Minority bloc slams wage cut bill

The House minority bloc lashed at the administration yesterday over the wage reduction bill, saying the measure is inequitable and lacks sufficient basis.

House minority leader Rep. Arnold I. Palacios noted that House Bill 15-115 would impact only civil service employees. This personnel category, he said, should be the last to be affected by a compensation cut.

He cited an August 2002 memorandum submitted by Civil Service Commission legal counsel John Cool, in relation to the previous administration’s work-hour reduction plan.

In the memorandum, Cool listed actions that need to be taken before cutting the wages of permanent civil service employees: hiring freeze; cost reduction measures such as voluntary work-hour reduction, voluntary leave without pay, elimination of premium pay and differentials, and transfers or consolidation of functions and duties; reduction or termination of limited term employees; and reduction or termination of probationary employees.

“Civil service employees should be the last people to be affected by a cost reduction. They are the backbone of the government,” Palacios said. “The [Fitial] administration knows that it can’t cut wages without encountering legal problems. That’s why they want the Legislature to do the dirty work.”

In a separate interview, press secretary Charles P. Reyes Jr. said that the administration-initiated wage reduction bill would apply only to civil service employees.

The bill excludes elected officials, contract employees, and political appointees—also known as excepted service employees.

“We intend to apply the wage reduction across-the-board. For civil service employees, we need legislation. All other employees, including Cabinet members and excepted service employees can be handled administratively. They serve at the pleasure of the governor and the governor has more authority over their employment contracts. They will not be spared from the compensation cuts,” Reyes said.

INSULT

In addition to affecting the livelihood of civil service employees, the wage-cut reduction poses an “insult” to them, Palacios said.

He noted that tenured government personnel have been deprived of within-grade salary increases for several years. Government employees are entitled to salary increases after each year of satisfactory performance.

“Passing this bill is like adding salt to the wound of civil service employees,” Palacios said.

Furthermore, he called on the administration to stop filling government vacancies, rather than trimming the compensation of existing employees.

The Governor’s Office has submitted over 300 certifications of vacant positions to the Legislature since January 2006. The certifications express the administration’s intent to fill the vacancies, which reportedly resulted from the termination or non-renewal of employees hired by the previous administration.

BASELESS

For his part, Rep. Joseph Deleon Guerrero, a member of the House minority bloc, challenged the administration to show figures proving why a wage reduction is needed.

He noted that the administration had already implemented a 7-percent budget cut to address the reduced revenue projection for fiscal year 2006. The Executive Branch had also made additional budget cuts to meet the $24-million subsidy required by the Commonwealth Utilities Corp.

“We haven’t seen the figures to justify the wage cuts. As far as we’re concerned, this is just presumption. Why aren’t they showing us where in the books we need the savings from the salary reduction?” Deleon Guerrero said.

Even the bills introduced in the Senate and the House do not mention specifically where the additional money is needed, he added.

SENATE VERSION

H.B. 15-115, introduced on Friday by Rep. Absalon Waki Jr. and four other House leadership members, seeks to reduce by 10 percent the salaries set forth in Title 1, Section 8213 of the Commonwealth Code. The provision lists the salary schedules for civil service employees.

The bill’s findings state that the salary reduction “is necessary to prevent further deterioration in the Commonwealth’s financial situation, and hopefully prevent a reduction in the government workforce.”

Sen. Felix Mendiola has also authored a Senate version of the bill.

Mendiola’s three-page bill cites the same purpose—“to ensure the continuity of essential public services without resorting to a reduction in government workforce.”

However, Senate Bill 15-40 is different from H.B. 15-115 in that the Senate version includes civil service and all other government employees. But S.B. 15-40 specifically exempts government positions whose salaries are constitutionally protected.

“[T]he salary of the governor, lieutenant governor, resident representative to the United States, and Commonwealth judges and justices shall not be so reduced, unless [they] in writing voluntarily accept a salary reduction of 10 percent,” the bill states.