Quote :

"it's bullshit is what it is. I was hired at a certain rate that was agreed upon for the entire term of the year. (I'm a teacher) "

Srsly? Would you rather lose the whole job? Maybe you could go find another job somewhere else at a rate you like better ...

In all seriousness, this is one of the realities of working for the government. You are nearly guaranteed to not lose your job unless you royally (and I mean very royally) fuck up. Especially in a core area like education. I think you can deal with a little temporary pay cut.

4/28/2009 12:54:50 PM

Yea we are all very unhappy here at school. I figure I will lose close to $100/check for the next two months, and looking at the new insurance premiums, it will cost me an additional $40+/month to insure my family. CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN!

4/28/2009 1:06:02 PM

lol what does bev perdue have to do with obama?

i voted for pat mccrory, but i'm fairly certain he was gonna have to start axing at the budget as well

[Edited on April 28, 2009 at 1:17 PM. Reason : +]

4/28/2009 1:13:21 PM

Well at least its a furlough: first, it temporary maybe a few months and second you get 10 extra hours off. They could have just did a RIF and getting your salary back from that is a little harder than a furlough... yeah it sucks... every gov. employee is prolly pissed...

Could have been worse for sure and we all knew it was coming.

4/28/2009 1:24:43 PM

I would have loved to have seen forced retirements of some people...

4/28/2009 1:31:50 PM

Obama giveth tax break and Perdue taketh away.

I'm calling it now. Perdue = 1 term governor.

4/28/2009 1:39:21 PM

4/28/2009 1:40:56 PM

Quote :

"I figure I will lose close to $100/check for the next two months"

I'm assuming you're counting the 10hrs off in there. If not, you're doing something wrong or make a shit ton of money.

I'm actually fine with this, as it is now. I'd prefer not to have the 10hr furlough, but I can live with it. The state needs money and it has to come from somewhere. Laying people off isn't going to help in the long run. I just hope they put the money to good use. At the end of the day, this isn't really going to hurt most people too bad. Where as losing jobs would be devastating. Not just for the individuals but to everyone as the decrease in consumerism would trickle out and impact everyone.

4/28/2009 1:59:21 PM

The 10 hour furlough will be at some point during the remainder of the year. NOT during May and June.

So I didn't calculate those 10 hours for my next two paychecks.

4/28/2009 2:03:42 PM

that's what i thought. I didn't count it at all for my reduction in pay. unless i'm missing something Nighthawk, i think you did the math wrong. That, or you make @240k/yr.

4/28/2009 2:17:12 PM

100,000 a year employee would lose $500 across 2 months. Thats the easiest example. $125 a pay check if you are paid biweekly. And it wont really amount to an actual $125 drop, because that money is taxed. Probably closer to $90 in actual pay check drop.

4/28/2009 2:29:54 PM

Ugh I am pretty confused... Let me know if I am wrong with this...

1) We have a 10 hour furlough in which we don't get paid and we don't have to work. This will be applied to months May and June paychecks but according to my department, we cannot take those hours until after June 1 until Dec. 30. And this is ONLY 10 hours not 10 hours every month?

2) On top of that we have a 0.5% pay cut until the end of Dec. (not 5%?)

Quote :

"All teachers and state employees will receive a pay cut of 0.5 percent and in exchange will receive 10 hours of time off, at a time they choose. Although workers will see their pay cut in May and June, they may take their 10 hours of flexible time off between June 1 and Dec. 31. "

My department head just sent this to us and it seems misleading...
Sounds like we are only taking 10 hours off without pay...

Am I even making any sense?

4/28/2009 2:33:29 PM

^^ what am i doing wrong/missing? How are you getting $250/mo?

100,000 * .005= 500

500/12= 41.67

if you're paid montly, you'll lose 41.67 before taxes with just the pay cut?

Are you counting the furlough? That would bring it to about $280/mo if you're counting 5hrs each month. I didn't realize that was going to be taken out right way.


^ 10hrs off (total) without pay is how I understood it from the beginning. But I didn't know they were taking it out right away. And yes, it's .5% not 5%.

V Gotcha, that makes sense. For some reason, I thought it was just going to be for 2months. Not a yr spread across 2 months

[Edited on April 28, 2009 at 2:56 PM. Reason : .]

4/28/2009 2:50:46 PM

^The cut is for the whole year taken from just TWO paychecks from the 08-09 fiscal year. The state, essentially is playing catch up. So it's 100,000 * .005 = 500

Divide that by 2 (May and June) gives you 250 / mo. or 125 / bi-weekly check.

And the way the Executive Order reads, we're getting the 0.5% cut for May and June AND the forced 10-hr furlough to be made whenever the individual departments decide. At that point, you'd be losing 10 hrs of pay as well.

Though it's all being reported way differently. More or less it would equal a 1% pay cut.


[Edited on April 28, 2009 at 2:55 PM. Reason : too many edits]

4/28/2009 2:53:08 PM

^ Yeah, it's more like a retroactive 0.5% cut for FY0809, and "oh hey, the employees haven't been giving that 0.5% back for the last 10 months, so we're taking effectively 3% for each of the last 2 months of the FY."

Plus the furlough, 10 hours of LWOP to be taken between 6/1/09 and 12/31/09.

At least that's how I read it.

If you look here
http://www.governor.state.nc.us/NewsItems/PressReleaseDetail.aspx?newsItemid=330
you'll see

Quote :

"All teachers’ and state employees’ compensation will be reduced by an annualized amount equivalent to 0.5 percent for the remainder of the fiscal year. Each employee will receive 10 hours of flexible time off in exchange."

I have no idea what the "in exchange" is referring to. It appears to be put in without basis. If it was 10 hours paid leave it'd make sense, but it looks to me like a 0.5% salary cut plus 10 hours leave without pay. What are employees getting "in exchange?" Just the flexibility to decide when to take the LWOP?

[Edited on April 28, 2009 at 3:03 PM. Reason : ?]

4/28/2009 2:58:46 PM

ok thank you for the clarification... If you interpret it wrong, you could be thinking you're giving an assload from your paycheck. But honestly, the next two months of less pay shouldn't make or break many people unless you have every penny accounted for every month. So I can't get my nails done for the next two months

Well when all this bullshit is over, I am entitled to a huge fucking raise!

4/28/2009 2:58:51 PM

^^It is .5% of your total annual salary, not just .5% of your monthly paycheck per month. So if you are making 50,000 you will lost $250 dollars, which are split between two paychecks, for a total of $125 a check you would lose. If you are a 10 month employee, you lose it all in one lump sum month. Most teacher assistants will lose at least $75 from one paycheck, which when you only make $1500 before taxes, insurance and retirement is a significant amount.

4/28/2009 3:02:32 PM

Quote :

"Well when all this bullshit is over, I am entitled to a huge fucking raise when you enter the private sector."

There's no such thing as a raise with the state, really.

4/28/2009 3:03:36 PM

Quote :

"It's bullshit in that they found out via WRAL."

I heard it first in an e-mail from one of the higher-ups in my unit, but that e-mail did reference the WRAL article. The email (forward) from the provost/chancellor didn't come until later.

4/28/2009 5:13:14 PM

Yea our superintendient forwarded the memos and stuff that Bev had released around 2 pm, and had been published by WRAL since before lunch.

4/28/2009 7:07:01 PM

welp, guess it's about time to leave state employ and put my engineering degree to some use

goddamnit

4/28/2009 7:35:29 PM

4/28/2009 7:40:07 PM

The video stated that there may be more furloughs etc in the future... I might be checking out RTP for sure... Like they are any better :-( sheesh

4/28/2009 7:55:31 PM

the thing that pisses me off, and probably pisses a lot of other teachers off, is that these cuts are coming right at the end of the year, without notice, when we are really trying to put away enough of our paychecks for the summer, since our last paycheck comes at the end of May, and we won't get another one until near the end of August.

4/29/2009 6:36:51 AM

i want 10 more hours of vacation

[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 6:52 AM. Reason : .]

4/29/2009 6:52:04 AM

Amazing how government employees cry about this stuff. Yeah, you guys probably get pooped on a little when it comes to pay raises and performance based compensation...but you could have tried your hand at the private sector from the beginning where they can file bankruptcy and leave you bag holding on about 15-20% your salary in PTO and other benefits they decided not to give you.

4/29/2009 7:23:02 AM

Quote :

"So it's 100,000 * .005 = 500 Divide that by 2 (May and June) gives you 250 / mo. or 125 / bi-weekly check."

Quote :

"So if you are making 50,000 you will lost $250 dollars, which are split between two paychecks, for a total of $125 a check you would lose."

I know it wasn't the point, but is a person making 100k/year going to be significantly hurt financially by missing that $500? Is a person making 50k/year really going to be reeling from missing that $250? Maybe, I guess, but if missing that $500 means you get to keep a job where you still get $95,500 then I don't have too much sympathy.

Everyone else is hurting right now. No reason state employees should get an automatic pass on all hardships.

4/29/2009 7:44:17 AM

teachers are already not paid enough. clearly we didn't go into the profession to become rich, but cutting our pay right before summer is NOT insignificant. Fuck Bev Perdue.

4/29/2009 8:44:48 AM

Every person in American thinks they are underpaid, even Wall Street suits who add no value to the economy making millions a year think they are underpaid. A .5% hair cut is a gift from God in an economy like this. I took a 100% pay cut, I would have worked for a 40-50% pay cut. Stop crying.

4/29/2009 8:47:50 AM

someone's bitter that they got fired.

[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 8:53 AM. Reason : ]

4/29/2009 8:52:29 AM

Someone is bitter they are taking a .5% paycut. Who looks like the bigger crybaby you crybaby?


Oh, and I got laid off you dumbass, not fired.

[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 9:04 AM. Reason : .]

4/29/2009 8:55:46 AM

Quote :

"Amazing how government employees cry about this stuff. Yeah, you guys probably get pooped on a little when it comes to pay raises and performance based compensation...but you could have tried your hand at the private sector from the beginning where they can file bankruptcy and leave you bag holding on about 15-20% your salary in PTO and other benefits they decided not to give you."

Yeah, as a State employee it's hard to start screaming "woe is me", when we aren't forced to deal with layoffs or super-drastic paycuts.

[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 9:01 AM. Reason : .]

4/29/2009 9:00:59 AM

Haha well I am still pretty happy about having my job. Now this morning I received a noticed that our health plan is being sliced and diced too. The individual plan is no longer offering free eye exams :-( I might need to schedule that before the change takes place.

Also I was kinda like wtf when I saw this:

Quote :

"Effective 07/01/2010, members must attest that he/she or covered dependents do not use tobacco products. If so, the member may only opt for the PPO Basic (70/30) plan. Effective 07/01/2011, members must attest that their weight and height ratio is within an evidence-based determined range If not, the member may only opt for the PPO Basic (70/30) plan. "

Honestly I don't think I have to worry about this, but for some people quitting smoking or losing weight isn't quite that easy. Some people are genetically big. Well at least these people have some time to make adjustments

Me? I don't smoke tobacco products nor am I a big girl LOL

4/29/2009 9:25:33 AM

you are damn straight i'm bitter that my pay is both being cut, AND the state is essentially asking me to PAY BACK money that I've made during the past 9 months.

4/29/2009 9:30:42 AM

Smath74, what do you mean "cut AND pay back?" That's two ways of interpreting the same thing. Not two separate things.

For those who maybe didn't see it: the govs office has clarified that no additional $ will be deducted for the 10hrs off. So it is 10hrs off in exchange for the .5% cut. I know this made no sense at first, especially since the exec. order was not written that way, but they've said the order was written poorly.


I'm not really sure why any of you are talking about looking elsewhere for work. Folks in RTP didn't get furloughed, they got laid off. The economy is fucked right now, everyone will be impacted. The triangle has been in sort of a bubble compared to the rest of the state b/c the unemployment rate here was lower to begin with. But, it's increased by about the same % as the rest of the state. It could be a lot worse for you. I just hope you don't jump ship b/c of a skimp few hundred dollars, and then get laid off in a few months as things continue to get worse.

Personally, I'm kinda glad they're doing it. I'm happy to contribute if it helps the NC economy improve some and keeps our unemployment rate from going even higher than it already is (@10.8% last i saw). I just hope they use the money wisely.

As for teachers who only get paid 10months or whatever... it's not like you would get paid any more $ if you were paid 12months out of the year. Do you not plan for that all year long? Do you really just wait for the last 2 check to fund your summer living expenses? Point being, what does it matter whether it was right before summer or not?

I've been paid bi-weekly, semi-monthly, and monthly. They're all a little different and you have to adjust a little for each if you're living check to check. But hopefully you're not depending on every check to get you by. If you are, you're going to be hit a lot harder than others.

4/29/2009 11:47:01 AM

^That is the issue though, living on these little paychecks. I have several coworkers whose spouses have been laid off or are unemployed now. They are relying on their own paycheck to make ends meet, be it ever so meager, and by announcing this so rapidly, they have not had time to make plans knowing that their checks are $100 or more light.

4/29/2009 12:42:20 PM

Quote :

"what do you mean "cut AND pay back?""

not only is my pay (which was agreed upon when i signed my contract) being decreased for the rest of the year, I have to PAY BACK money that I have already earned during the previous 9 months. They are taking it ALL out in my last paycheck of the year.

4/29/2009 12:51:53 PM

Quote :

"Do you not plan for that all year long?"

of course we do, but now our plans have to change

4/29/2009 12:53:41 PM

Quote :

"^That is the issue though, living on these little paychecks. I have several coworkers whose spouses have been laid off or are unemployed now. They are relying on their own paycheck to make ends meet, be it ever so meager, and by announcing this so rapidly, they have not had time to make plans knowing that their checks are $100 or more light."

Is that...is that the worlds smallest violin I hear? Given 1 of 2 options, those being a .5% cut or a 100% cut, which one do you think all those people short $200 would choose?

4/29/2009 1:01:30 PM

Yeah no fucking kidding. I get it - it kinda sucks. It just sucks a lot less than the alternative.

4/29/2009 1:09:11 PM

Quote :

"That is the issue though, living on these little paychecks."

But teachers knew the pay isn't great (particularly at first), or at least had the knowledge at their fingertips, going into it. I have an education degree, it was no secret going through school that the pay, especially the first few yrs, is not very good. I chose not to teach. Others chose, knowing good and well about the pay, to teach. I hate when my friends who are teachers cry about their pay and how much they work. They knew the deal going in. Shut up, or look for a different job.

For those living off one person's salary or or are already just scrapping by: Does it suck? absolutely. Do I feel sorry for these people who are going to have a tough time getting by? absolutely. But it's way better than those people being laid off. For them and for you and me. Some money is better than no money for them. And if more people in this area are laid off it would impact us much more than all of us state employees taking a small pay cut.

Quote :

"not only is my pay (which was agreed upon when i signed my contract) being decreased for the rest of the year, I have to PAY BACK money that I have already earned during the previous 9 months. They are taking it ALL out in my last paycheck of the year."

What are you talking about man? Perhaps I'm missing something about your specific situation. As far as state employees go as a whole and as far as i know, there is a .5% pay cut for the year. And that's it for now. It will be taken out across two months. Is there something else I'm not aware of?

If not, you can't say that this one .5% cut is both a cut and you paying money back. It's one or the other. I don't care how you look at it, but it's not both.


And to be honest, I'm kinda pissed about the 10hr not being unpaid. That makes no sense to me if that's how this all pans out. Here's .5% cut for us to generate money. But here's 10hrs off for everyone, if you want it. Who's not going to take that time off? That's going to decrease the amount of money they actually generate b/c productivity will be down for those 10hrs.

It should either be A) 10hrs off no pay B).5% cut, no additional time off or C)10hrs off no pay [a true furlough] AND .5% pay cut.

4/29/2009 1:45:28 PM

It essentially is a 10hr furlough.

Just some department can't lose people with such short notice. And remember this is to help the 08-09 FY. The 09-10 and 10-11 years will probably be way worse. What little pay increases state employees saw could be wiped off and/or loads of people laid off.

[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 1:54 PM. Reason : ]

4/29/2009 1:54:28 PM

The last I read, the 10hrs off was voluntary and no additional pay (to the .5% coming out already) would be taken for the time off.

Just read some more up on it and the time off is required. So yes, it is "essentially" a furlough. .5% doesn't quite come to 10hrs pay, but it's close.

[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 2:12 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2009 1:57:59 PM

Quote :

"That's going to decrease the amount of money they actually generate b/c productivity will be down for those 10hrs."

I found the 10 hour vacation as an admission that productivity amongst state employees was already low and attendance for 10 hours did not matter. I don't mean to offend people but it honestly does comes off as "We don't need every employee here for 10 hours and it wont matter.". It seems amazing that 1 day off for everyone is going to save things. Every little bit counts I guess.



[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 7:38 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2009 7:29:51 PM

Quote :

"What are you talking about man? Perhaps I'm missing something about your specific situation. As far as state employees go as a whole and as far as i know, there is a .5% pay cut for the year. And that's it for now. It will be taken out across two months. Is there something else I'm not aware of?"

they are reducing my salary. Not only will my monthly checks be reduced, but they will be retroactively reduced, and I will have to pay back the entire retroactive balance since August in my last paycheck at the end of may.


[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 7:56 PM. Reason : ]

4/29/2009 7:56:11 PM

the .5% should not have been retroactive. smath is 100% justified in his bitching.

4/29/2009 9:06:47 PM

^^^ yeah, that's certainly another way to look at it.

^^ I see, i thought you were saying they were cutting your money and in addition to that, you were paying money back.

^^ and ^, what about it is retroactive?

I guess that's one way to look at it (albeit somewhat creative). You could also say "they're taking away some of my earnings for the rest of the yr, but they're making me pay it all at once." Both are odd ways to look at it imo and I could probably come up with a dozen more "not quite true" scenarios.

I look at it like this: they're taking .25% of my yearly salary out of each of my next two paychecks. And .5% of your yearly salary out of your next paycheck since you only get paid once more. And, in exchange for that money they're going to give us 10hrs off from work at a future date. However, our wages for 10hrs don't quite equal .5% of our salary, so it's not a dead even trade, although pretty close.

Would you look at it as paying previously earned money back/being retroactive if it were a straight up 10hr furlough? As in, 10hrs off without pay.

4/29/2009 9:29:16 PM

the annoying part about "retroactive" is there's no need to phrase it that way. it makes it look like there was an opportunity for us to pay it all along. they could just as well call it a 0.1% pay cut retroactive for the last five years. it's not retroactive at all. it's just a cut in our may/june paychecks calculated using our salary.

4/29/2009 9:51:02 PM

^it is the most accurate way to phrase it

4/30/2009 12:21:09 PM

my wife was sent this:

Quote :

"Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 11:19 AM To: Anesthesiology Dept Subject: Flexible Furlough Program I just want to point something out to everyone since the state has not mentioned it and no one else has either. 0.5% annualized deduction 1. This is after taxes 2. Because it is after taxes it will be classified as income that you will have to declare as income on your 2009 tax returns. What does this mean? 1. If you make 30,000 a year the state will take out $150 from your net pay spread out over the next 2 months. 2. This $150 is after taxes which means you have already paid between 21 and 23 percent. This is roughly $33. 3. Now since this is declared as income you will have to declare it on your federal and state income tax returns for 2009. So this may result in an extra $7.50 4. So the total cost based on $30,000 salary is roughly $190.50."

Ok, if the state is taking away $150 how in the world is it declared as income?

This makes no sense.

4/30/2009 12:31:13 PM