Mayor orders furloughs for city workers who voted against deal

Boy, what a mess this is turning out to be. First, Villaraigosa heralds a labor deal with city unions that would have workers chipping in a small amount for their health care. In return the mayor wouldn't impose furloughs. A majority from the Coalition of L.A. City Unions ratified the agreement, but several bargaining units turned it down. So now the mayor wants to impose furlough days on those bargaining units that voted no, what amounts to 6,300 workers. The result, he said, will be reduced city services. That certainly wasn't the message delivered by Villaraigosa earlier today. From press release:

"States and cities across the country are grappling with burgeoning budget deficits and struggling to find solutions. Stalemate often stands in the way of resolution and core services are often cut without considering the long-term impact. Here in Los Angeles, we have a different story to tell."

But not so fast - some of those workers could be exempted from furloughs because they are considered too crucial to remove from their posts. Perhaps that explains why they turned down the deal - what's the incentive to pay for health care when there's no repercussion if you don't? (LAT)

Earlier: L.A.'s dirty little secret about furloughs