Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Layoffs’ Category

Jindal Retirement Alternative Plan Enhancement (J-RAPE)

Posted in Civil Service, Governor's Office, Layoffs, Privatization, Retirement on February 22, 2012| 10 Comments »

Cindy Rougeou, executive director of the Louisiana State Employees’ System (LASERS) has been openly critical of Gov. Bobby Jindal’s retirement package for Louisiana Civil Service employees.

Jindal has offered sweeping retirement reforms for some 58,000 active employees—reforms which Rougeou says targets workers who are barred from lobbying on their own behalf, which attempt to force state employees to work longer for reduced benefits, which give legislators false information on the percentage that employees contribute to the cost of their retirement, which ignore that the current unfunded accrued liability (UAL) came about because of legislators’ reneging on their obligation to pay the state’s required contribution, and which violate both the Louisiana and U.S. constitutions.

What’s more, Jindal is concentrating only the LASERS’ $6.8 billion unfunded accrued liability, which is just over a third of the total UAL for the four state retirement systems—teachers, school employees and state police are the others.

But it seems there may be one more: The Jindal Retirement Alternative Plan Enhancement.

Also known as J-RAPE, as in raping state taxpayers, this is an unofficial plan to enhance former legislators who the governor feels were loyal to him before either losing their re-election bids or becoming term limited.

In other words, while the state struggles to find funds to balance the budget for yet another year, the administration sees nothing wrong with padding the state payroll with pathetically unqualified former legislators—so they can enhance their state pension.

Example: former Rep. Noble Ellington spent 24 years in the legislature. If his three highest earning years in the legislature averaged $35,000, he would qualify for a yearly retirement of $21,000.

But wait. He somehow managed to land a job as second in command to Jindal ally Insurance Commissioner Jim Donelon at a cool $150,000 per year. If he remains in that position another three years—five years if Jindal’s retirement reform passes—he will be able to retire at $105,000 or $108,750 per year, again, depending on passage of Jindal’s retirement package. Either way, that’s a 400 percent increase in retirement benefits as a political favor from our fiscally-responsible governor.

J-RAPE.

Then there is Jane Smith, another legislator-with fewer years than Ellington-who was term limited but nevertheless landed a $107,500 per year job as deputy secretary of the Department of Revenue, a stroke of good luck that will bump her retirement from $10,500 to $43,000—in addition to her benefits from the teachers’ retirement system. Both she and Ellington possess woefully inadequate experience or qualifications for their positions.

J-RAPE.

An infuriating aspect of these—and other appointments—is that the average retirement for state civil service employees is around $19,000 per year. Yet, neither the appointees nor the governor show any remorse for such blatant misuse of political patronage—all while Jindal holds himself up to voters as the citadel of ethics and all things good and decent.

Troy Hebert is another. After 11 years in the legislature, he was eligible for a whopping $9,650 per year in retirement benefits. But then he was appointed Commissioner of the Office of Alcohol and Tobacco Control. His $107,000 job will qualify him for an annual pension of $40,000 if he stays on for four years, an increase of more than $30,000. If he remains for nine years, giving him 20 years of state service, his retirement would be $53,500.

Another aspect of all this that is particularly grating is that no one in the media asks the obvious questions: How can you possibly justify thumbing your nose at taxpayers and state employees by handing out these six-figure jobs to political cronies? Where is that transparency, that accountability now?

When someone like Edwin Edwards, probably the most media-accessible, media-friendly governor in this state’s history did things like this, reporters were all over him like red beans on rice.

But when Jindal, who seldom holds press conferences because he despises reporters, abhors the media, loathes the fourth estate, does it, no one says a word.

The silence is deafening.

Where’s the outrage?

J-RAPE.

Read Full Post »

State hospital administrator suspends employees’ First Amendment rights by prohibiting attendance at rally

Posted in Civil Service, Governor's Office, Layoffs, Teague, Transparency on February 15, 2012| 2 Comments »

The administrator of a state hospital may have overstepped his authority and placed his office in violation of state civil service rules when he sent a short email to hospital employees two weeks ago.

His email actually pre-dated by eight days the email of LSU Systems President John Lombardi that we wrote about last week. It seems to be the trend these days that the administration of Gov. Bobby Jindal will tolerate no outward signs of resistance from state employees.

This, of course, is the governor who touts his openness, his transparency, his accountability while attempting to suspend the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: that pesky little guarantee of free speech and free assembly.

Not that he would ever dirty his hands with issuing a direct order; he’s far smarter than that. That’s what his subordinates are for. People like Lombardi who last week sent out an email admonishing his LSU troops to be thankful they still have jobs and not to be critical of Jindal’s budget cuts.

Now we’ve learned that on Feb. 1, Larry Dorsey, administrator of University Medical Center (UMC) in Lafayette issued an even sterner memorandum to the employees of his facility which is facing the elimination of 130 positions.

Word of the impending layoffs at UMC went out in mid-January in the form of an email from Dr. Roxane Townsend, CEO of the Health Care Services Division of the LSU Health System.

In all, seven facilities will be affected by the layoffs, Dr. Townsend said. Those include, besides UMC, Bogalusa Medical Center, Earl K. Long Medical Center in Baton Rouge, Lallie Kemp Regional Medical Center in Independence, Leonard J. Chabert Medical Center in Houma, Interim LSU Public Hospital in New Orleans, and W.O. Moss Regional Medical Center in Lake Charles.

Dorsey was quick to point out to Capitol News Service that there will not be 130 employees who will lose their jobs because some of the eliminated jobs are vacant positions that will be abolished and that some employees would be allowed to “bump” those with less seniority in order to save their jobs. He did not say how many would actually lose their jobs or how many unfortunate souls would be bumped.

The layoffs at the seven facilities, scheduled to take effect on March 5 once they have been approved by the Director of Civil Service is being proposed due to the inability of the Health Care Services Division to realize $29 million in additional federal funding for care delivered to the uninsured and Medicaid population during the current 2011-12 fiscal year, Dr. Townsend’s memo said.

But back to that Feb. 1 memorandum, issued as an email to all UMC employees. Here it is in its entirety:

“I have had discussions with our attorneys concerning a citizen organizing a rally outside of the hospital. I am directing all employees and physicians not to attend this event either on or off the clock. There are potential serious legal issues with our participating in such an event. Violation of this directive may result in discipline (sic) action against you.” (Boldface emphasis Dorsey’s.)

The rally, organized by private citizens who use the hospital, was held on Feb. 2, the day after Dorsey’s email.

Dorsey told Capitol News Service that he issued the directive on advice of his legal staff.

Perhaps his in-house counsel should have sought legal counsel of her own.

The directive, it turns out, is in direct contravention of the provisions of General Circular 2012-004, issued on Feb. 9 of this year by the Louisiana Department of Civil Service and drawn directly from the state lobbying act: R.S. 24:56. That date, by the way, just happens to coincide with the issuance of the Lombardi email.

The circular, re-issued in anticipation of the 2012 legislative session in order to clarify state classified employees’ rights and restrictions, says that classified employees “are prohibited from engaging in efforts to support or oppose a candidate, party or faction in an election.”

But in the very next sentence, the circular says, “These constitutional restrictions do not prohibit a classified employee from expressing themselves either privately or publicly on issues that may be pending before the legislature or other body.”

The circular cautions employees than when speaking publicly on an issue, “make sure you are addressing matters that are of public concern and not personal to your particular work environment.” The elimination of positions at a state hospital would appear to come under the banner of public concern.

The circular also poses several questions, one of which asked if a classified employees attends a public rally, would it be permissible for the employee to “carry a sign, cheer and boo?”

The circular answered that rhetorical question by saying it is permissible for employees to carry signs, cheer and boo so long as the same standard of public concern is observed.

The circular said a classified employee is allowed to be a member of an organization that lobbies before the legislature but that the employee cannot personally lobby legislators.

Active classified employees are allowed to attend rallies conducted by the Retired State Employees Association, even “on the steps of the Capitol so long as the employee is a member of the association and provided the employee is on approved annual leave if the rally is held during normal duty hours.”

To the question, “Would attending a rally be considered lobbying?” the circular said, “No, it would not. A rally is a gathering of people to inspire enthusiasm for a cause.”

The circular also said that classified employees are allowed to place signs in their yards in opposition to or in support of proposed legislation.

The legal counsel at UMC could well be up for special recognition and perhaps even a merit raise from the Jindal administration for doing such an effective job of stifling employees’ First Amendment rights.

Read Full Post »

Morgan Keegan report on OGB’s fate is at DOA but don’t expect its release; it’s ‘part of the deliberative process’

Posted in Governor's Office, Layoffs, Legislature, Legislators, OGB, Office of Group Benefits, Privatization, Transparency on February 8, 2012| 1 Comment »

The long-awaited report by Morgan Keegan on the proposed fate of the Louisiana Office of Group Benefits (OGB) has been turned over to the Division of Administration, LouisianaVoice has learned.

LouisianaVoice has made a formal request under the Louisiana Public Records Laws for a copy of the Morgan Keegan report. That request was directed on Wednesday to Commissioner of Administration Paul Rainwater.

But don’t expect the report to be released willingly. Rainwater, in all probablity will fall back on the erroneous claim that, like the notorious Chaffe & Associates report of last year, it is exempt from the public records law “as part of the deliberative process.” Even that claim was made only after Rainwater’s first attempting to deny the existence of the Chaffe report. To say this administration is willing to bend the rules in order to protect its backside is being charitable.

The Morgan Keegan report is said to have included several options, two of which included the outright sale of OGB or turning the administration of the preferred provider organization (PPO) over to a third party administrator (TPA)—a move that would be accompanied by a massive layoff of OGB employees who presently process claims by state employees, retirees and dependents.

An earlier report, and the number cited by Rainwater last spring in testimony before the Louisiana Legislature, said that 149 OGB employees would be laid off.

That number now sits at 177.

The word of the layoffs comes only days after word of Jindal’s hiring of several former legislators and relatives of former chief of staff Timmy Teepell to high-level positions in his administration.

It was earlier reported by LouisianaVoice that the executive budget to be delivered to the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget on Thursday would include a line item to sell OGB outright for $189 million but the Jindal administration later backed off on that option and chose the third party administrator instead.

Jindal was reported to have been only lukewarm to either proposal because, in his words, the state would still be “in the insurance business.”

Sources close to the administration said that Jindal has added yet another option: to do nothing in case of another widespread protest as was experienced when the administration first floated the idea of privatization the agency that has accrued a $500 million surplus while administering health care claims for state employees, retirees and dependents.

Rainwater fired former OGB director Tommy Teague last April after Teague did not fall in line quickly enough over the proposal to sell the agency. Afterwards, a firestorm of protests erupted across the state from state employees and retirees that resulted in Rainwater’s vacillating between selling OGB or contracting with a TPA.

Read Full Post »

OGB privatization in Jindal’s budget will mean massive layoffs but it’s really important that he pleases ALEC

Posted in Budget, Governor's Office, Layoffs, OGB, Office of Group Benefits, Teague, Transparency on February 7, 2012| 4 Comments »

The Jindal administration has made last-minute changes in the executive budget to be submitted to the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget on Thursday that could, if passed, result in “massive layoffs” in the Office of Group Benefits (OGB), LouisianaVoice has learned.

Under the revised budget, OGB will not be sold outright as originally advanced in an earlier version of the budget but instead OGB’s Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) will be taken over by a third party administrator (TPA) to be run in the same manner as the state’s HMO plan that is currently administered by Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Louisiana.

The original executive budget included a provision for the outright sale of OGB. Had that remained on the table and a buyer found, Morgan Keegan financial advisors of Memphis, Tennessee, stood to reap a $750,000 bonus for finding a buyer for OGB.

It was not immediately clear if the bonus for the legally-troubled firm—Morgan Keegan was fined $210 million by the Securities and Exchange Commission nearly two years ago for misrepresenting critical information to investors—would still be an option.

What is clear, however, is that there would be massive layoffs of OGB employees who currently run the state’s self-insured PPO which presently has a surplus of some $500 million.

Commissioner of Administration Paul Rainwater testified to the legislature last year that it was necessary to reduce the work force at OGB by 149 persons. Ostensibly, those would be the employees who now handle claims for state employees, retirees and their dependents.

The good news is there will be no premium increase to state employees and retirees in Fy-2013.

While the plan to sell OGB has been altered, the contracting of a TPA will nevertheless be tantamount to privatization of an agency that is generally well-received by state employees. The agency has established a record of rapid turnarounds on claims and under former administrator Tommy Teague, amassed the $500 million surplus.

Teague was fired by when he didn’t fall into line quickly enough to suit Rainwater over last spring’s efforts to privatize the agency. In his testimony, Rainwater flip-flopped several times as to whether the governor’s intent was to sell OGB or contract with a TPA. He used both terms almost interchangeably during questioning by legislators.

OGB is only one of several state operations Jindal is attempting to privatize. He succeeded with the Office of Risk Management (ORM), but only partially. The state paid F.A. Richard & Associates (FARA) $68 million in 2010 to take over ORM only to have FARA return eight months later for a contract amendment of $6.8 million, bring the total price to nearly $75 million. A scant two weeks later, FARA was sold to an Ohio company and last fall, that company was in turn sold to a firm out of New York. Neither transfer of ORM to the second or third firm was given advance written approval as was required of the state’s contract with FARA.

Jindal’s efforts to sell two state prisons were thwarted last year but it is expected that those efforts will be renewed.

The governor also is moving ahead full-throttle with his efforts to create for-profit charter schools to replace so-called failing public schools. There are some non-profit charter schools scattered throughout the state but the emphasis has been on for-profit schools as well as vouchers to enable children to move from failing schools to charter schools.

Jindal recently fired a shot across the bow of public school teachers when he unveiled his ambitious education program not before teachers but at the annual meeting of the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry, a virtual slap in the teachers’ faces by the proponent of virtual schools.

Jindal elevated—or lowered, if you prefer—the debate be suggesting that the executive director of the Louisiana Association of Educators should resign for his remark that poor, uneducated families might not have the wherewithal or the expertise needed to navigate the bureaucracy to transfer their children to better schools under Jindal’s proposed voucher system.

The governor, not content with simply promoting his program, suggested that teachers are given pay raises for the simple act of breathing and that they could only be fired for selling drugs in the workplace (schools).

Parts of the state’s Medicaid program have also been privatized by Jindal but his efforts to contract out the Department of Health and Hospital’s information technology services met stiff resistance from the state Civil Service Commission last week.

That confrontation, won for the moment by the Civil Service Commission, could serve as the impetus for Jindal to renew his unsuccessful 2010 efforts to abolish civil service and the Civil Service Commission.

State Rep. John Schroder (R-Abita Springs) introduced a handful of bills that year dealing with merit pay raises for state classified workers, and civil service in general, none of which were passed.

All of Jindal’s privatization proposals appear to be ripped directly from the pages of the playbook of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

That playbook, an actual internet web page, includes a section entitled “Tools to Control Costs and Improve Government Efficiency. Among the “tools” it recommended were:

• Adopt a state hiring freeze;

• Reform state pensions;

• Delay automatic pay increases (we wondered where legislators came up with the term “automatic” in freezing merit increases a couple of years back;

• Embrace the expanded use of privatization and competitive contracting;

• Restructure state retiree health care plans.

Jindal only recently unveiled his plan for restructuring the state retirement system, a plan that includes tighter retirement qualifications, increased employee contributions, a revised formula for calculating benefits, defined contributions as opposed to the present defined benefits plan (similar to 401K plans found in the private sector, and a proposed lump-sum payout upon retirement.

The one issue that has remained unaddressed in the retirement discussion is if the state does go to a defined contribution plan such as those found in 401K plans, will the state then be required to pay the usual employer share to Social Security?

Some state employees currently do not pay into Social Security and thus are not qualified for Social Security benefits or Medicare upon retirement unless they worked in the private sector prior to their state employment.

If Jindal should revamp state retirement, it could mean that the state could be required to pay the customary employer percentage into those programs which could mean any savings achieved by privatization could be negated.

Read Full Post »

Got promised? Weighing the words of candidate Jindal vs. actions of governor Jindal: a study in deliberate deceit

Posted in Civil Service, Education, Governor's Office, House, Senate, Layoffs, Legislature, Legislators, OGB, Office of Group Benefits, Teague, Transparency on April 22, 2011| 7 Comments »

Perhaps this should be filed under “How Soon We Forget,” or maybe it shouldn’t be remembered at all because of the bitter irony it invokes. Either way, we felt a little reminder of campaign promises past might give you an insight into political realities present and future.

Candidate Bobby Jindal had an interesting campaign flyer in the last gubernatorial election that someone found and sent to LouisianaVoice.

It’s all about how touchy-feely he was about state employees. It’s almost enough to give you a warm fuzzy if it weren’t for the foreboding chills it invokes when one considers that his real motivation is not the welfare of state employees or even the citizenry of this state, but the consolidation of his own political power base.

While state employees are being laid off and in some instances, as in the case of Office of Group Benefits CEO Tommy Teague, fired outright, Jindal continues to campaign weekly outside the borders of Louisiana, adding more and more to a campaign war chest already crammed with more than $10 million.

When he campaigns in California, New York, Texas, and elsewhere, the costs of those trips—including flight costs, hotel accommodations, meals, and security detail (state police who accompany him on each and every trip)—are not reimbursed to the state by the Republican Party. They are borne by Louisiana taxpayers. And lest you thought he travels alone, rest assured he takes staff members with him on those jaunts. When George Bush campaigned for a second term and when Barrack Obama campaigns, the costs were—and are—reimbursed by their respective national parties.

All his hopping from fundraiser to fundraiser at out-of-state venues must surely raise the question: just why is someone in California or Wisconsin or Montana so vitally interested in a governor’s race in Louisiana? That’s the question voters must ask themselves when they enter the polling booth next fall.

It’s a good bet that laid-off state employees or employees of agencies that Jindal has privatized or plans to privatize will be asking.

It’s a certainty that employees with serious health issues would like to know why they stand to lose their health benefits after years of loyal service, some of whom even fell for Jindal’s “love of state employees,” pitch and voted for him—not once, but twice—for governor.

Here, then, are the verbatim contents of that long lost (at least he must wish it was lost) flyer that, with any justification, will bite him in the backside next fall:

As a former state employee, I know firsthand how important it is that we protect state employees and state retirees.

I have served the state as Secretary of the Department of Health and Hospitals and as President of the University of Louisiana System.

My mother has been a state employee for three decades. I know that she and the thousands of people who serve our state at every level dedicate themselves on a daily basis to ensuring that Louisiana is moving forward, and I strongly believe that we must support these workers in their efforts.

As my campaign for Governor continues to intensify, I expect that some people will begin to spread false rumors about the future of state employees under my Administration.

I wanted you to hear it from me that I will be a friend and supporter of both state employees and retirees.

Any statements to the contrary are simply false.

I am committed to bringing more jobs and more economic opportunities to Louisiana, and I want to see state workers and retirees supported for the work they do.

In addition, I have been a vocal supporter in Congress of legislation to protect state employees and retirees from unfair Social Security provisions, specifically, the Government Pension Offset (GPO), which lowers the dependent benefits a state employee with a spouse working in the private sector receives through Social Security, and Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP), which penalizes public school teachers and state workers who have second jobs.

I am a co-sponsor of the Social Security Fairness Act (H.R. 82) in the U.S. House of Representatives, which would repeal both the GPO and the WEP.

I do not believe we should punish people for working, and certainly do not believe teachers and state workers in Louisiana should be singled out for penalty.

These men and women work incredibly hard to ensure a bright future for our state and our children, and they deserve to receive adequate Social Security benefits.

My mother is a state agency employee and I myself have paid into the State Teachers Retirement System, so I know firsthand how unfair these provisions are to state workers. I fully understand the importance of rectifying this problem so state workers and teachers are not unfairly penalized for their service.

I commit to you that I will continue to fight to protect all Louisiana workers as Governor of Louisiana.

There you have it. The words in that flyer certainly take on a hollow ring today. We have only one word for Gov. Jindal and his promises: pandering. By any definition, it’s pandering in the sorriest sense of the word. Does anyone remember Jindal’s uttering a single word as governor about the GPO or WEP? Didn’t think so.

Has anyone heard a single encouraging word from him to state employees. No? Hmm.

Does any remember another campaign promise to block any attempt by legislators to give themselves a pay increase? Probably not, but he certainly did, in another flyer like the one quoted above. Yet, what did he do when they voted for a 123 percent pay raise back in 2008? He said he would not veto the pay hike. Only when he was swamped with public outcry such that his email literally shut down, did he finally acquiesce and veto the action.

Turn your attention away from the NBA playoffs and LSU and Saints football long enough to do your homework. Weigh what he says against what he does. Consider the contracts handed out to donors to his wife’s foundation. Think about the motive behind his interstate campaign trips. Look below the surface for his real reasons for wanting to privatize so many state agencies and find out who is getting the contracts for those agencies. Most of all, try to put yourself in the place of that state employee who, facing grave health issues, finds himself on the street.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »