Las Vegas Sun

July 28, 2014

Currently: 86° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Sandoval won’t talk state worker pay, benefits

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval speaks to the Las Vegas Sun editorial board Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2012.

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval speaks to the Las Vegas Sun editorial board Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2012.

CARSON CITY — Despite lavishing praise on the performance of state workers, Gov. Brian Sandoval won’t say whether his budget will include pay and benefit increases for 17,000 state employees.

State worker pay and benefits have been cut significantly in the state’s past two budget cycles.

“The budget is an ongoing process,” Sandoval said, adding that he would not reveal details until his State of the State message in January.

Restoration of pay and benefits was not included the list released by the state budget office Friday of special fiscal requests sought by state agencies.

Sandoval said this week he intends to expand Medicaid for low-income people in connection with the federal health care legislation. And he has disclosed that tax cuts for small business will be included in his budget.

Asked if he would put money where his mouth is in praising state workers, Sandoval would only say, “That’s one item that is being looked at.”

Aldo Vennetilli of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Workers, isn’t optimistic. “He’s (Sandoval) is going to put the screws to them.”

He said the pay and benefits of state workers have fallen 30 to 40 percent in the past several legislative sessions. And 1,600 positions in state government are being kept vacant.

Sandoval and the 2011 Legislature approved a 2.5 percent reduction in wages and six unpaid furlough days a year for state workers. Also eliminated were automatic pay increases for some employees and longevity pay.

The state Public Employees Retirement Board in November voted to increase by 1 percent the premium paid by state and local government workers to the pension program. The health insurance program that covers state workers has not asked for any increase in premiums.

In October, Sandoval he said he would try to reverse wage reductions and furloughs state workers have shouldered since 2009. But he said he never promised to restore lost benefits.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 2 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. Mr. Ryan: What about the Legislative process of approving the budgets for the cities, counties, school districts--that's where the overwhelmingly excessive compensation is. State salaries, overall, are a bit high and they have had some cuts recently--so perhaps static levels for state employees is appropriate. Of concern, remains, that State employees (and others) get annual step increases until they top out of the pay scales--unlike federal employees who must wait up to 3 years (or "merit" performance) for a step increase. FIXING STEPS could be helpful, very helpful.

  2. Mr. Ryan: what constitutes the alleged 30-40% reduction in pay and benefits for State employees??? Too many people just keep saying stuff with no foundation. I've heard of the 6% temporary cut / shorter work weeks. So are "you" saying that a few years of no COL's and such is 30-40%? If so, that means the overall compensation is much more excessive than we already thought.