CCPOA tentatively agrees to 5% cut

Jun 15th, 2012 | By | Category: Furloughs & Layoffs, Negotiations, Unions

Correctional officers, firefighters, psych techs, Jerry Brown tentatively agree to furloughs

Jon Ortiz | Sacramento Bee

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 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…(Full text at Sacramento Bee)

Sponsored Content

2 Comments to “CCPOA tentatively agrees to 5% cut”

  1. OH Yeh says:

    Time to sue CCPOA for the Screw Arnold Campaign;

    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:
    The SEIU, however, asks us to go farther. It asks us to approve a procedure under which (a) a special assessment billed for use in electoral campaigns was assessed without providing a new opportunity for nonmembers to decide whether they wished to contribute to this effort and (b) nonmembers who previously opted out were nevertheless required to pay more than half of the special assessment even though the union had said that the purpose of the fund was to mount a political campaign and that it would not be used for ordinary union expenses. This aggressive use of power by the SEIU to collect fees from nonmembers is indefensible.

    Read more here:

  2. cmf c/o says:

    Thanks for not protecting our wages again. We have already paid dearly these last 5years and got nothing for it other than larger deficets each year. Will our pensions be next? Will you finally defend us on something?