Reduction of unfilled jobs in the city

When Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass unveiled next year's budget, the most dramatic part of the announcement was that it would eliminate over 2,100 unfilled jobs in the city.

If approved by the City Council, it would be the largest job cuts in the city since the Great Recession.

Cutting these vacancies – many of them in street and park maintenance – is necessary to counteract declining revenues and rising labor costs, Bass said.

And an estimated $180 million would be saved.

“We are not cutting services,” the mayor said last week during an appearance on LAist's Air talk Program.

But not everyone agrees.

“Unfortunately, virtually every department will be affected by limitations in the delivery of current (and future) services,” said Deputy City Treasurer Rick Cole in a statement released last week on the day Bass announced her $12.8 billion budget.

He continued: “Today, departments must address record numbers of vacancies by putting existing staff on unsustainable levels of overtime, implementing temporary workarounds, and postponing lower-priority work that cannot be postponed indefinitely.”

It is unclear to what extent city services would be impacted by the mayor's proposed budget, but at a minimum, the budget would limit some of the financial flexibility that general managers currently enjoy.

A “buffer” for other budget priorities

When introducing your spending planBass said the decision comes “amid economic uncertainty at the national, state and local levels driven by broader economic trends and the upcoming national election.”

The proposal would eliminate 417 jobs in the Bureau of Street Services – more than in any other city agency. The agency fills potholes and repairs sidewalks, among other things.

307 jobs would be lost in the Recreation and Parks Department, 250 jobs in the Sanitation Department and 137 jobs in the Transport Department.

It's not just a matter of the city government not wanting to fill a vacancy. Cutting these positions means department heads are losing some of their budget — and potentially reducing the chances of getting that money back in the future. In the case of the Bureau of Street Services, the agency would lose about $34 million in the fiscal year that begins July 1.

As it stands now, department heads sometimes use vacancy money for other purposes, such as paying employees overtime. The Los Angeles Police Department, for example, regularly uses vacancy money to pay officers overtime. (None of the department's vacancies would be eliminated in the mayor's budget proposal.)

It is a “buffer to finance other priorities,” says Miguel Santana, who served as the city's top administrative official from 2009 to 2017. He explained that money not spent in one budget cycle is “carried over” to the following fiscal year.

Sometimes these other priorities are important and sometimes they are on the “nice-to-have” list, he said.

But carrying that money over from one year to the next is not good budgeting, Santana said.

“Huge vacancies are generally not a smart policy – especially when you know you can't fill those positions,” he said. “They don't reflect the true cost of running the city.”

He also said that the large number of vacancies did not provide any incentive for department heads to increase their efficiency.

Why jobs are being lost

The city could not fill Thousands of unfilled positions for various reasons, including tight labour markets, reduced interest in public service and slow recruitment processes.

Vacancy rates in the city also increased during the pandemic.

A decade ago, the vacancy rate for city jobs was 10%, excluding the Department of Water and Power, LA World Airports and the Harbor Department. Just before the pandemic, it was 11%.

Today, there is a citywide vacancy rate of 17.4%, or 9,786 unfilled positions, according to a September survey report by LA City Controller Kenneth Mejia.

Cole said each of these positions is important for a well-functioning LA

“Cutting critical positions simply because they are currently vacant will leave a permanent void in virtually all departments, compromising the ability to maintain today's levels of performance,” the statement said.

But managers can always ask the mayor and city council to fill the positions again, Santana said, adding that eliminating vacancies is not unusual.

“This is not unusual – especially in times of financial constraints,” he said.

Former city treasurer Wendy Greuel praised the mayor's move to eliminate vacancies.

“I'm impressed that the mayor has shown that she is fiscally responsible,” Greuel said. “This allows her to focus on positions and those that are not important.”

The City Council is planning a series of hearings on the mayor's budget in the coming weeks. The first of those hearings before the Council's Budget, Finance and Innovation Committee is scheduled for Tuesday.