.jpg)
Respecting the rights of all means that I respect your right not to eat meat or to eat meat from a supermarket and not to hunt. I expect the same respect.
Democrats' health bills depend on forcing individuals to buy insurance or face severe fines or imprisonment.
More Columns >>>
- > Charles M. Arlinghaus: The new health care bureaucracy (18)
- > Kathy Sulivan: Don't read too much into recent election results (18)
- > Joe McQuaid: Not to be outdone, the Granite State must have a fossil to call its own (8)
- > Two stories for the book on hunting (7)
- > Fergus Cullen: Is Lamontagne too good for politics? (6)
- > Garth Corriveau: Time to deliver better government for Manchester (19)
- > Douglas J. Wenners: Congress' proposed reforms will raise health insurance rates (35)
- > Charles M. Arlinghaus: City's revenue sharing loss was inevitable (12)
- > Deroy Murdock: Pelosi's health care bill is the nanny state run amok (31)
- > Joe McQuaid: Contemplating a misplaced grandkid, Kathleen Parker's visit
- > John Clayton: Dad takes on 'Naked Baby Syndrome' (14)
- > John Harrigan: We can't let this go without a challenge (21)
- > Greg Moore: Tuesday's message from voters: Butt out, party bosses (8)
- > Kathleen Parker: Saving the news (11)
- > Grace Mattern: Domestic violence is a bigger problem than many realize (9)
Andrew Cline has been editorial page editor of the New Hampshire Union Leader since October of 2001. His writing has appeared in more than 100 newspapers and magazines, including The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and National Review.Diana Lacey: Gov. Lynch is poorly managing the taxpayers' money
Print
Email
Mobile
Reader comments
By DIANA LACEY
Wednesday, Nov. 4, 2009
Gov. John Lynch's administration, not the State Employees' Association, has failed state taxpayers, contrary to what was stated in the New Hampshire Union Leader's Oct. 24 editorial, "SEA realism: It's about time." How many lawsuits must be filed, lies revealed, lives jeopardized before this is accepted as fact?
We did not seek raises; we entertained numerous concessions to save jobs. We simply wanted to make sure our sacrifices were absolutely unavoidable, as small as necessary and actually saved the work force Gov. John Lynch claims to respect and value.
Examine what's happened since the contract was rejected and reflect on Lynch's long-standing position that there were only two acceptable outcomes: across-the-board, everybody-shares-the pain furloughs or approximately 750 across-the-board layoffs:
Lynch's layoff predictions were grossly overstated; the threat of "across-the-board" cuts was disingenuous at best. There were fewer than 300 full-time layoffs, and only in certain agencies.
Lynch gave his agency heads alternatives he would not entertain in contract negotiations. In Administrative Services Commissioner Linda Hodgdon's Oct. 27 column, she states: "Once the serious decision was made by the union to reject furloughs, the governor allowed department heads to be as resourceful as possible, and for that he should be applauded." Every taxpayer should be asking Lynch, "Why weren't you resourceful in the first place? Why did you try to take all that money from employees instead?"
Lynch's lead negotiator states that "even if we found a pot of gold," these jobs might not be coming back. And Lynch's agency heads are stating that these jobs are likely gone for good because of greater efficiencies. If that is the case, taxpayers should be outraged that these efficiencies weren't initiated at the beginning of the budget!
Did Lynch just spend our money for four extra months? Did Lynch plan to keep spending that money for the rest of the biennium if the SEA had agreed to the contract? Or did Lynch simply seek political cover by blaming state employees for the layoffs he wanted to execute all along?
Today, state employee concerns are validated by Lynch's own actions. We are amazed and disappointed in Lynch's unfortunate priorities:
-- Lynch would rather take (on average) $4,200 from more than 10,000 workers' paychecks than make the state more efficient.
-- Lynch holds onto more than 1,000 vacancies, estimated to be worth more than $100 million in savings, but lays off full-time workers.
-- Lynch employs more than 1,000 part-time political appointees (at an average pay of $74 an hour), but lays off full-time workers (this is included in a fiscal note recently provided by Hodgdon's staff).
-- Lynch has increased spending on consultants and contractors. Hodgdon denies that, but the health benefit administration contracts she oversees validate our claim.
Had Lynch done the belt-tightening in the first place, the final sacrifice he wanted in a contract might have been minimal. In all likelihood, that option would have been ratified by SEA members.
Of course, if Lynch's real intent was to lay off workers and play the victim card by blaming it all on them, then he has succeeded.
Diana Lacey is first vice president of the State Employees' Association of New Hampshire.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. © 1997-2009.
YOUR COMMENTS
As they say, a person will not have to defend unless they know they did something wrong. She seems to be doing a lot of defending lately.
The SEA indicates they fought for everyone. I guess that is why they voted on a contract that would GUARANTEE layoffs. I was told that this individual had a smile on her face when the vote was cast. Pathetic.
Time to get rid of the Union. As far as the SEA's argument that they are there for Fair Share... how? I see postings saying how they are now collecting funds for "their coworkers laid off"... however "coworkers" to the SEA is SEA members only. False advertising perhaps??? The SEA can try to make the argument that they took money from Fair Share employees because they were fighting for them - this alone is a lie. So for any Fair Share employee laid off, who was forced to contribute, what good did the SEA do for them? Not a thing.
- Kelly, Manchester
The only ones left are the NH diehards who insist on accountability as well as preserving our neighbors rights.
New Hampshire is being taken over by everyone who makes a profit without concern of where our tax dollars go.
Someone, please step up to the plate and defend the rights of the ones wanting to bring up our families in an atmosphere that is non-corrupt and also concerned about living past tomorrow.
- judy, Concord
I believed the Gov. and thought the union was being greedy. As the facts are coming out it looks like I was wrong.
The employees are doing the right thing by insisting on efficiencies rather than just delaying the problem for another two years.
We should take a hard look at all programs that have expanded in all agencies along with any newly created high paying positions.
- Trixie, Concord
The unions representing the state employee's never take responsibility. I used to support most unions but the management of the unions have long since become havens for useless workers. I hope they break the union.
- Bob Newton, Freedom,NH
The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
- Jeff, Concord
Will Lynch be ever be accountable for anything? Or do we just pass the buck to some non elected poor slob.
- Chris, Merrimack
Spot on Dianna. Keep up the good work.
- Tom, Concord
Which single working mom is Diana going to bump to unemployment so she can get her seniority job back?
- Andy, Milford
Reform and modernize the pension system in order to save money in the budget and reduce the number of state job cuts.
- Ditmar Kopf, Hollis
Gov. Lynch is destroying education in this state and no one is noticing.
Check this site: www.mathwizards.wordpress.com and flip through the articles that have been posted over the last couple of months. They've done a great job of exposing the programs (costly ones) that do nothing to help the students. It's all fuzzy feel good nonsense and the students will pay a price for his failed Dept of Ed
- Susan, Manchester, NH
Diana, face it, you gambled and you lost. Get over it.
- Tom, Manchester
Can we have a follow up to this tomorrow by Governor Lynch about how Diana Lacey is poorly performing her services as first vice president of SEA of NH?
- Bob V, Manchester
Actually this should read Lynch mismanaged tax payer money, and then raised taxes and fee's and still mismanages money.
Some of us are still waiting for the story announcing how all the waste and fraud in our many government run systems is being weeded out. Never do we read such stories and it's not because our systems are not riddled with the stuff. The problem with government programs is that the politicians who put them in place and then are in charge of watching over them will never admit to waste or fraud because it’s a reflection of their performance.
- Deb, Derry
So, with 20 /20 hind-sight vision, the worker's Association exposes the truth about a politician's actions. There is another fact that should be explored, why were a significant number of political appointee (the grossly over-paid, notoriously under-worked, do nothing productive all day) positions filled AFTER the tentative contract was rejected even though the $25,000,000 personnel cost reduction had NOT been achieved? I suspect the answer is a politically sponsored agenda.
- Gary L. Kerr, Chichester
give it a rest Diana. There are 2 sides to every story. Why do you still feel the need to defend yours? Instead of spending your time sitting in the past, why not use that time more usefully such as working on what will happen moving forward? Does the SEA have any real plans or do we have to keep hearing this over and over? And yes I am a member.
- brenda, belmont
Lynch cut all those jobs and still the state is run a deficite 34 million dollars over 4 months. There needs to be more cuts and personnel are and efficient way to cut bugets. The concessions would have gone a long way to save of those job. Most the jobs that were cut by the way was because the program run by those employees was cut.
-Governement has never and probably will never efficient. They don't have to turn a profit there no incentive to become more effeicent.
-Vacancies are just that vacant meaning they cost the state any money until they are filled. There is hireing freeze within the state so until that is lifted they won't get filled.
-Part time employees are cheaper than full time employees in every industry.
-Contractors are cheaper than employees. This is a way for the state to save money.
- Brad, Goffstown
NOTE: If you have visited this page before, newer comments may be hidden. Press F5, or hold down the Ctrl key while reloading or refreshing the page. (Another option for Firefox users is the Clear Cache add-on.)