A look at the layoff protections


Here’s the language:

§21.2 Workforce Reduction Limitation





  1. digusted says:

    But we have gay marriage which was far more important than getting the state fiscial house in order, or keeping people working.

  2. digusted says:

    this is all a matter of pork………no matter how you look at it, under the table dealings, under the desk dealings so the vanderbilts, cuomos, and bloombergs can keep there billions. They give political campaign dollars to these bozos we elect, so what do you do about it, what the Let the people vote campaign has stated, if they have no value,no family values, no morals, are inline with the devil, in what ever form, vote the opposite person, or vote in a person who has strong values, that is the clearest message you can send to politicans who do not work for the people, just the money

  3. digusted says:

    Cuomo talks big about reform, about merging localities, but that will never happen because guess where the biggest patronage mill is located, but they are jobs…………

  4. digusted says:

    I am not in csea or pef, was at one time, What I say is the following, the furloughs are the issue, layoffs are going to happen either way, you fought hard in court to override Patterson, and they give it right back as a concession, it should also only be a three year contract or less to see what happens.

  5. edwin raub says:

    Do what Council 82 did and vote it down; make them come back to the bargaining table and offer you guys a fair deal.

  6. optivity says:

    (2) years of layoff protection seems about right but come 2013 when the recommendations from SAGE & Deloitte are implemented, watch out!

    “Deloitte Technical Recommendation: Data Center Consolidation

    The new model will run on data center infrastructure consolidated from more than 50 locations across the state using a hybrid model of a public cloud (externally hosted), a private cloud (NYS hosted, shared servers/storage), and dedicated hardware housed in a primary Tier 3 facility and a secondary disaster recovery facility.”

  7. ResidentX says:

    “Government Gangsters” – youre talking like a governor gangster. Still towing the threat line. I cant be any clearer. I firmly believe that no way no how does he start right in on laying 10k off. That would be political suicide. But you keep saying it if you want it to be true.

  8. ResidentX says:

    “Unhappy PEF Member” – suggest you watch out. The fox doesnt like people spreading mis-information. FACT The private sector has been adding 100s of thousdands of jobs in the last year. FACT. The layoffs you speak of have been imposed on the PUBLIC SECTOR WORK FORCE.

    So we understand this clearly… the private sector has ADDED nearly 1 million jobs over the last 8 or 9 months. Over that same time period the PUBLIC SECTOR has seen half a million or more layoffs.

    so lets stop acting like “woe is the private sector.” and in another FACT. The private sector has seen on average… pay increases in EVERY year of the last TEN except ONE, in 2009 there was a ONE PERCENT reduction in compensation on average.

    The public sector is being CRUSHED comparatively.

  9. sumner says:

    @Unhappy PEF Member welcome to my world.
    @adkgrl – yes I am a state worker. But I’ve been in private and in the public sector. I’ve seen unions reject offers, refuse to give up any benefit earned and businesses close, shut down plants, move elsewhere and tear down the structure so protestors have no where to go . That can’t happen in NYS, so yea it’s a ‘smug’ attitude. If you didn’t have Civil Service protection of your job by enforcing seniority for layoffs and rehiring and you knew that if you were laid off the job could be posted on Open Competitive lists or public job sites the attitude about ‘make us a better offer’ would not so easily accepted. Without those Civil Service protections we could be among the 1,000′s looking for a job. So yea… it’s a ‘smug’ attitude… and you know it.

    @IT Worker – you refer to a unionized private business that always offer something when something is taken away. Tell that to the IT employees of Key Services who were recently given 60 days notice that all support operations were moving to a call center in India. The same was done at Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield when I was there 10 years ago. Blame it on high speed internet and digital phones I guess. They have no ‘first rehired’ protections.

    @Civil Servant – I fully understand the added costs of Healthcare. With the new contract the Empire plan will lose it’s ‘Grandfathered status’ under ‘Obamcare’ because not increasing copays or deductibles by more than 5% is a criteria.

    - Simply Vote your conscience.. I’m not trying to influence.. just sharing a different viewpoint.. (My YES vote will cancel out at least one of your NO votes… or is it your NO Vote canceling my YES vote :)

  10. Was a No, now a YES.. says:

    It is imperative to have a contract in place. There is a bill in front of the assembly to strip us of the Triborough Agreement. If this happens and we do not have a contract in place, it is a blank check for the Prince to increase healthcare to whatever, cut pay, freeze pay, freeze steps, longevity, furlough, etc.

    With a contract in place, he can not implement what will be substantially more draconian cuts to our salary and benefits!!!!

  11. chmpmttn says:

    Government Gangsters, “OK, the scenario: both unions vote it down. Layoffs notices go out immediately, 10,000 are given 20 days notice.

    What do you do next if you were lucky enough not to get laid off? What do you expect exactly on day 2?”

    Go to work, do my job and attempt to get promotions to improve my lot in life.

    Basically the same thing as if the contract is accepted, except in that case I’ll be spending less money in the local economy since I will have less to spend.

  12. Ex-State Worker says:

    DEC PEF Employee

    Also what you do not seem to understand is that when your friends are laid off because of a NO vote, they may suffer short term, but will quickly find a job somewhere. But a YES vote will cause devistating effects for decades to come.

    Arguements can be made about each vote. How ever you vote, do it wisely, not just because you want to save some jobs.

  13. ResidentX says:

    “Was a No, now a YES..” – there are two bills. Both presented by a group of republicans representing of all things

    - real estate, wall street and banking (these are the people responsible for the melt down)
    - the drug industry and a ceo of a medical corporation. (these are the people bankrupting America)

    these bills have been presented nearly every year. They will be voted down… again. So easy with the fear mongering.

  14. ResidentX says:

    “sumner” – you do realize that they will always move jobs to a place that will do it cheaper. The jobs havent gone from here to somewhere else in the country. These corporations feeding off the tax payer dime are sending jobs to places where they can pay a bowl of rice as a weekly salary. You standing up for yourself isnt going to stop that.

    voting in favor of huge give-backs is only digging the hole deeper between the have’s and the have nots. Its short sighted and quite frankly why the poor continue to be poor and the wealthy continue to get more and more wealthy … because people like you will vote out of fear EVERY SINGLE TIME. They can count on that like they can count on the sunrise.

  15. Government Gangsters says:


    That’s great that you believe that, but it’s either cheerful optimism or blind naiveté. So far Prince Lasagna has yet to back down on anything or refrain from doing anything he said he would. That’s a ballsy bluff to call. And why would I want it to be true? I already received my walking papers but was escorted from the gallows before the door fell from under me. If PEF votes the contract down I’m likely out of a job I really like that took me two years to get. I’d like to keep my job if I can, even if it’s only for another year or two. Remember, I agree with 90% of the things you say, and the facts are on our side but PR is not. The unions need to do a better job at PR, they are horrible at it, and we are now paying for it.

    So you’re not going to “fight” for a better contract, whatever that means in practical terms exactly?

  16. Paying Attention says:

    chmpmttn: isn’t that retaliation by the governor?
    How can the state operate minus 10,000 employees?
    If it can, then why does he keep them employed if they agree with him?
    To do what?
    Andy was focused on SSM not jobs.
    Let him layoff 10,000 people and see where he’ll be standing in 3 yrs — try unemployment line. That’s where.
    Don’t cave to bully tactics.
    He’s going to layoff even if you vote yes.
    Bet on it.

  17. WTG says:

    @ Was a no, now a YES. Before you change your vote, know this. This bill will never see the floor of the Senate or Assembly. First, it was decided that it be unconstitutional sbould it pass. Second every sponsor or co-sponsor is a Republican in a heavily Democratic Assembly. Even if it were legal it would have been shot down by the Dems. The Triborough Amendment was a court decision enacted into law. If by some miracle it were repealed the no-strike clause of the Taylor Law goes with it. Guess who has the upper hand then? You are falling for the fear mongering tactics of the Dark Prince and the union leadership whose credibility is riding on your yes vote. Don’t vote yes out of fear

  18. @Was a No, now a YES..


    EVERY State Contract has a continuation clause, and every one was signed with the understanding that it would continue until replaced.

    You are falling for the fear mongering. You have NOTHING to fear on that account.

  19. digusted says:

    triboro amendment takes a constitutional convention to override, and multiple years of passing the bill, politicians are stupid but not that stupid they want to be re-elected.

  20. chmpmttn says:

    Government Gangsters, “chmpmttn:

    No contract is a better contract in this instance. My purpose in this is to vote on the contract and do my job. It is the Union’s purpose to fight for the better contract based on what the membership votes for. This is what we pay our dues for.

  21. @ Was a NO, now a Yes..

    What WTG said.

    Triborough is not an agreement between the unions and the state. It is an amendment to Civil Service law that is the result of a 1972 PERB ruling that the “No Strikes” clause of the Taylor law gave too much power to the employer in contract negotiations. The employer at the time had the power to unilaterally change working conditions (pay, benefits, etc) if no contract was in place and labor had no recourse.

    The Triborough DECISION by PERB is the basis for the Triborough AMENDMENT. Even if the Triboroguh amendment was repealed – which is extremely unlikely – the case law of the Triborough decision would remain, meaning rules almost exactly like those used due to the Triborough amendment.

    The only way the state could truly end Triborough would be if they also repealed the “No Strikes” clause in Taylor, handing labor extraordinary new power. Look at what happens now during wildcat strikes that flout Taylor. MTA has done it repeatedly, and always gets contracts far greater than anything state employee unions have ever obtained. It’s amazing what the employer will agree to when labor shuts something down by striking for a few days.

    Contrary to all of the rhetoric you see from conservatives about Triboroguh being “expensive”, they all know it would be far more costly if we had the right to strike. Contracts would be settled with far better raises, and would have to be settled far sooner, instead of how things work now where the employer waits a year or two, attempts to not offer a retroactive raise for the year or two it took to “negotiate” along with raises that many times don’t keep up with inflation.

    If anything, under Triborough, the employer still has too much power, as there is still no reason for the employer to negotiate in good faith if they don’t want to. Triborough only has a slight advantage for labor in times such as this, when the employer is trying to reduce compensation – which doesn’t happen very often. In better times when an employer might have to increase compensation, the employer holds all the cards and can drag their feet – hence why some unions pressed for a binding arbitration law for employees in their bargaining unit. Unfortunately, neither CSEA or PEF is covered by binding arbitration. PERB can make a non-binding ruling, but ultimately for CSEA and PEF the legislature has the authority to impose a contract to resolve an impass.

  22. DEC PEF Employee says:


    You are correct “Ex-State Worker”. I don’t understand it. I don’t understand how you can be so cavalier about what unemployment means to the unfortunates who get laid off and so dramatic about the so-called “devastating effects” caused by this contract proposal for those who will still have a job. That makes no sense whatsoever.

  23. Disgusted:

    Neither Taylor nor Triborough are constitutional laws. They are both Civil Service law. However, see my above post – the chance that Triborough is going anywhere is slim to none, so I agree with you on that point.

  24. Was a No, now a YES.. says:

    Now is the time for those Triborough bills to pass. Especially if the contract is voted down, we will be even more of a scourge and political capitol to push anti-union bills will be/are at an all time high….

  25. ResidentX says:

    “Government Gangsters” I am in a similar boat in that IF the layoffs DID actually happen I am probably hit. Ive looked at everything that is out there including personal observation of behind the scenes layoffs etc.

    This is what i see…

    The governor does intend on facility closures etc. He could perform those to a degree and scare unions into voting for this contract. Ive seen ZERO layoffs that werent due to facility closures etc. He performs these that he intended all along under the guise of it affecting the whole work force.

    People need to remember… it isnt Cuomo pulling the manipulation strings… its two clowns who spent many years bullying the private sector work force. The problem is the end game. The end game here is Cuomo would like to either remain governor or run for national office. The obvious appearance shows national office goals. He simply CANT run for national office on a record of mass layoffs. Compromise (as was forcibly stated by the general population during this budget debate) and jobs are going to be the leading factors in making a national splash. They say its like 3 jobs lost for each layoff. So if he were to layoff 10k he would essentially be affecting 40k plus. THAT is a HUGE Impact. THAT will not afford him a whole lot of political capital to run for national office. In fact it will prove quite damaging. They can play hard ball right up until his bluff is called. At which point he will be forced back to the bargaining table to prevent mass layoffs and you should expect a song and dance about how the surplus will aid in offsetting costs not achieved through expected cuts to the work force and he will turn THAT into a positive for himself.

    step back from the immediate situation and look at the bigger picture. We want fair. Thats all. Im pretty sure the general population knows this.

  26. HomeTownGirl says:

    Our names are not important, our item numbers are.
    There will be layoffs whether there is a yes or no vote.
    Vote no!

  27. Lisey says:

    I am a state worker, but also a taxpayer. State Government should not be a welfare system, existing to give everyone jobs. If a position is not necessary, it should be eliminated. If the position is needed, the person should be paid appropriately for the job they are doing. If that means layoffs, so be it, but they should be done “surgically” with consideration for the need for the position.

  28. I took the incentive says:

    @Was a No, now a YES.

    PLEASE pay attention. They can not repeal Triborough and just cut the Unions. That is not the law. Please stop spreading nonsense.

  29. Phillip Sheridan says:

    @NYS Techie – So that’s what you resort to when you don’t have a factual response. I only wish there was audio so I could hear you sing.

    @ResidentX – Those states didn’t have Triboro protections,granted, but the legislatures and governors removed health benefits from items that could be collectively bargained so they could impose harsher changes on the unions that they could through collective bargaining. Right here in New York the legislature and the governor removed the one year notice provision for closing correctional facilities and psychiatric centers by using the simple words “not withstanding” if you don’t think that Cuomo wouldn’t do that to provisions of the Taylor law to get what he needs in terms of health care concessions or other concessions you are fooling yourself.

    I have been around long enough to know that if something gets in the way of a determined foe they will find a way around it, this includes Triboro protections.

  30. Chester Snodgrass says:

    I think that the folks who believe that Cuomo will not go through with layoffs are sadly mistaken.
    Cuomo’s goal is to crush the unions and layoff government employees.
    Doesn’t anybody remember that one of our past presidents, held in high regard by many, fired all the air traffic controllers when they conducted an illegal strike?
    What could be better than extracting big union concessions, and then lay off people anyway!

RSS feed for comments on this post.