So the new mayor’s election promise that she would not consider layoffs has now flip flopped. When do we get a politician who does not lie?

About the same time the three cops busted for excessive speeding on their motorcycles pay the fines they owe.

Sherri Green is quickly becoming Sherri Grinch. I bet these people haven’t even had time to tell their families before teh news went out. That’s in bad taste

Awc’mon Imorge, that’s called double speak ie(both sides of mouth same time)
What happended to the core review? thought this was going to be the document with which to base these layoffs on. Perhaps we don’t need a core review, save some money, just have the managers in a meeting, tell them to submit report showing a 3% reduction in all depts.,and go from there.
Oh, and don’t forget the reduction in Mayor and councils pay.

The city workers are not immune to the current economy and though it really sucks for them I applaud the difficult decision that has been made…would it be too much to ask to see Bates name among those laid off.
The city’s population has shrunk 10% and until now has not been reflected in staff numbers.

That’s a token start! Let’s keep it going.

No worries people the city has already said they need to hire more security for the CN Center for the booze in the seats fiasco. So I’m sure those folks will find work soon.

28 positions is just 4% of the total number employed. She will have to find another 6% or about 40 positions more in order to achieve 10%.

The feds too are talking 10%. Perhaps the province can do a little pruning too, especially in the ivory towers.

I’m in no way speaking to the merits of anybody employed with city hall, but when people make comments such as perhaps bates should be laid off, it really makes me glad that the peanut gallery isn’t in charge. I don’t think it’s the easiest occupation to manage a city. After all, you have to somehow try to appease everyone including the ungrateful ignorant members of our population. Anyways, I’m pretty sure bates compensation also reflects the amount of petty personal remarks people make towards him.

If so many know better, run for council!

A difficult and (by looking at the picture) a very uncomfortable announcement to make, but a necessary one that was done early in this council’s term.

No fence sitting, no forming review committees, just action.

Looks like this council has already done two things that many of us condemned the previous council for doing too often.

My condolences to those losing their jobs.

Do it now. Get costs down and then under control. Start selling some of the millions in tied up property er parking lots we own.

Hey very good on the new mayor, run the city hall like a business. If you have too much dead weight, get rid of it.

“If so many know better, run for council!”

There are only so many positions on council. I am sure you know that. Do you mean to suggest that all those who could not get on council shouldn’t be allowed to speak out and even criticize the actions of those who were more fortunate?

Doesn’t seem to be too democratic.

Its rather late in the day for the City to get on board with a reduction in staffing. Other business’s in Pr George have been downsizing and cutting costs for the past 15 years. The people at City Hall, have been on a free ride throughout this recession.

They should ensure that the **no layoff** provision for outside workers, is not renewed at the end of this contract, and then lay of some of the outside workers next year.

I dont think the increases for the Councillors is out of line, as they do, do a lot of work for the paltry sum they receive, however the Mayor, and City Managers do not deserve any increases.

Had Rodgers made the tough desisions when he was Mayor, he would probably still be around, however he didnt. Greene knows that if she does nothing this term, she will not be Mayor for the Winter Games. People will no longer accept lame excuses for out of control spending.

They need to continue this re-alignment of City Hall until it is lean and mean. These lay-offs should just be the beginning.

Prince George always wants to be the first in everything, so maybe we can be the first City in BC to take the spending of tax dollars seriously.

I feel sorry for the ones let go being right after Christmas or at anytime of the year.

Looks like a play with numbers. The city did not save 2 mill. as of today. They only saved the cost of the 9 let go today. Do not forget there were 18 positions that were empty, some were likely empty for a while and no possible plans to fill for a while.

Sounds like what the Liberals would say….

So for all arguments sake just a guess:
2 mill/9= $222,222. nope – wages to high
2 mill/28= $71,429 average wage.
$71,429 x 9= $642,857 approx.saved

I made an error. There were 19 positions that were empty.

It is unfortunate for the workers afected by the lay offs and I hope they find employment elsewhere.

this is good, city workers have long been overpaid and underworked. there are layoffs in all sectors and areas and the city is no different. i am glad to see a few management type people get the boot cuz we all know they usually do nothing anyways and are overstaffed. good start by the mayor.

this is good, city workers have long been overpaid and underworked. there are layoffs in all sectors and areas and the city is no different. i am glad to see a few management type people get the boot cuz we all know they usually do nothing anyways and are overstaffed. good start by the mayor.

Finally had time to go through the agreement.

The “Letter of Understanding” for “layoff protection” was signed by Colin Kinsley on behalf of the City and is in effect from January 1, 2008 to Dec 31, 2012.

It is not a blanket agreement at all. There are some outside who can be laid off according to the agreement. The main positions which are in jeopardy are those who have a permanent seasonal position and do not have a second seasonal position for the remainder of the year.

Whether there are any people like that, I do not know.

Now for the interesting one that a good lawyer would base a case on for laying an outside worker off, in my opinion.

Clause 4. “This Letter of Understanding will not apply to reductions in the workforce caused by legislative requirements.”

As the City Manager stated at yesterday’s Council meeting, the City is not allowed to run a deficit. That is a legislative requirement.

In order to meet that requirement, one can increase income or decrease costs. Reducing the number of people employed is one way to reduce costs.

That one could be argued, and when well done can be successful.

However, the key part of the entire Letter of Understanding is found in the definition of “lay-off”.

Clause 2. “The term “lay-off” shall be defined as a period of time that an employee is not actively employed by the City due to shortage of work.”

So, no snow …. no work clearing snow …. can’t lay someone off.

However, a permanent cut back in services which means a permanent cut back in positions occupied by people who provided those services is not a shortage of work. It is a cessation of work. In my opinion, such a reduction in positions does not meet the definition of “lay-off”.

So the question is, is the City actually protecting outside workers to the detriment of inside workers? Are any outside workers being laid off?

Atleast Greene has done something to lessen the burden on tax payers and get the budget down to a manageable number. On the other hand if PG still had Rodgers as mayor the 19 empty positions would be filled and the tax increase closer to 5%.
Not a Greene supporter but good for her.

It must be real special to have a layoff at city hall.
Over a 1000 people lost their jobs at Clear Lake sawmill, Rustads, and NCP and yet 9 city workers getting notices receives more ink than a 1000 other workers.

why is the union leader on council absent from the above picture?

Like chimps at their first fire, all the little people taking pot shots at people who lost their jobs. Classy.

The only problem is some of those positions have not been filled for a while – even when Rogers was mayor.
As I posted previously – ” So for all arguments sake just a guess:
2 mill/9= $222,222. nope – wages to high
2 mill/28= $71,429 average wage.
$71,429 x 9= $642,857 approx.saved”

A guess would be around $643,000 approx saved as of today.

“Resident” mentions “It must be real special to have a layoff at city hall.”

Not enough layoffs, with only 9 people.

Corporations and business have been cutting back for 15 years as Palopu mentions. The City should have followed years back – even as far back as Kinsley…

Government should be no different – welcome to the real world………Many have been there more at least once……

Takes a woman to balance the books and the hard knocks. heh, heh.
Lets not forget all the mill jobs that went, and their families included.
I’m pretty sure that these City workers will be fine as they must have good educations and degree’s as such.
There’s still a consolation, at least there’s 8 months of E.I and then there’s welfare, but they’ll have to sell all their assets 1st.

Run for city council? Well ya got about three years to practice getting all each of yer answers out in about a minute. Or sell yer soul to sponsors who will want their dues back and more on your behalf IF you get elected.

I understand the anguish of those having been given notice of termination. I personally have been in that position four times during my working career. Not once did I see it coming.
The one observation I have, looking back, is that each time one door closed, another opened. It wasn`t easy, and it wasn`t fun, but our family survived and prospered in Prince George.

As I gaze on the above picture of City Council and senior management with their gloomy looks in support of Mayor Green as she announces the “cuts”, my first question is this.
How did the City of Prince George end up with 28 excessive employees?
My second question is.
Who will do the work that these 28 will not do? You see something doesn’t jive here. First it’s a $350,000 core review, but before the “review” the axe has dropped….interesting. Mr Bates is quoted as saying “it is not yet clear how the job losses will impact service levels.” So we venture out into the unknown…but never fear “contract workers” can take up the slack. Opps did I say that? There was a lot of business money behind Green…stay tuned folks..it’s going to get interesting…and the “core review”? – Just to gain knowledge on who gets what to pay back the big money machine. In the end the tax payer will pay more! The whole thing looks and smells cheese y to me.

Cheetos – there were not 28 employees. only 9 got axed. the rest of the positions have been empty – some for quite a while.

Will any of the laid off employees be working on the Winter Games? Is it possible that some of the city employees already working on the Winter Games came from the vacant positions? Just wondering.

I hate to see anyone lose employment.

guesswhat …. the City is playing a smoke and mirror game.

It says in the article: “The elimination of the 28 positions will save the city about 2 million dollars.”

If those words were said like that and I am not taking them out of context, then a reasonable interpretation is that there were 19 people who left their position at some time. As a result of this decision, those postions are no longer available and an additional 9 postions have been chopped.

I also assume that those 19 postions were all vacated in 2011 and not prior to 2011.

Here is the main thing. The city has people at the helm who think that we are all stupid. They think that we do not deserve a clear explanation of what actually happened over time. They could tell us that they really did not go out of their way to fill those 19 positions; that, in fact, under the previous Council there was a conscious decision to not re-hire for those postions for the time being.

I see nothing much new in the way of thinking with this group. It is still far too muddled for an effective Council.

Nothing really new here except that people are getting laid off instead of reductions through attrition which sheri said was going to be her approach.

How do we find out what the total number of employees working for the city has been over the last ten years?

Got to be tough to hear that you are losing your job especially knowing Council is giving themselves a 30% pay hike while telling everyone else to cut back.

So faxman how many should be layed off, come on you must have a figure.

pgposter so can you back up. You must have the facts, spit them out.

47

A repost from the “views” section of this site.

Given the fact of life of city governance and finances, the fix for this year to reduce a projected increase of 5% and higher down to just over 3% by laying off people and not rehiring positions which have been vacated, is not a one time fix.

This fix will be required every year until the structural problem is resolved. In other words, look forward to this next year, and the year after and the year after and so on until the situation becomes untenable. Our financial capacity to deal with the problems will continue to spiral downhill which, in turn, will contribute to the continuing “death” cycle.

If this is not fixed soon right across the province, especially in slow growing and negative growth communities, we will be in an ever continuing spiral of catching up with at least three aspects of operating a small to midsized city in the early part of the 21st century in Canada which is entering the baby boomer retirement peak for the next 20 years to be followed by the boomer echo cohort.

1. Paying for services and cost downloading

2. Paying for aging urban owned infrastructure replacement

3. Competing with other cities to provide “lifestyle” in addition to “core” services to entice job providing businesses and new residents, who are the human resources to those businesses, to move to this City rather than other cities. It has become a jobseekers’ market and will get worse with the baby boom retirements now upon us.

Neither Council nor Administration has publicly addressed this issue head on. We are kept in the dark. This needs to be a public “conversation”. It is our City. We need to know whether the people we have placed in charge of it for three years understand the problem and are doing something about it. So far, it does not look that way.

I am not a supporter of Ms. Green but I applaud her decision (and those of council and city employees) to take this action. As many have stated before, private business has suffered many lay-offs in the last few years.

What I would like to see is a reduction in City wages. Not lay-offs, we can keep these people employeed, just at lower wages. Forget the contracts that were signed, lower those wages (and possibly benefits). I know Canfor people who have had to accept wage cuts in the last 5 years; they still earn a good salary even with the cuts. People have to learn to make do, and if you don’t have an education, trade or skill set that gets you a well paid job, then do something about it. Janitors, clerical staff, cashiers, etc. should not be paid what the City of PG pays them. If they don’t like being paid lower wages, then they can go out, earn an education or trade or skill set of some sort that pays them better.

Isnt it strange that the first solution to reduce taxes is to lay off workers. There are a thousand other areas that they can cut costs. But I guess it looks good to stand infront of a camera in your suit and tie to show the tax payers that “Im’ the Boss”.

It is those very workers that drive our economy and keep the money in circulation. I hope that they never remove the No Layoff clause. The managers have one so why should those who work not have one.
Cheers

“Here is the main thing. The city has people at the helm who think that we are all stupid. They think that we do not deserve a clear explanation of what actually happened over time.”

Gus…if you really beleive this then you’re either high or clueless.

The positions were eliminated not the people.
You need help if you are thrilled over someone being out of a job. BC Racer,you don’t like anyone.

Realitycheck ….. nice “out of context” quote, but we all know you are known for that approach. ;-)

I then continued in the same paragraph with” “They could tell us that they really did not go out of their way to fill those 19 positions; that, in fact, under the previous Council there was a conscious decision to not re-hire for those positions for the time being.”

So tell me realitycheck, now that you got my attention, why are they not telling us that? Why have we not had positions filled? People not willing to work for the City anymore? People not willing to come to this community? During any given period, do we have as many positions as that not filled?

In fact, based on the average of the 28 positions eliminated there had already been a saving of around $1.4 million sitting in the back pocket of Council.

You, of all people on here, should be able to tell us when that money was starting to be squirelled away for this announcement.

What kind of reality is it that you are checking against?

So BCRacer, have you been getting too many parking tickets again? Then you heard your favourite meter maid got laid off?

BCRacer …. in my opinion you started down the path of making this personal by writing: “I heard of on(e) person who lost her job and it brought tears of joy to my heart”

I was simply putting a plausible scenario to it ….

Ya…you can put a monkey in a suit but you cant stop them from flinging their poo at each other…