To browse all LAO publications, visit our Publications page.
March 4, 2014 - The Governor's budget proposes $24 billion to pay salary and benefit costs for state workers in 2014-15, up from an estimated $23.5 billion in the current year. The increased costs reflect pay increases for most state workers, rising health and pension benefit costs, and a net increase in the number of state workers. In this report, we provide an overview of the state workforce, current collective bargaining agreements, and state employee compensation costs in 2014-15. We also discuss historical trends of state employee compensation costs and state worker take-home pay. We find that over the last two decades, after adjusting for inflation and state worker cost for health and retirement benefits, state worker take-home pay has remained largely flat while state costs per employee have grown significantly. In addition, assuming the number of state workers does not decline significantly, we expect the state's employee compensation costs to increase for the foreseeable future.
February 19, 2014 - This presentation to the Assembly Public Employees, Retirement and Social Security Committee describes the likely over-$5 billion annual cost of a plan to fully retire CalSTRS' unfunded liabilities over the next 30 years. The state and school districts likely will bear the majority of these costs. The presentation discusses options the state's leaders may have in developing the plan to address this huge funding problem over the long term.
September 4, 2013 - We reviewed the proposed memorandum of understanding (MOU) for Bargaining Unit 9. Bargaining Unit 9 is represented by the Professional Engineers in California Government (PECG).
September 4, 2013 - We reviewed the proposed memorandum of understanding (MOU) for Bargaining Unit 6. Bargaining Unit 6 is represented by the California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA).
September 3, 2013 - We reviewed the proposed memorandum of understanding (MOU) for Bargaining Unit 7. Bargaining Unit 7 is represented by the California Statewide Law Enforcement Association (CSLEA). If adopted, the MOU would modestly increase state costs in 2013-14 with increasing costs in 2014-15 and 2015-16.
August 29, 2013 - We reviewed the proposed memorandum of understanding (MOU) for Bargaining Unit 12. Bargaining Unit 12 is represented by the International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE). If adopted, the MOU would modestly increase state costs in 2013-14. Depending on decisions made by the Department of Finance, state costs could increase further (1) in 2014-15 to provide a one-time payment of $1,200 to employees and (2) in 2015-16 to provide an ongoing 3 percent or 3.25 percent general salary increase.
August 23, 2013 - We reviewed the proposed memoranda of understanding (MOUs) for Bargaining Unit 16 and Bargaining Unit 19. Bargaining Unit 16 is represented by the Union of American Physicians and Dentists (UAPD). Bargaining Unit 19 is represented by the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). If adopted, the MOUs would modestly increase state costs in 2013-14. Depending on decisions made by the Department of Finance, a general salary increase for all affected employees could increase state costs beginning in 2014-15 and thereafter.
August 2, 2013 - We reviewed the proposed memorandum of understanding (MOU) for Bargaining Unit 18. These employees are represented by the California Association of Psychiatric Technicians. If adopted, the MOU would modestly increase state costs in 2013-14. Depending on decisions made by the Department of Finance, a general salary increase for all Unit 18 employees could increase state costs beginning in 2014-15 and thereafter.
June 21, 2013 - We reviewed the proposed memoranda of understanding (MOUs) for Bargaining Units 1, 3, 4, 11, 14, 15, 17, 20, and 21. These employees are represented by Service Employees International Union, Local 1000. If adopted, the MOUs would modestly increase state costs in 2013-14. Depending on decisions made by the Department of Finance, a general salary increase for all affected employees could increase state costs beginning in 2014-15 and thereafter.
March 20, 2013 - Last year, the Legislature asked CalSTRS to submit a report detailing at least three options for addressing the unfunded liabilities of the pension system's Defined Benefit (DB) Program, which are now estimated by system actuaries to total about $70 billion. This handout for the Legislature's Public Employment and Retirement Committees (1) describes the risks of waiting to address CalSTRS' unfunded liabilities, (2) compares CalSTRS' unfunded liabilities to California's other long-term liabilities, (3) and examines possible sources for additional funding. We recommend that the Legislature adopt a plan that aims to fully fund CalSTRS' unfunded liabilities in about 30 years. A companion video further explains our findings and recommendations.
March 14, 2013 - Over the past five budget years, furloughs reduced state employee compensation costs by about $5 billion in exchange for giving state employees additional time off. This report examines whether state employees took this additional time off—or whether, after accounting for changes in use of vacation and other time, they worked about as many days as they did before. We find that (1) state workers used most of their furlough days, but decreased their use of vacation and annual leave days, and (2) state leave liabilities and payments to separating employees are now at historic levels.
March 12, 2013 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4 on State Administration
April 20, 2012 - We reviewed the proposed Memorandum of Understanding for Bargaining Units 12 (Craft and Maintenance), 16 (Physicians, Dentists, and Podiatrists), 18 (Psychiatric Technicians), and 19 (Health and Social Services/Professionals). If adopted, the MOUs would result in modest increases in state costs for employee compensation.
April 13, 2012 - Presented to Joint Conference Committee on Public Employee Pensions, Hon. Warren T. furutani, Chair, and Hon. Gloria negrete McLeod, Chair
November 8, 2011 - The Governor’s 12-point pension and retiree health plan would result in bold changes for California’s public employee retirement programs. His proposals would shift more of the financial risk for pensions—now borne largely by public employers—to employees and retirees and would, in so doing, substantially ameliorate a key area of long-term financial risk for California governments. Despite the proposal’s strengths, it leaves many questions unanswered, such as how his hybrid plan and retirement age proposals would work and how the state should cope with large unfunded liabilities already affecting the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, the University of California Retirement Plan, and the health benefit program for state and California State University retirees. The Governor’s proposal to increase many current public employees’ pension contributions also raises significant legal and practical issues.