“Yesterday afternoon, I submitted a request to Civil Service for the Layoff Avoidance Measure of withholding performance adjustment pay increases (or merit increases) for the upcoming year. I sincerely regret that this is necessary for a third year in a row, but I made this request to minimize the impact of budget pressures on our levels of staffing and on the agency.”
–Louisiana Workforce Commission executive director Curt Eysink, in a September 26 email to his employees informing them they would not be receiving 4 percent merit increases.
“I’m not going to cast a vote to set a precedent for one employee.”
–State Civil Service Commission member Scott Hughes, less than week later, speaking out against a proposed $19,430 annual pay increase (40.8 percent) for a Louisiana Workforce Commission mid-level manager. Despite Hughes’s opposition, the compliant Civil Service Board rubber stamped the pay increase from $47,570 to $67,000 for the employee described by Civil Service assistant director Jean Jones as barely meeting minimum job standards.
Discover more from Louisiana Voice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Louisiana Voice 
40.8%?! This wasn’t a pay adjustment due to increased workload, obviously. Aren’t those capped at 10%? What was this, then? I’m glad to read Hughes’ opposition statement (kudos to Hughes for having a rare sense of fairness), but I would love to know the reason for the request.
Personally, I have a real problem with rank and file state employees having been told for years now to do more with less, while mid-to-upper management is almost always asked pretty please with a cherry on top, in the form of at least a 5%, but often a 10%, pay increase. Nine times out of ten, they only become responsible for a larger work area, but they still push down the work.
Is there a way to take a look at pay adjustments that have been given for doing more with less at least since merit increases were discontinued?
Ah. I see I have the explanation in the next article.