Henry Sliwerski, a highway worker from Bedford, voted against the proposed state worker contract because he felt it asked too much from public employees. But Sliwerski's vote also came from his personal experience on the job and his sense that Gov. John Lynch and legislators don't respect the work people like him do every day.

"We get paid peanuts to risk our lives out there," Sliwerski said of his fellow turnpike workers. "When there's a dead animal, we have to pick it up. When there's a car accident, we're there to help clean it up. We're understaffed as it is now. Layoffs would be ridiculous."

Sliwerski was in the majority yesterday, as members of the State Employees' Association rejected the proposed two-year contract by a solid majority. The contract would have required workers to take 19 furlough days over the next two years in lieu of widespread layoffs. Many workers, like Sliwerski, personalized the vote, accusing Gov Lynch of disrespecting all state workers and ignoring their ideas.

"Everybody I talked with said our governor's a bully and bring it on," said Wade Rahmlow, a Concord man who works as a foreman for the Department of Administrative Services. "We're tired of being pushed around."

That frustration was on display yesterday, as the state employees union organized a rally in front of the State House. The protest attracted several dozen state workers, and most carried signs denouncing Lynch. SEA President Gary Smith, shouting through a bullhorn, led the workers in several chants taunting the governor.

At one point, Lynch's chief of staff, Rich Sigel, appeared on the State House steps, and Smith shouted to him through his bullhorn.

"Bring the message to the governor to show some leadership," Smith told Sigel.

However they voted, state workers faced a difficult choice in the contract proposal: either accept 19 furlough days and the approximately 3.5 percent pay cut that came with them, or put several hundred colleagues' jobs at risk.

Christina St. Louis, a Littleton resident who works at the Department of Cultural Resources, said that choice left her with little confidence of a good outcome either way.

"My vote means they might lose their jobs if I vote against the contract," St. Louis said of her fellow state workers. "But there's no guarantee they won't lose their jobs down the line. We have no guarantees in this contract."

Mary Kate Ryan, who also works at the Department of Cultural Resources, said the proposed contract and the ensuing debate made her question whether she should remain in public service.

"I'm wondering whether this is a career option for me anymore," said Ryan, who lives in Concord. "If there's no job security, what makes public service preferable to the private sector?"

The contract talks may have soured many former Lynch supporters among the ranks of state workers. Deb Gagne said she was a strong supporter of Lynch in past campaigns, but she felt he broke that trust by taking state workers for granted during contract negotiations. She said Lynch's stance helped fuel existing biases against state workers.

"He's devalued us," said Gagne, who lives in Pembroke. "We know we're never going to be hailed as wonderful people among the public, but he really devalued us."

In recent weeks, officials in the SEA offered their members reams of data to encourage them to reject the contract proposal, including what they said was evidence of unfilled jobs and excessive reliance on part-time and contract workers. But several workers said they would have liked more specific information about how layoffs or furloughs would affect state services.

Single page