California Supreme Court appears to be leaning toward support of governor's furlough program

Maura Dolan
LA Times blog
Sep 8, 2010

Times file photo of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, shown July 28, 2010. (Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)

The California Supreme Court appeared likely Wednesday to uphold Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's furlough of state employees to reduce spending during the state's fiscal crisis.

During oral arguments, some justices suggested that a governor may not have unilateral authority to furlough state workers. Lawyers for state employees argued that only the Legislature could furlough those workers.

But several justices indicated that they believed that the Legislature endorsed or at least acquiesced to furloughs when it approved budget reductions that reflected the savings to be achieved by unpaid furloughs.

Justice Joyce L. Kennard said language in the budget acts and legislative analysis suggested that the Legislature "approved of the furloughs."

Attorneys for employees said the governor only had the authority to lay off workers or negotiate for furloughs. The furloughs produced a savings equivalent to the layoff of tens of thousands of workers.

Several justices noted that furloughs were less drastic than layoffs.

"Are you really arguing that the furloughs are not less drastic than the layoffs of tens of thousands?" a skeptical Justice Ming W. Chin asked of one of the employees lawyers.

The court's ruling, due within 90 days, is expected to determine the legality of unpaid furloughs of more than 200,000 state employees beginning in 2009. In the cases before the court, employees were required to work two fewer days a month. Currently, state employees are being furloughed three days a month.

More than 30 lawsuits challenging furloughs have been filed, producing mixed rulings in the lower courts.