SACRAMENTO – Fighting for survival, Gov. Gray Davis is backing a number of proposals, from drivers' licenses for illegal immigrants to expanded gay rights, as he attempts to bolster his Democratic base for the recall election.

But there is a notable exception to the pattern: He signed a state budget this month that makes a $1.1 billion cut in a state work force represented by labor unions that have long been major contributors to Democratic campaigns.

The dozen unions that represent about 207,000 state workers (not counting 118,000 more in the university systems) are being told they face the equivalent of a 10 percent salary cut or the loss of 16,000 positions.

"It hasn't created a lot of good will among the membership," said Perry Kenny, president of the California State Employees Association, "particularly when you see some units being favored over others."

Still, Kenny said, the largest state workers union, with more than 92,000 active members, plans to make campaign contributions and follow the emerging Democratic Party line on the recall election Oct. 7.

The union's position is "no" on the first question of whether Davis should be recalled and, on the second question, "yes" for Democratic Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante among the 135 contenders to replace Davis.

Members of the union, which gave Davis $270,000 during the final weeks of his re-election campaign last fall, are among the state workers who received a series of "catch-up" pay raises after Davis took office in 1999.

The state workers had received no raises during the last four years of Davis' predecessor, Republican Pete Wilson. The union alienated Wilson with a $2 million contribution to his Democratic opponent, Kathleen Brown, in 1994.

One of the bargaining units receiving favorable treatment under the Davis administration, the prison guards, is represented by a union that gave Davis $2 million during his first gubernatorial campaign in 1998.

The prison guards have a five-year contract, tied to Highway Patrol pay, that could result in a total pay raise of about 35 percent. Their raise this year is 6.8 percent.

Most state workers, however, received a 5 percent raise under contracts that expired last month – after a two-year freeze in which employee contributions to the pension system were reduced in lieu of a pay raise.

In contract talks, the Davis administration is trying to halt the 5 percent pay raise that will appear for the first time in monthly paychecks at the end of this month, along with a retroactive raise for last month.

The state workers did not receive the pay raise after the new fiscal year that began July 1 because a legislative deadlock delayed passage of the budget, which was finally signed by Davis Aug. 2.

The state is making a standard offer to give state workers one day off each month, instead of the 5 percent pay raise, and pay more of the rising cost of health insurance.

Critics say the offer will cost the state more in the long run because workers who do not take the days off can cash them out when they retire at a higher salary rate.

So far, the offer has been accepted by four of the state's 21 bargaining units, representing the Highway Patrol, firefighters, doctors and dentists, and psychologists and social workers. The net savings is said to be $45 million.

If the other bargaining units accept the offer, the state can expect to save about $500 million this fiscal year, reducing the need for layoffs by a similar amount.

The state has sent 120-day "surplus notices" to more than 12,000 state workers, a preliminary step required before the state can issue a 30-day layoff notice. More than 60 state workers have already been laid off under a round of cuts that began this year, said Lynelle Jolley, a spokeswoman for the Department of Personnel Administration.

About $1 billion worth of vague state operation reductions penciled into the budget last year were never made. But the Davis administration says the $1.1 billion reduction in the new budget is required by law and is no bluff.

A large number of layoffs is a "serious possibility," said Jim Hard, director of the state employee union's civil service division. He said negotiators are "trying to do what we can" to be flexible and suggest alternatives.

"We are not asking for a raise," Hard said. "We do not intend to give up the 5 percent raise we got July 1."

A long-standing complaint of the unions is that governors of both parties, seeking the appearance of efficiency, often try to limit the size of the state work force by contracting out for services, even if such contracts are more expensive.

A union representing Caltrans engineers, which says 570 members have received surplus notices, contends that a state engineer costs about $92,000 a year while a consultant doing similar work costs $162,000.

"It's obviously disturbing to our members to get a notice that you are surplus going out the door, particularly when you are sitting next to a consultant," said Ted Toppin of the Professional Engineers in California Government.

The engineers union, averaging about $225,000 in campaign contributions in recent election cycles, has not decided on contributions in the recall election.

"We are going to talk about it and weigh all the factors," Toppin said. "The governorship is incredibly important to our members as state employees and as members of the public."