The recession might not be as bad as it was, but tell that to all those people out there who can’t find jobs or are facing this type of government action (in the most progressive of all cities).  From Heather Knight of the San Francisco Chronicle:

More than 10,000 San Francisco city workers — from librarians and gardeners to secretaries and street cleaners — would be laid off and most rehired for jobs with shorter hours under a controversial plan being examined by Mayor Gavin Newsom.

The idea, which sprouted in the mayor’s budget office and was described to his department heads Monday, would reduce the workweek for a large swath of the city’s 26,000 full-time employees from 40 hours to 37.5.

Newsom’s budget office estimates that paying workers for 2.5 fewer hours of work each week would save more than $50 million a year as the city grapples with how to close a devastating $522 million budget gap for the 2010-11 fiscal year.

Health and vacation benefits would not be affected, though pensions — which are calculated based on workers’ salaries – would reflect the shaved schedules . . . .

If the idea is accepted, workers will begin receiving layoff notices soon and could opt to reapply for the positions with shorter weeks, which would be filled based on seniority . . . .

Making the plan more controversial, though, is that it won’t apply to all city workers. Police officers, firefighters and deputy sheriffs probably would be exempted. Those departments have mandatory staffing levels and reducing workers’ hours would mean paying increased overtime, eliminating any cost savings.

Better than mass layoffs certainly, but can some of this blog’s California readers write in the comments whether this plan would be legal and whether better alternatives exist?  My thoughts: raise the city tax on large companies doing business in San Francisco and consider a four-day workweek (nine hours a day) to save on operating and infrastructure costs.

Hat Tip:  Daniel Mitchell