SAN FRANCISCO — Most state employees should be paid only federal minimum wage as of July 1, if no state budget or appropriations bill is passed, the California Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday.
The decision was made as lawmakers wrestled with a giant financial shortfall that could lead to another prolonged budget stalemate this summer.
For The Record
Los Angeles Times Friday July 04, 2003 Home Edition Main News Part A Page 2 National Desk 1 inches; 63 words Type of Material: Correction
State workers -- Articles in Section A on Tuesday and May 2 incorrectly reported that California state workers would be paid the federal minimum wage if the state continues without a budget. In fact, the wage paid would be the state minimum of $6.75 an hour. The federal minimum wage is $5.15 an hour; the May 2 article incorrectly reported it as $5.
The ruling, written by Chief Justice Ronald M. George, said workers who fall under a federal labor law -- most of the state's 200,000 employees, must get at least minimum wage; the federal minimum is $5 an hour. The same law requires that workers who earn overtime must get their full regular pay plus the overtime amount.
But state Controller Steve Westly said he plans to pay full wages even if there is a budget impasse, pointing to language in the court's opinion that said the money could be paid if it was not feasible to do otherwise.
It would be impossible to determine in the next two months which workers should be paid minimum wage, which should get full wages and which should not be paid at all, Westly said.
"The court suggested most employees be paid minimum wage when a budget has not been passed, but left the door open for the controller to determine whether this is feasible," he said after studying the decision. .
"We will not put state employees on the minimum wage plan," he said, a position that state employees unions hailed.
The court ruling also allows the state to pay bills for Medi-Cal, debt service and other essential state and federal programs even if a budget is not in place, the controller said.
Richard Fine -- who on behalf of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. brought the lawsuit that produced the ruling -- insisted that Westly had misinterpreted the court decision.
Fine said that only hourly employees who work overtime should receive their usual pay if an appropriations bill has not been passed.
"The minute he makes that payment" of full wages, Westly "may find himself subject to a lawsuit," warned Fine.
The details of federal labor law could lead to an unusual situation in which workers would get only minimum wage if they put in 40 hours per week but would automatically go back to full wages as soon as they crossed the overtime threshold.
