Arnold loses one, wins one on furloughs

Hot on the heels of yesterday’s smackdown by an Alameda County Superior Court judge over salary cuts for correctional officers in the form of unpaid furlough time that many actually can’t take off, the Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today is crowing over his victory in another furlough-related case, this one filed in San Francisco on behalf of CalPERS workers.

“Government Code sections 19851 and 19849 give the Executive broad authority to control the work week,” the ruling says, adding there’s no showing that the governor’s executive orders on the furloughs exceeded his powers. “The Governor acted reasonably in furloughing all employees to save funds and preserve parity.”

“The governor’s authority to furlough state workers is clear, and this is another ruling in our favor,” Schwarzenegger spokeswoman Rachel Arrezola said a few minutes ago. “As California families and businesses are forced to cut back in today’s economy, the governor does not believe state workers should be shielded from the same economic realities.”

Josh Richman

Josh Richman covers state and national politics for the Bay Area News Group. A New York City native, he earned a bachelor’s degree in journalism from the University of Missouri and reported for the Express-Times of Easton, Pa. for five years before coming to the Oakland Tribune and ANG Newspapers in 1997. He is a frequent guest on KQED Channel 9’s “This Week in Northern California;” a proud father; an Eagle Scout; a somewhat skilled player of low-stakes poker; a rather good cook; a firm believer in the use of semicolons; and an unabashed political junkie who will never, EVER seek elected office.

  • John W.

    What’s the difference between the two cases? I’m as upset as anybody about bloated bureaucracies, public employee unions, outrageous retiree benefits and the like. However, it seems to me that if you mandate a furlough (which the guv should have complete authority to do), you have to let the employees actually take the time off.

  • Wee weed

    You are correct, John W.