Quantcast

The DNAinfo archives brought to you by WNYC.
Read the press release here.

Judge Blocks Gov. David Paterson's Furlough of 100,000 State Workers

By Heather Grossmann | May 12, 2010 9:42pm | Updated on May 13, 2010 7:17am
A judge issued a temporary restraining order against Gov. David Paterson's planned furloughs.
A judge issued a temporary restraining order against Gov. David Paterson's planned furloughs.
View Full Caption
Governor's Office

By David Pitt

DNAinfo Reporter/Producer

MANHATTAN — A federal judge temporarily blocked Gov. David Paterson’s plan to impose a one-day-a-week furlough for state workers for the time being, saying in his ruling Wednesday that the furloughs would cause “irreparable” harm — and that the unions were likely to prevail in court.

The judge, Lawrence Kahn of US District Court in lower Manhattan, stayed the furloughs pending a hearing in his chambers on May 26.

A spokesman for Paterson expressed disappointment at the ruling, adding that “we look forward to our day in court.”

The furloughs were scheduled to begin next week. But on Tuesday, unions representing state employees state university teachers filed a lawsuit arguing that the furlough plan was illegal.

In his ruling Wednesday, the judge also ordered the governor to begin paying out previously approved raises for state employees that were to have begun in April.

The judicial double-whammy was the latest setback for Paterson in his efforts to pull the state back from the edge of bankruptcy.

He had inserted the furlough plan into an emergency budget bill, which forced the legislature to approve it. But there was extensive criticism from lawmakers, many of whom argued that the furloughs were unnecessary.

Leaders of the 100,000 employees who stood to lose 20 percent of their weekly pay cheered Judge Kahn’s ruling.

The furloughs would affect roughly half of the state work force.

Paterson spokesman Morgan Hook said that the governor  “again calls for the leaders of New York’s public employee unions to share in the sacrifice that all New Yorkers are enduring in this extraordinary fiscal crisis.”

The ruling left open the issue of whether the furloughs were legal.