Gibbons & Pay Cuts

Since I'm a state employee and my sister is a teacher, I have a personal stake in Governor Gibbons' plan to try to cut all state employees' salaries by 6%. I'm not too fond of it, but I've expected a freeze, and a cut in the face of Nevada's budget issues is not particularly surprising.

What I don't like is the false alternative being presented: layoffs or pay cuts. There's another option, and its one being used in California - unpaid mandatory days off. If the Governor wants to cut labor costs, then it's fair to expect less services. A 6% pay cut equates to 15 unpaid days off in the year for me.

Why is it fair? It preserves pay rates which are comparable to the private sector. It spreads the burden around the whole state, as there's a 6% reduction in services to go along with the 6% reduction in pay. It doesn't amount to more work (as in our department, we're absolutely buried with work at the moment) for less pay, it is simply less hours being worked - a situation shared in the private sector by some 8 million Americans right now.

6% off the top is "tough luck." 6% unpaid time off at least trades cash for leisure. That there's fewer clerks at the DMV, or the welfare office, or working a a time in the NHP, or the like is a consequence. To save labor costs in the long run, you need to cut services - not just reduce pay.