Advertisement

Union Sues State Over Private Contracting Plan

Share
Times Staff Writer

Leaders of the state’s largest public employee union, declaring that Gov. George Deukmejian’s plan to turn certain government work over to private enterprise is a “disaster,” filed suit Wednesday challenging the constitutionality of “contracting out” regulations.

Leo E. Mayer, president of the California State Employees Assn., which represents 75,000 state workers, charged that Deukmejian’s aggressive moves to cut the size of the state work force through private contracts have done little to save money and threaten to undermine the state Civil Service system.

“Contracting out means that dedicated state employees . . . may be forced out of their jobs by a system that is illogical, illegal and unconcerned with quality,” Mayer told a press conference.

Advertisement

National Trend

The lawsuit is a direct outgrowth of a national trend toward replacing public employees with private firms in the hope that the work can be done at less expense to taxpayers. In California, Deukmejian often has cited his contracting policy as a major factor in holding down the cost of state government.

Mayer and other union representatives, while maintaining that contracting forces state employees out of their jobs, were unable, however, to provide evidence that state employees have been laid off as a result of the practice.

Union officials estimated 15,000 contracts for a variety of state tasks have been awarded to private companies since 1982 when the Legislature set guidelines allowing contracting when public employees are not available to do the work, for new state functions or under emergency conditions.

Challenge to Law

Lawyers for state employees previously filed suits challenging about five individual contracts. But the union decided to change course and challenge the law itself because of the rapid increase in new contracts.

Union officials indicated satisfaction with a report last year from Legislative Analyst William G. Hamm contending that of 100 contracts proposed by the governor for fiscal 1985-86, only two would actually save money.

Advertisement