The flap over furloughs

Re “State is told to furlough employees,” Jan. 30

I read with skepticism that a judge ruled that employees of the state will be furloughed -- that is, not receive pay on the first and third Fridays of each month.

Will that include the state employee who made this ruling, Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Patrick Marlette? What about his large-sized belt? I say, let’s trim the fat from his salary, furlough him the same two days a month and reduce his belt size as well.

Or is it that only the ruled must pay the price? Please do not tell me that judges are exempt. If so, they will continue to accrue riches while we ordinary mortals get poorer and poorer -- and on our dime.

Patricia J. Barry

Los Angeles

--

With the nation experiencing rising unemployment, it is quite amazing to see the arrogance and selfishness of our state employee unions in attempting to overrule the governor’s furlough order.

When they wake up in the morning, they should look in the mirror and give thanks that they still have jobs. Perhaps they should ask the unemployed in America if they would have accepted furloughs, had they been offered, instead of pink slips.

Come on, unions; we’re in this together. You need to give as much as the rest of America.

Peter Fertig

Pasadena

--

It’s wonderful to furlough employees to save money; however, the government never seems to do this in a businesslike manner.

For example, closing the unemployment centers two days a month at a time of high unemployment makes no sense. Next, the government will want to close police and fire departments, which are absolutely crucial during bad times.

Can the state please pick something that does not impact the public in such an immediate way? I know: How about cutting pork?

Sharon Vesely

Pomona