Cutting Back at City Hall
Summary
Smithville, in their proposed budget, was focusing on reductions to maximize their budget for the essential services while cutting other costs, including the salaries of other employees. The cutback resulted from the failure to raise enough revenue in the city that could cater to all the services provided to the public. The employees who aren’t in essential services were on the receiving end; the cut was on their salaries and retrenchment. The union representing the employees had to protest and defend their people as they wanted not to be affected. The retrenchment was necessary to make the essential services survive, and therefore it was affected despite the union’s plea and suggestions of ensuring their members aren’t the sacrificial lambs.
- In developing the Smithville budget, officials endeavored to make reductions easy on employees. From this standpoint, how do you evaluate their success in the following areas: hiring freeze, cost-of-living pay freeze, merit pay freeze, furloughs, reduction by attrition, cutting back on the force, elimination of training programs, and freeze on travel? Please explain.
Some expenses weren’t so much of a benefit even they excluded them from cutting costs. Training of employees is a necessary program for continuity and adaptability to technological overall advancements.
- Other cutting back methods include putting ceilings on positions, load-shedding, demotions, personnel transfers, and reclassifying positions. Do you believe Smithville officials should have done more in these areas? Please elaborate.
Smithville officials could have done more to harmonize and ensure the budget is at the level that is affordable to the city. They could have stopped some operations that weren’t that profitable and resume them when the situation gets well to cut the budget and costs.
- Officials could have quickly solved most of the budget-cutting problems by a 10 percent reduction in the workforce. Do you think they were wiser to choose instead of the complex program they did? Please justify your response.
The reduction in the workforce may hurt the union as they projected. This is the reason why they were to follow the complex programs. They wanted to make sure that not many of their members are fished out of work, an action that would render many of them jobless.
- Do you consider as valid the criticism of union leaders who faulted officials for failing to attempt to alter the city charter to permit increases in utility rates or to reduce the 70 percent of the sales tax going to capital improvements when they knew long beforehand that revenue would be substantially lowered?
The criticisms of the union leaders were not substantial because the criticism was of Smithville’s benefit, but the direction it was leading was known. It was in their domain that revenue would be substantially lowered.
- Do you agree with the Fraternal Order of Police president that in the Smithville budget, capital improvements were allowed at the cost of “a little” raise for employees? Please elaborate.
The president of the Fraternal Order of Police was so right as the head of the FOP union. The provisions for the raise were evident in the proposed budget that was to take effect. The police were to benefit because of the essential services they provide.
- Do you think it is fair not to make reductions-in-force for essential services such as fire and police protection and place the burden of retrenchment almost wholly on those employees who provide the other governmental services? Please justify your answer.
It is fair to ensure the essential services remain in force, no matter other considerations. For the case of Smithville, there could be a reduction in the salaries of the other workers but not a retrenchment, as was projected by the budget organizers.
- Do you think it is possible that efficiency and productivity might not be improved after a retrenchment program has been implemented?
After a retrenchment has been affected, there can be many ups and downs in maintaining the output given out by all the employees together. The gap will have to be felt by the few employees who will be back to work on all the positions left for efficiency to be achieved. That may be a problem in city management.
- Researchers have reported several negative results associated with retrenchment in government: (a) an increase in polarization—management vs. labor, whites vs. blacks, political appointees vs. career officials, and veterans vs. non-veterans; (b) increases in waste, fraud, and failure to maintain standards; (c) an increase in the age of the workforce; (d) a higher level of organizational chaos—disruption of programs and processes; (e) a decline in morale; and (f) an increase in decision-making uncertainty. How serious are these findings? Please explain.
These findings are serious; they happen in the public sector because, in a retrenchment, the retrenched factions check on the logics and base of their selection for retrenchment leaving their fellows. Due to the feelings that the retrenched persons have, they always try to fight back the corporations through all avenues, thinking that they are the sidelined persons at the workplace.
- Cutback practices are sometimes met with opposition from special-interest groups: trade, professional, labor, community, and business organizations; grant recipients; and clientele groups. How may interest groups help to protect programs and prevent cuts that potentially jeopardize their loss of benefits?
Interest groups would not want a cut in the salary of the persons who benefit them, the persons they consider their clients. Without the persons, they aren’t at work, and therefore it is a narrative that they would not support at all costs.