Public Radio’s Dan Gorenstein has more.

The proposed new deal for state employees was fairly straightforward.

Agree to the contract and take 19 furlough days- or about a 3.5% cut in pay.

Or reject the plan and brace for hundreds of layoffs.

Much to the chagrin of the governor, the employees- by a 59% margin- opted for the latter.

TAPE: I think it was a very fair contract...and I’m disappointed that’s not the contract going forward.

While the governor frequently mentioned how disappointed he was, he couldn’t say he wasn’t prepared.

Over the past several weeks, Lynch has met with state agency heads to develop a layoff plan in the event state workers did vote the deal down.

Due to the economy, demand for state services has skyrocketed.

But the governor says he’s confident the will maintain a similar level of services.

TAPE: the department heads have been very thoughtful in involving their managers while developing these layoff plans. The goals have been to minimize layoffs and the impact on state services offered to the people of New Hampshire.

State employees have their doubts.

TAPE: October 30, 2009, current patients will be transferred or discharged to other New Hampshire Hospital units. Reassignments or layoffs will occur....

The person who sounds like they are giving some military briefing from the front lines is Mark Barwell of the State Employees Association.

Barwell delivered that message in the statehouse press room just minutes after Lynch had assured reporters the impact to services would be minimal.

SEA President Gary Smith scoffed when told state workers could do more with less.

TAPE: things are going to fall off the tracks. Services are going to go unprovided. Kids are going to go unprotected. Elderly are going to freeze.

Top state officials say pink slips are already in the mail, with most of the 250 expected to come by the end of October.

Some departments will bear a heavier share of that load than others.

The governor says some agencies will be spared.

But Health and Human Services- the state’s largest department- definitely won’t be one of them.

Commissioner Nick Toumpas says staff is ramping up new initiatives- on line welfare registration for example- that he believes will help offset some of the layoffs.

But once you consider that HHS must also make another 20 million dollars in cuts beyond whatever comes from these layoffs, and the Commissioner gets candid.

TAPE: there could be some delays, we may not be able to do everything in as timely a fashion. You just can’t reduce the type of resources in this type of a climate when we are seeing caseloads go up and say there’s not going to be an impact.

One state employee described the vote as the first act of a five act play.

As far as the union is concerned, the next ‘act’ involves the Legislature.

The SEA will lobby lawmakers to suspend rules and dip into the state’s Rainy Day Fund to hire employees back and restore services.

As far as the governor is concerned, these cuts mean he hits his $25 million dollar goal in savings.

But he says state agencies will continue to restructure, which means additional layoffs are possible.

Lynch understands even among the employees who survive this round of cuts- many are worried about their jobs going forward.

On that point, the best assurance he could offer is that he doesn’t know what the economy will look like in a year, and he’ll continue to monitor the economy.

For NHPR News, I’m DG.

Comments (2)
Article Tools
Email
Print

Public Insight
comments

All comments are moderated before appearing on the site. Comments must adhere to the NHPR.org comment guidelines and terms of use.

very interesting

that state workers were threatened with 750 additional layoffs if they didn't agree to furloughs, but now those additional layoffs seem to have disappeared. Why are they no longer necessary? Could it have been just a scare tactic? If the gov had bargained in good faith, we probably would have a contract that trades limited furloughs for a limited number of layoffs.

Cutting agency budgets to the bone

If all the agency budgets had already been cut to the bone why is the Department of Transportation able to pay the General Fund back the money for 40 positions to avoid layoffs.