That's just fucking crazy
http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/scranton-s-police-fire-dpw-unions-file-lawsuit-against-salary-cuts-1.1338006
Quote
Scranton's police, fire, DPW unions file lawsuit against salary cuts
By Jim Lockwood (Staff Writer)
Scranton's police, fire and Department of Public Works unions Monday filed a lawsuit to overturn Mayor Chris Doherty's unilateral slashing of their salaries to minimum wage.
The unions - International Association of Firefighters Local 60, the Fraternal Order of Police E.B. Jermyn Lodge 2 and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Local Lodge 2305 - are seeking an injunction against the mayor to prohibit him from cutting pay to the federal minimum of $7.25 an hour.
Read the lawsuit HERE
The unions each have separate contracts with the city, the mayor cannot unilaterally slash pay outside the bounds of contracts and without any negotiations, and his decision is legally unfounded, according to the lawsuit filed in Lackawanna County Court by the unions' attorney, Thomas Jennings of Philadelphia.
Mr. Doherty responded, "What am I going to pay them with? We don't have the money."
DPW leader Sam Vitris said of the lawsuit, "It's not something we take pleasure in, but it's something we have to do. We're hoping the mayor and city council resolve this as quickly as possibly, ASAP. None of us want to go through with this, but it's just that you can't unilaterally lower wages without entering into any negotiations."
On Wednesday, the mayor dropped a bombshell by announcing he would unilaterally cut the pay of 398 city workers, including himself, to minimum wage indefinitely due to the city's cash-crunch crisis.
The city is fast running out of money, the mayor said, and unpaid bills, particularly health care coverage, are mounting. By paying only minimum wages, starting with the next payday on Friday, the payroll that is paid every two weeks would drop from up to $1.2 million to $300,000, leaving the remaining $700,000 in deferred wages to pay bills, Mr. Doherty had said. Once the crisis is over, employees would be paid the deferred pay, he has said.
The mayor and council have been at odds over updating an Act 47 recovery plan that Mr. Doherty said is required by banks before they would again provide financing to the city. Mr. Doherty's plan proposes a 78 percent property tax hike over the next three years, but the council has refused to pass it and want the mayor to reduce taxes with alternative sources of revenue. The mayor says council's proposals for alternative revenues won't raise enough money and will not raise money quickly.
"We're communicating with council, so we've just got to keep working at this," Mr. Doherty said.
The earliest the unions' lawsuit would be taken up in court likely would be Thursday in motions court, when hearing dates are typically set. The unions are hoping for an immediate injunction Thursday to prevent the minimum wages from taking effect this week, though they acknowledge such swift court action is probably unlikely.
While paydays are every other Friday, payroll funds usually are transmitted from the city the Wednesday before a payday. Because Wednesday is a holiday, the payroll funds would have to be transmitted no later than Thursday for employees to be paid Friday, Mr. Vitris said.
"We expect that this isn't going to be taken care of by Friday," Mr. Vitris said. "We're not optimistic at all" that the mayor's decision on minimum wage decision could be reversed this week, in time to have full, regular paychecks.
The lawsuit also claims the unilateral action violates state Act 111 and other labor laws. The suit claims that if the pay cuts stand, they would have a "devastating immediate impact" on workers by creating their inability to feed their families or maintain any semblance of a decent standard of living; pay medical bills and other expenses; pay for child care in some cases, particularly for single parents, thus making it impossible for them to work; and pay mortgages, loans and other bills that would destroy their credit ratings.
"There are people that are going to be hurting because of this" pay cut, Mr. Vitris said. "We hope it doesn't go on too long."
Contact the writer: [email protected]
Poor way of dealing with it.
Glad to see that everyone is on board for the city to keep paying out money it doesn't have.
Scary idea. Sad that it comes to such last minute, extreme measures. Too bad they could never have made some changes and reforms when times were good, so hopefully finances wouldn't have come to such a bad point to where they even consider this type of pay cut.
QuoteThe suit claims that if the pay cuts stand, they would have a "devastating immediate impact" on workers by creating their inability to feed their families or maintain any semblance of a decent standard of living; pay medical bills and other expenses; pay for child care in some cases, particularly for single parents, thus making it impossible for them to work; and pay mortgages, loans and other bills that would destroy their credit ratings.
Glad to see they realize that minimum wage sucks. Maybe they'll reconsider their feelings with the ballot the next time those damned dirty hippie Democrats try to dare raise it.
Quote from: garbon on July 08, 2012, 06:15:52 PM
Glad to see that everyone is on board for the city to keep paying out money it doesn't have.
Right after Hansy, you're
straight forward out of central casting. Too fucking funny.
I guess no one else noticed that they're deferring the salaries, not reducing them.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 08, 2012, 07:09:41 PM
I guess no one else noticed that they're deferring the salaries, not reducing them.
Will that help them pay their bills in the meantime?
Quote from: garbon on July 08, 2012, 06:15:52 PM
Glad to see that everyone is on board for the city to keep paying out money it doesn't have.
Borrow the money or lay the workers off.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 08, 2012, 07:09:41 PM
I guess no one else noticed that they're deferring the salaries, not reducing them.
Yeah, that's still a breach.
I bet property values and hence property tax receipts and hence total income won't be affected at all when three-quarters of the police and firepersons abandon this cesspool of a city for better horizons, i.e. places that can afford basic services.
But invective aside, what I find interesting is something about unpaid bills? Why are salaries, which as far as the city is concerned really just bills, deferred but not outside third parties? Oh, right, because fuck workers, fuck unions, fuck decency, send your city into a death spiral of austerity, but don't dare fuck with institutional creditors who don't even fucking live there, because they're like fucking gods. It's Germany and the EU, writ small.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 08, 2012, 07:19:43 PM
Will that help them pay their bills in the meantime?
Good point Timmy. Those city workers were probably living paycheck to paycheck before this. :lol:
Can't municipalities file bankruptcy? If it lacks money and can't pay bills, isn't that what it should be doing?
Quote from: Ideologue on July 08, 2012, 07:34:26 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 08, 2012, 07:09:41 PM
I guess no one else noticed that they're deferring the salaries, not reducing them.
Yeah, that's still a breach.
I bet property values and hence property tax receipts and hence total income won't be affected at all when three-quarters of the police and firepersons abandon this cesspool of a city for better horizons, i.e. places that can afford basic services.
But invective aside, what I find interesting is something about unpaid bills? Why are salaries, which as far as the city is concerned really just bills, deferred but not outside third parties? Oh, right, because fuck workers, fuck unions, fuck decency, send your city into a death spiral of austerity, but don't dare fuck with institutional creditors who don't even fucking live there, because they're like fucking gods. It's Germany and the EU, writ small.
Not quite. In the EU, certain countries on the Med are worthless scam-artist scum that aren't really a part of the community.
Still, the city's revenues are bound to increase if 300 more mortgages get foreclosed on.
If it's not stopped by an injunction, it would be interesting to see how many officers and firefighters report to roll call at $7.30 an hour. At that wage, might as well call in sick.
I hope they get the police service they pay for.
Quote from: Faeelin on July 08, 2012, 07:48:39 PM
Can't municipalities file bankruptcy? If it lacks money and can't pay bills, isn't that what it should be doing?
Maybe that's the next step, if these drastic measures don't work.
Quote from: KRonn on July 08, 2012, 08:41:05 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on July 08, 2012, 07:48:39 PM
Can't municipalities file bankruptcy? If it lacks money and can't pay bills, isn't that what it should be doing?
Maybe that's the next step, if these drastic measures don't work.
It would be interesting to know how it came to this point in the first place, other than the blurb about the Mayor and the Council not seeing eye-to-eye. This sort of municipal insolvency just doesn't happen overnight.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 08, 2012, 08:43:04 PM
Quote from: KRonn on July 08, 2012, 08:41:05 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on July 08, 2012, 07:48:39 PM
Can't municipalities file bankruptcy? If it lacks money and can't pay bills, isn't that what it should be doing?
Maybe that's the next step, if these drastic measures don't work.
It would be interesting to know how it came to this point in the first place, other than the blurb about the Mayor and the Council not seeing eye-to-eye. This sort of municipal insolvency just doesn't happen overnight.
I said something similar earlier.
"Sad that it comes to such last minute, extreme measures. Too bad they could never have made some changes and reforms when times were good, so hopefully finances wouldn't have come to such a bad point to where they even consider this type of pay cut. "
Same kind of thing goes on in many places. In Massachusetts as they laid off teachers, police and fire officers I had to wonder what the powers to be should have done to lower costs before the crap hit the fan, so it didn't have to come to layoffs.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 08, 2012, 08:43:04 PM
It would be interesting to know how it came to this point in the first place, other than the blurb about the Mayor and the Council not seeing eye-to-eye. This sort of municipal insolvency just doesn't happen overnight.
What's interesting is that the town thinks cutting everyone's pay like that is an option before dissolving Scranton's incorporation.
These sort of things happen to towns sometimes, typically a large loan or bond issuance is involved somewhere. I'm not one to rile the Ide's and Seedy's of the world into a frenzy, but oftentimes JP Morgan or Goldman Sachs are actually the movers behind the deal. Almost all of these deals work out fine for the municipality, since local governments have taxing power they can usually meet bond or loan obligations so they are a somewhat safe investment. However sometimes a town's economy goes into the toilet so bad that there is no feasible way to raise taxes to keep up with the obligations. You basically come to a point where you would have to raise "town killing" (meaning it would force all the people to move) taxes or you start layoffs and etc.
Where it's all really heading is of course municipal bankruptcy and then the town goes into a form of receivership where the State bails it out and then comes in and manages the finances of the town until they can be trusted again. It sounds like in this case municipal bankruptcy is what is necessary, because if they are looking at a 78% property tax increase just to keep their heads above water I don't know that there are many viable options out there.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 08, 2012, 08:59:43 PM
These sort of things happen to towns sometimes, typically a large loan or bond issuance is involved somewhere. I'm not one to rile the Ide's and Seedy's of the world into a frenzy, but oftentimes JP Morgan or Goldman Sachs are actually the movers behind the deal.
That's because they're sometimes the only ones that can pull it off. The State of Pennsylvania, as a commonwealth, may have some real restrictions on what they can do and can't do when it comes to bailing out municipalities, I don't know. I know that most states don't allow their municipalities to declare Chapter 9, so the Too Big To Fail or Go To Jail banks have to do the heavy lifting.
QuoteYou basically come to a point where you would have to raise "town killing" (meaning it would force all the people to move) taxes or you start layoffs and etc.
Michigan's been looking at that problem for a while; some towns simply have to go, and wind up needing to get rolled into a larger municipality.
Hell, not just some towns but even some counties should bite it. Georgia lost two entire counties during the Great Depression due to financial issues (and now there's some push to remake them). A town is nothing.
Quote from: Faeelin on July 08, 2012, 07:48:39 PM
Can't municipalities file bankruptcy? If it lacks money and can't pay bills, isn't that what it should be doing?
Sure. Stockton CA filed for bankruptcy not to long ago.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 08, 2012, 07:34:26 PM
But invective aside, what I find interesting is something about unpaid bills? Why are salaries, which as far as the city is concerned really just bills, deferred but not outside third parties? Oh, right, because fuck workers, fuck unions, fuck decency, send your city into a death spiral of austerity, but don't dare fuck with institutional creditors who don't even fucking live there, because they're like fucking gods. It's Germany and the EU, writ small.
:lol:
Your Germany and EU jab misses its target by a mile. Private holders of Greek debt took a 75% haircut.
Meh Scranton and Stockton are both better off being put out of their misery.
They'll be ok. I hear Schrute Farms is hiring.
Wonder if they could work out some sort of deal whereby they agree the minimum wage is just a temporary thing whilst the city gets its shit somewhat in order- afterall its either a terrible job or no job.
Quote from: Tyr on July 09, 2012, 06:27:39 AM
Wonder if they could work out some sort of deal whereby they agree the minimum wage is just a temporary thing whilst the city gets its shit somewhat in order- afterall its either a terrible job or no job.
This is a great suggestion Squeeze.
Quote from: Zoupa on July 09, 2012, 03:48:46 AM
They'll be ok. I hear Schrute Farms is hiring.
It took til page 2 for to get to this. Disappointing.
Quote from: Habbaku on July 08, 2012, 11:44:42 PM
Georgia lost two entire counties during the Great Depression due to financial issues (and now there's some push to remake them).
I miss Campbell county.
Quote from: Tyr on July 09, 2012, 06:27:39 AM
Wonder if they could work out some sort of deal whereby they agree the minimum wage is just a temporary thing whilst the city gets its shit somewhat in order- afterall its either a terrible job or no job.
They might be making more on unemployment.
Fire? No wonder American municipalities have cash flow problems if they are employing elements.
Quote from: Martinus on July 09, 2012, 09:33:10 AM
Fire? No wonder American municipalities have cash flow problems if they are employing elements.
All this thread & this is what you pick, title grammar? :zzz:
The engine still isn't at full speed, eh. How drunk were you this week-end?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 08, 2012, 06:56:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 08, 2012, 06:15:52 PM
Glad to see that everyone is on board for the city to keep paying out money it doesn't have.
Right after Hansy, you're straight forward out of central casting. Too fucking funny.
I have one, decisive personal experience regarding minimal wage.
Until the late 90s, THE employer of the city I work at was an IBM factory, mostly doing hard drives. I knew a lot of people working there.
Then the government significally raised the minimal wage, obviously affecting jobs where the task is to stand for 8 hours and push a button.
In a couple of months the factory relocated to China.
Quote from: Tamas on July 09, 2012, 09:37:24 AM
I have one, decisive personal experience regarding minimal wage.
Until the late 90s, THE employer of the city I work at was an IBM factory, mostly doing hard drives. I knew a lot of people working there.
Then the government significally raised the minimal wage, obviously affecting jobs where the task is to stand for 8 hours and push a button.
In a couple of months the factory relocated to China.
So from that you've determined that the cure for unemployment is crushing poverty worse than slavery?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 09, 2012, 06:30:55 AM
Quote from: Tyr on July 09, 2012, 06:27:39 AM
Wonder if they could work out some sort of deal whereby they agree the minimum wage is just a temporary thing whilst the city gets its shit somewhat in order- afterall its either a terrible job or no job.
This is a great suggestion Squeeze.
:D
Quote from: Tamas on July 09, 2012, 09:37:24 AM
I have one, decisive personal experience regarding minimal wage.
Until the late 90s, THE employer of the city I work at was an IBM factory, mostly doing hard drives. I knew a lot of people working there.
Then the government significally raised the minimal wage, obviously affecting jobs where the task is to stand for 8 hours and push a button.
In a couple of months the factory relocated to China.
I hate to break this to you, but relocating a factory takes
a lot more than a couple of months.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 09, 2012, 03:30:01 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 08, 2012, 07:34:26 PM
But invective aside, what I find interesting is something about unpaid bills? Why are salaries, which as far as the city is concerned really just bills, deferred but not outside third parties? Oh, right, because fuck workers, fuck unions, fuck decency, send your city into a death spiral of austerity, but don't dare fuck with institutional creditors who don't even fucking live there, because they're like fucking gods. It's Germany and the EU, writ small.
:lol:
I thought you'd appreciate that. :P
Quote from: Neil on July 08, 2012, 07:21:45 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 08, 2012, 06:15:52 PM
Glad to see that everyone is on board for the city to keep paying out money it doesn't have.
Borrow the money or lay the workers off.
Agreed. But are they able to borrow? They obviously lack the political will to lay the workers off.
Quote from: garbon on July 08, 2012, 06:15:52 PM
Glad to see that everyone is on board for the city to keep paying out money it doesn't have.
Glad to see that at least one person realizes that a contract can be unilaterally re-written if one side simply decides that it "doesn't have" what it is obliged to provide.
Quote from: grumbler on July 10, 2012, 02:14:39 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 08, 2012, 06:15:52 PM
Glad to see that everyone is on board for the city to keep paying out money it doesn't have.
Glad to see that at least one person realizes that a contract can be unilaterally re-written if one side simply decides that it "doesn't have" what it is obliged to provide.
:hug:
Quote from: Iormlund on July 09, 2012, 12:03:46 PM
I hate to break this to you, but relocating a factory takes a lot more than a couple of months.
Oh, they've got them pre-made and ready to go over there.
I think it was a GM executive who said that their factories are built modular and ready to float to the next place?
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on July 10, 2012, 06:35:52 PM
I think it was a GM executive who said that their factories are built modular and ready to float to the next place?
The Chinese will help expedite GM or any company that wants to open up a factory. They don't have much paperwork, beuracracy and enviromental issues to deal with. Often just the local government officials can ok a project, get things moving real fast. That's what I've heard of how it often works there.
Meanwhile...
QuotePennsylvania lawmakers, Harrisburg officials debate bankruptcy prohibition for cash-strapped cities
Some midstate lawmakers who supported the extension of Harrisburg's bankruptcy prohibition are not saying why they don't want the cash-strapped city to file for bankruptcy protection.
Sen. Jeffrey Piccola, a champion of the bill that prolonged the bankruptcy moratorium, has not returned repeated interview requests over multiple days.
Gov. Tom Corbett signed legislation extending the bankruptcy prohibition for five months; his office would not share his rationale for signing Senate Bill 1263.
And Corbett did little to explain why he supported it shortly after signing the legislation into law.
The bill prevents Harrisburg and other cash-strapped third-class cities from filing for bankruptcy protection until Nov. 30.
Rep. Glen Grell, R-Hampden Twp., initially said he didn't see the need to prolong the bankruptcy moratorium because the law that led to the state takeover of Harrisburg prevents city officials from filing for bankruptcy on their own behalf.
The only person who could file for bankruptcy under the takeover law is Harrisburg Receiver William Lynch, and he could only do so with permission from the state.
But a majority of City Council and other Harrisburg officials recently filed a lawsuit in federal court to try to void the state takeover of Harrisburg, and that is why Grell said he backed SB 1263.
Grell and Piccola, a Dauphin County Republican, were the prime sponsors of the takeover legislation.
If city officials were to win the lawsuit and the takeover were rescinded, SB 1263 still would prevent council from filing for bankruptcy.
"When city officials continue to challenge the authority of the city receiver in court, I'm concerned," Grell said.
"The real reason to extend it is that the receiver needs additional time to complete the transaction for the sale of the incinerator and the lease of the parking authority assets."
The legislation still has city leaders scratching their heads, however, because SB 1263 also takes away Lynch's right to file for bankruptcy.
And Lynch has repeatedly said he needs to use the threat of bankruptcy as a tool as he negotiates a debt recovery plan for Harrisburg with the city's creditors.
Stakeholders of the city's more than $326 million of incinerator debt would rather work out a plan with Harrisburg than face one developed in bankruptcy court, where they stand to take a bigger financial loss, city officials said.
"My fear is that five months gives [the state] time to sell assets. Meanwhile, Wall Street is being paid off, and we still have stranded debt," Councilman Brad Koplinski said.
"[The law] essentially singled out the city and singled out third-class cities across the commonwealth."
Lynch, who is charged with implementing the state-sponsored fiscal recovery plan for Harrisburg, isn't disturbed by the bankruptcy prohibition, said Cory Angell, his spokesman.
"We don't see that as being too big of a deal. If we wanted to go into bankruptcy, we need that much time anyway to get everything together," Angell said.
"Bankruptcy can be time consuming. We'll live with [the extension] and just move forward with implementing the plan."
Last year, lawmakers amended the state's bankruptcy code to prevent the city from filing for bankruptcy until July 1 of this year.
The bill also amended the state's fiscal code to extend the prohibition for five months and, like last year, it was adopted as lawmakers adopted the state budget.
Kelli Roberts, a spokeswoman for Corbett, said the bill was "a product of the budget process," and "it was something members of the Legislature wanted, and we felt comfortable signing."
After signing the state's 2012-13 budget and approving the fiscal code amendment, Corbett said he was only doing what legislators wanted him to do.
"The Legislature made a decision to carry, extend that for five more months. I'm not going to argue with them on that," Corbett said just after signing the budget last week. "That's their decision."
But a considerable number of lawmakers approved the bill that contained a number of amendments to the fiscal code, not realizing it had such a negative affect on Harrisburg, Koplinski contends.
"I was up on the hill ... explaining it to reps. One of the problems is that [the bankruptcy] moratorium was shoved into the fiscal code. There was no up-and-down vote on this issue," he said. "I talked to multiple reps, and I had to give the full background on how we got here and what was done."
Rep. Ron Buxton, D-Harrisburg, blasted the bill, calling it "a punitive action against the residents of the city of Harrisburg."
Sen. Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Delaware County, said bankruptcy court is not the right place for municipalities and school districts to work through issues.
Allowing municipalities or school districts to petition for bankruptcy protection sends the wrong message; it says the state government is not fulfilling its responsibility to citizens, Pileggi said.
"With the case of Harrisburg, there's been an active receiver working there. That would give us an opportunity to see whether the steps that were being taken would likely lead to some success. So I think it's just a matter of allowing that time and then taking a second look at it in the fall," he said of extending the moratorium until Nov. 30.
Well that's useful...
Quote from: garbon on July 11, 2012, 08:50:36 AM
Well that's useful...
No shit. Really can't tell what the fuck is going on up there anymore without a mining helmet and field compass.
I think it's a reasonable course of action. Bankruptcies are ruinous, it makes sense to make laws to prohibit them.
Quote from: DGuller on July 11, 2012, 10:05:21 AM
I think it's a reasonable course of action. Bankruptcies are ruinous, it makes sense to make laws to prohibit them.
What is a city supposed to do if it has no money, can't borrow any but has enormous debts? Pay its workers minimum wage?
Quote from: DGuller on July 11, 2012, 10:05:21 AM
I think it's a reasonable course of action. Bankruptcies are ruinous, it makes sense to make laws to prohibit them.
:lol:
It's worked for me!
Quote from: KRonn on July 10, 2012, 09:05:52 PM
The Chinese will help expedite GM or any company that wants to open up a factory. They don't have much paperwork, beuracracy and enviromental issues to deal with. Often just the local government officials can ok a project, get things moving real fast. That's what I've heard of how it often works there.
Acquiring a business license can take you years in China. The company I work for wanted to open a joint-venture for years but never got the appropriate licenses for it despite political support at the highest level.
Quote from: Zanza on July 11, 2012, 01:44:33 PM
Quote from: KRonn on July 10, 2012, 09:05:52 PM
The Chinese will help expedite GM or any company that wants to open up a factory. They don't have much paperwork, beuracracy and enviromental issues to deal with. Often just the local government officials can ok a project, get things moving real fast. That's what I've heard of how it often works there.
Acquiring a business license can take you years in China. The company I work for wanted to open a joint-venture for years but never got the appropriate licenses for it despite political support at the highest level.
One of the dangers of over-regulation is that anti-corruption law really limit your flexibility to give bribes to officials, even in foreign countries. The irony is that heavy regulations make companies want to leave for China, but they also make it hard to set up shop in China.
Quote from: Zanza on July 11, 2012, 01:44:33 PM
Quote from: KRonn on July 10, 2012, 09:05:52 PM
The Chinese will help expedite GM or any company that wants to open up a factory. They don't have much paperwork, beuracracy and enviromental issues to deal with. Often just the local government officials can ok a project, get things moving real fast. That's what I've heard of how it often works there.
Acquiring a business license can take you years in China. The company I work for wanted to open a joint-venture for years but never got the appropriate licenses for it despite political support at the highest level.
That's why you just outsource production to an existing company there. They've got everything already set up. The relationships, the supply chains, the subcontract partners, everything.
I'm still trying to wrap around the the fact that Dayton didn't implode during the recession. With their shitty city council and the previous mayor being a Milk Dud that was elected, they have managed to run a 5 million surplus under their new mayor.
Quote from: garbon on July 11, 2012, 10:14:00 AM
Quote from: DGuller on July 11, 2012, 10:05:21 AM
I think it's a reasonable course of action. Bankruptcies are ruinous, it makes sense to make laws to prohibit them.
What is a city supposed to do if it has no money, can't borrow any but has enormous debts? Pay its workers minimum wage?
Doesn't need them anyway.
"Obama wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more fireman, more policeman, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It's time for us to cut back on government and help the American people."--Your boy Mittens
It's worth noting previous SCOTUS rulings have actually said local governments can (with tons of assumptions about relevant State law and etc) simply unilaterally break a contract in times of emergency. Not that Scranton would qualify under the previous rulings, but generally in certain circumstances governments can actually refuse to honor a contract.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 11, 2012, 04:53:50 PM
It's worth noting previous SCOTUS rulings have actually said local governments can (with tons of assumptions about relevant State law and etc) simply unilaterally break a contract in times of emergency. Not that Scranton would qualify under the previous rulings, but generally in certain circumstances governments can actually refuse to honor a contract.
In addition, there's the whole issue of the mayor doing this unilaterally, though that's more a question of what powers Pennsylvania law and the city's charter give to the mayor.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 11, 2012, 03:43:29 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 11, 2012, 10:14:00 AM
Quote from: DGuller on July 11, 2012, 10:05:21 AM
I think it's a reasonable course of action. Bankruptcies are ruinous, it makes sense to make laws to prohibit them.
What is a city supposed to do if it has no money, can't borrow any but has enormous debts? Pay its workers minimum wage?
Doesn't need them anyway.
"Obama wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more fireman, more policeman, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It's time for us to cut back on government and help the American people."
--Your boy Mittens
It's not the number of public sector workers, it's how the public sector system works, seems to me. At least in some areas, for some unions, not all of them. System is broken, needs big reform. Too many areas are messed up, too expensive to afford now. Fix some of that and things like gutting the number of workers in tough times shouldn't have to be as drastic.