Pawlenty wants furloughs for state workers

Gov. Tim Pawlenty wants state employees in Minnesota's largest unions to help save the state money by taking about a month of unpaid leave in each of the next two years.

Under his proposal, members of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees would be required to take 24 unpaid days off each year of their two-year contracts. Also proposed: a wage freeze.

The two unions represent about 30,000 workers. Their current contracts expire this summer.

The unions condemned the proposed furlough. In updates to members, both called it a "bomb."

Paul Larson, the state's labor negotiator, confirmed that the state proposed furloughs during contract talks. He would not discuss details.

If the proposal goes through, the state, which faces a $4.6 billion deficit, would join companies nationwide that have asked workers to take unpaid leaves to cut costs. Among them: the Pioneer Press.

According to a February survey from Watson Wyatt Worldwide Inc., 10 percent of the U.S. companies asked already have implemented mandatory furloughs, and another 11 percent implemented voluntary unpaid time off.

"We're seeing more people furloughed because it is a way for employers to save money without having to lay off workers; it is sort of an in-between step," said Stephen Befort, a University of Minnesota labor and employment law professor.

Douglas R. Christensen, a partner in Dorsey & Whitney's labor and employment law practice group, said some of the companies moving toward furloughs already have laid off employees and "are operating very leanly."

State employees across the country are far from immune.

Public employees in California, Arizona, Georgia, Maryland, Iowa, Colorado, Utah, Ohio, Oregon, Maryland, Illinois, West Virginia, New Jersey and at least a half-dozen others states have faced the possibility or reality of forced unpaid time off. The results may save the states money, but they've raised hackles:

• In New Jersey, four union members were arrested this week after disturbing a meeting at which a two-day furlough for state workers was approved.
• In Iowa, courts were closed for a day as employees took furloughs.
• In California, independent agencies took the furlough plan to court before being forced to participate.

  "This is an attempt to balance the budget on our back and undermine all our union protections," AFSCME said in a bargaining report for its members in Minnesota.

"This is a severe assault on the livelihoods of our members," MAPE officials said in a letter to members this month.

Jim Monroe, executive director of MAPE, said of members' reaction: "Irate would probably be a mild word."

MAPE told members that the state's lead negotiator said Minnesota could impose the furloughs without negotiation.

"We believe this is just a clarification," MAPE's bulletin quoted the negotiator as saying.

Monroe disagrees, and labor law experts said whether the furloughs can be imposed without bargaining depends on the language in the current contracts.

In some states, furloughs have been imposed by executive order or through non-legislative boards. In others, they've been negotiated with unions or passed by the legislature.