Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/12/1993 09:05 AM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATOR LEMAN announced SB 1 RETIREMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM to be up for consideration. MIKE MCQUARY, Department of Transportation equipment operator in Fairbanks, supported SB 1, because there was a high rate of injury on the job and a lot of people were quitting because they simply couldn't do the work any more. It's been proven to be cost effective. They are losing a lot of people through workmen's compensation and they need to have new people who are able to work. Number 504 WENDY REDMAN, Vice President, University Relations, strongly supported SB 1. She said the University was able to show significant savings through use of early retirement incentive programs. They anticipated additional savings would happen with the new program. She pointed out that it was at the option of the employer which she thought was very important. It is a management tool for providing savings and organizational flexibility that is not available to them any other way. At the University they have developed senior faculty in departments where demand has decreased and they have no resources in some departments where faculty is needed. The only way to lay off a professor is to eliminate the entire department, she explained. Due to the slow economy there are decreases in hiring junior faculty so there is kind of a buyer's market when it comes to junior staffing. If they could use the RIP now, it would put them in the extremely fortuitous position of being able to replace the older faculty with a good cadre of junior faculty that is available at this point. Number 557 MS. REDMAN opposed proposed amendments 1 and 2 because it would eliminate the University from the legislation. Proposed amendment 3 was alright with them, because they do not anticipate refilling more than 50% of the positions at this point. She supported amendment 4 because it clarified the bill. Number 578 SENATOR LEMAN asked if she could research the time period to show what the savings would be for a time period less than 5 years. MS. REDMAN said they could show savings from 3 years to 5 years. TAPE 93-19, SIDE B Number 584 ROBERT COLLINS, Kotzebue, supported SB 1, because it would save the state a lot of money and solve a lot of problems with eliminating the work force without a lot of anguish. He commented that the figures on people retiring at the age of 35 are probably in reference to state troopers who can retire in 20 years any way. Number 549 BARRY HAIGHT, volunteer lobbyist for a Public Safety employee group in the Fairbanks area, objected to amendment 1, because it includes teachers, but not municipalities, political subdivision, the University of Alaska, or state employees. He objected to amendment 2 because it also left off the University and state employees. He thought amendment 3 was an effort to accommodate state employees and should be considered. Amendment 4 he strongly supported. Number 516 CATHY WELTZIN, Auke Bay, brought up the human factor in the teaching profession. A lot of times people are in jobs when they are worn out and they are staying there for just one reason. This might be a really nice way to "clean up" their profession. This is a way to let them go with grace and to bring on new educators who would be more flexible. Number 498 DENNIS GELLHOUSE, President, ASEA, supported SB 1. A legislative audit from November 1991 revealed the state saved $23 million in the last program. This program is good in a period of declining revenues. The bill is written so a cost savings must be established before it is approved, so this is not another state give away for state employees. This is a way to save the state money and humanely mitigate the impact of layoffs and unemployment. MR. GELLHOUSE strongly objected to amendments 1 and 2. He did not take a position on amendment 3 and had not seen amendment 4. Number 459 FAYE BAIN, ASEA, strongly supported SB 1. She opposed amendments 1 and 2 which she described as an end run against the state employees, which according to her, were being treated as a "subhuman species." SENATOR LEMAN commented that there was no intent to treat state employees as subhuman, but the amendments were there to work toward resolving issues so the bill could possibly pass and become law. Number 416 SHANE RUUTTILA, ASEA Local 52, said in his division people who were mostly in their late 50's took advantage of the program. Not only would it be cost effective, but it would increase productivity and service. He strongly opposed amendment 1, because it would exclude state employees. The people who are staying on in the state are passing their dollars on to the people in the business community for goods and services. Number 375 GARY SAMPSON, Corrections Representative on ASEA, said there are approximately 1,000 employees in the Corrections Department that would be impacted by this legislation. He strongly supported the legislation saying his department is looking at steep cuts to their budget and the loss of many jobs. The people who will be impacted are the ones who are just starting out and perhaps they would have to leave the state to find employment elsewhere. This would be a great loss of potential for the state of Alaska. Passing this legislation would reduce the government payroll by not hurting those who are just starting out, but helping those persons who are prepared to retire. Number 352 SENATOR DUNCAN moved to adopt amendment 4 which changes the window periods for municipal employees. ROXANNE STEWART, Aide for Senator Duncan, explained the window period to the Committee which was included as a specific response to the concerns of the fire department in Fairbanks which could otherwise disappear on July 1. There were no objections and it was so moved. Regarding amendment 3, SENATOR DUNCAN said he believed to have a comprehensive piece of legislation that has all public employees in it. He would consider amendment 3 if it would help move the legislation along. He was concerned about how restrictive it would be on management to utilize the program to its fullest. Number 311 SENATOR MILLER offered amendment 3 for discussion purposes. SENATOR ELLIS thought amendment 3 took responsibility away from the Hickel appointees to do their jobs. Number 295 SENATOR LEMAN noted an excerpt from an NCSL report that said, "It is difficult to obtain real savings from retirement incentive programs for state employees and that control of replacements is the key to savings. Explicit accounting for all costs including future costs to retirement systems is essential." He agreed with this idea and supported amendment 3 because it had tighter controls which would improve the chances of this legislation succeeding. Number 251 JIM BULGIANO, ASEA employee, Department of Corrections, said there needs to be some consideration for essential personnel in replacing only 50% of the positions. In his department that might jeopardize the safety and security of their personnel. SENATOR DUNCAN said he appreciated his concerns and thought they should look at defining essential employees. Number 228 SHANE RUUTTILA, Division of Corrections, opposed amendment 3. He said their case loads are some of the fastest growing in the nation. They cannot afford to loose even one person. He thought there were some divisions that just wouldn't be able to operate under this amendment. Number 204 There were no objections to amendment 3 and it was so ordered. SENATOR MILLER moved to adopt amendment 5. There were no objections and it was so ordered. Number 141 SENATOR DUNCAN moved to pass the State Affairs CS for SB 1 with individual recommendations. There were no objections and it was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|