State budget gaps and the impact on recruiting

The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) has released its Update on State Budget Gaps: FY 2009 & FY 2010 on January 30, 2009. States closed a cumulative gap of nearly $40 billion as they prepared their FY 2009 budgets, and now face a sizable gap of an additional $47.4 billion that has opened since budgets were completed. The report also shows half of the states are projecting a cumulative shortfall of $84.3 billion for FY 2010, a gap likely to grow as more states assemble revenue and expenditure forecasts for the coming fiscal period. This report provides an up-to-date account of states budget conditions while NCSL's last State Budget Update: November 2008 provides a 60-page report which also gives an overview of FY 2009 revenue performance for each state and highlights actions legislatures are expected to take to close FY 2009 budget gaps.

Before reading, click here to see a colorful US map highlighting the state budget gaps (will open in a new window) as survey from late last year. Since this report came out early February, the budget scenarios have worsened; as such, what we'll take about may be worse.

Here's the link to the report - this is worthy read.

Do you see what I see? Do you recruit only from within states with challenging budget forecasts? Do you recruit from states with depressed economies, where you may find an incredible person for your organization only to find that their house is worth less than they owe?

I'm thinking now is the best time to push for telecommuting; managers who have historically held tightly to their command and control styles need to be re-educated.

What other far fetched ideas that recruiters have had should now be considered when searching for talent?

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Maureen Sharib on March 14, 2009 at 9:32am

Look at that housing dilemma hard and consider a package that relieves that homeowner of their burden. That grateful prospective employee may just come to work for your company in another state if the tie that binds is cut. And there may be other considerations granted by prospective employees for such far-seeing prospective employers, such as a deliberate (and realistic) examination (and re-examination) of comp and benefits.

This is a bonanza opportunity for companies to do a couple things (and it won't last forever):
Help stabilize the housing market in this country
Take advantage of existing tax laws that are advantageous for companies to do exactly what I'm recommending they do here
Fill jobs in need of urgent filling by qualified candidates - with the housing dilemma as it is and many candidates refusing to move companies are losing out on "Best Fits"

Underwater

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Durbin on March 15, 2009 at 4:23am

States increase spending during boom times, and now they increase it during bust times.

The problem is citizens who refuse to see the problem is they vote for the same idiots every 2 years.

Throw them all out, just once, and you'll get a lot better government. If you have voted for an incumbent, no matter how much you like him or her, then the problem is clear. You got what you voted for.