Bad math

I was listening to Denver Mayor Hickenlooper on NPR this morning, and he was talking about the recession, and city employment, and the economy, and all that fun stuff. When I tuned in, he was going on about how layoffs are the absolute last thing the City and County of Denver would do to free up extra cash. Which, I think, is a good thing. Isn't it better to have everyone make a little less, than to leave some people high and dry while their colleagues are doing just peachy? In Denver, we're talking 3-4 furlough days. Period. Over a year. This isn't the 3-4 per month that Hawaii has instituted. Looks like we have a good plan.
Only, the details seemed a wee bit murky to me. To avoid layoffs, the government must trim costs in other ways. Naturally. By way of example, Mayor Hickenlooper said that agencies are starting to share services, like IT and fleet maintenance. That way, he said, we can trim about 20% of the workforce needed to perform those operations.
Wait. Isn't cutting the work force tantamount to layoffs? What, are we expecting 20% of the IT staff for the City and County of Denver to spontaneously retire all at once? Can someone explain how eliminating 20% of our IT and fleet maintenance crews, among others, we are avoiding layoffs? Kthx.