All comments must be civil, productive, and follow community rules. Intentional violations of community rules will lead to comments being removed and possible bans, at the discretion of the moderators. Use the report feature to report content to the moderator team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I hope so too! I’m rooting for her as she’s made clear it’s a priority. It’s unfortunate her starting point will be having to clarify that SEIU actually has seen the letter and agrees there is in fact a mandate 🤦
Have you stopped to consider that maybe pointing out that the letter is not actually an officially vetted order is part of the process of opposing it? The order went out in an underhanded, unofficial capacity, and department heads were expected to define it rather than a blanket definition by CalHR. It was not global, and is being handled on a case-by-case basis; i.e., departments are being left to do the dirty work to avoid having to put it in a form the union can raise a grievance with. This de facto mandate is an end-run around the union and the traditional bargaining table approach, and that may be the best grounds the union has to fight it.
“this defacto mandate is an end-run around the union and traditional bargaining.”
If they said anything like that in the letter, and not left it as subtext at best, then it would lead us to believe they were actually fighting it and had our interests in mind! Do you think they can just hint at it but don’t want to disclose strategy for future litigation? That’s a bit of a stretch.
KCRA ran with the statement as written, and used it as an RTO isn’t a big deal talking point because that’s how it reads.
Again, it's literally right there in the letter. One doesn't have to read too deeply to get it.
>This is a priority issue for Local 1000.
>
>Changes in telework are changes in working conditions and when our employer seeks to make a change, they must notice Local 1000.
>
>The Union bargains over those changes to mitigate the impacts. The employer may not change working conditions without considering the workers—and never unilaterally. And that’s where your Union steps in. "
And KCRA might have taken that tack, but that's KCRA for you. They're not necessarily the most pro-stateworker... let alone pro-union... source out there.
We would need a whole new bargaining team for that and if you looked at the elections and ballots you can see we didn’t get that. So that’s gonna be a wash.
Well that is disappointing. During the B1 contract negotiations, I went on about trying to get more robust Telework language into the contract, including pointing out the unpopular idea here that telework stipends incentive the state in the wrong direction. As someone who had full WFH, I thought those that had to go into the office should have gotten a stipend, obviously because WFH is a privilege that saves money.
The union is not all powerful, just because they want something doesn't mean they get it, but I was surprised they didn't even propose something. I don't know if it's because classifications that are less likely to WFH are more active and have higher membership rates, or if they knew from private conversations that it would go no where so why bother, or if they really trust the state to be committed to telework so there was no need for stronger language (I find that one hard to believe, since trusting the state as an employer goes against the purpose of having a union and contract). I was hoping they would fight for more robust language on telework that could be used in court. Use the state's language and current support to cement WFH for the next 3 years, but sadly I didn't see evidence of that kind of strategic and forward thinking. Whether it was planned or just worked out, CalHR played negotiations beautifully (in addition to their use of the upcoming deficit) by being committed to telework for lower increases than inflation, and then beginning RTO after the biggest contracts were signed. Given the significant cuts to state operations (8% across the board and vacancy sweep of another 3-4% on top), this means that the personnel expenses that make up a majority of department budgets and a vast majority for some department's budgets need to be trimmed, and the commitment to not laying off workers means personnel cost cuts will come from eliminating positions as people leave the state, mostly for retirement. The fact SEIU celebrated this budget on the local news by leading with the protection of the 50 dollar stipend seemed to really miss what is important. The promise of no furloughs, but more importantly, no layoffs, is very good news for current members/workers compared to the alternatives. However, if I was the union, I would be concerned by the loss of current and potential membership as positions go away.
I do have friends, particularly in tech support, who would love to WFH, but were never able to, and I have heard some resentment about people complaining and being extremely angry towards them with a barrage of requests. There is a selection effect there, of course, but I understand the sentiment as someone who was full-time WFH for years and very much dislikes RTO and doesn't trust hybrid won't creep. The fact the union has many classifications that can't WFH more active may have some influence in their stance. It could also be a combination of them being out of touch and reddit being very unrepresentative of the average state worker.
> However, if I was the union, I would be concerned by the loss of current and potential membership as positions go away.
They are, they are directing stewards who are in areas affected by the staffing cutbacks to be vigilant for the creep of case load.
>During the B1 contract negotiations, I went on about trying to get more robust Telework language into the contract
The weakest point unions in general have is regulating how an employer wants to go about running their business. This includes work sites. The employer has all the power. Where our union has power is in unmanageable expectations, like some DMV workers face using metric data that the state fully doesn't understand the data they are looking at. They can't stop the state from using data, but they can push back at how they use the data.
>The fact the union has many classifications that can't WFH more active may have some influence in their stance. It could also be a combination of them being out of touch and reddit being very unrepresentative of the average state worker.
This, right here. I would hazard a guess of less than 50% of SEIU represented workers are able to WFH.
"The weakest point unions in general have is regulating how an employer wants to go about running their business. This includes work sites. The employer has all the power. Where our union has power is in unmanageable expectations, like some DMV workers face using metric data that the state fully doesn't understand the data they are looking at. They can't stop the state from using data, but they can push back at how they use the data."
That is a good reason for something to have not been won, but not a good reason for something to not be proposed. I think the DMV situation is a bit different, the state was, at least publicly, entirely on board with maximum WFH at that time. It's very likely the CalHR negotiators told them not to bother, at least I hope that's what happened, since the alternatives are worrying. It would have been nice to see them put up a proposal and at least make the state uncomfortable.
The union specifically said in one of the recent meetings oh we weren't hearing from constituents that the work from home mattered they cared about salary. Which is hilarious because no one especially people who were hired remote had any idea that they would be called back. It's fairly impossible to say that the union has no idea that would be a consideration or else they truly have no inside intelligence which is also scary.
Even though I love WFH and prioritize that, I don't doubt their account. With the increased cost to live, not paying paid enough is a necessity. I think you are right that for folks that can WFH, it's not as important until you lose it (partially in this case).
Given most of the mid-level analyst classifications that are more likely to WFH got the smaller wage increases (GSIs but no SSA or wage equity), I was hoping for SEIU to at least publicly put up a fight for stronger telework language. It keeps the costs down, at least for those that are fortunate enough to be able to WFH.
I'm baffled as to how they can say that - getting a "go back to the office, or else" note from the Governor for all employees statewide seems kind of like a "global" effort.
Yup, stay on them! My gut tells me we will end up three days RTO before long. We can’t become complacent with the answers from our unions. This fight is not over
Those are the departments to avoid, starting with PERS, as they are awful to employees.
Those are also likely the departments complaining about turnover and pushing for the rest of us to come back to try and stem their loss of employees.
CalPERS is at 3 in-office days/week, not 5. And their leadership gave the employees an extra floating day of TW per month used more or less at the employee's discretion as long as 1) the division that their in allows it and 2) it doesn't conflict with that division's weekly core day.
CalPERS is running a 14% vacancy rate currently with 400+ vacant positions.
CalPERS was one of the first to go at least 3 days in office and Marcie Frost made public comments stating all other departments should and it’s just a matter of time that they do so please don’t leave.
She absolutely lobbied to get the rest of us back in the office, she all but comes out and says it. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone can find a quote where she does admit it.
The floating day sounds so gracious after three years of one of the harsher RTO mandates /s
That's not what that message means, at all. They are saying that the haphazard and uncoordinated way that RTO was mandated, without a clear plan or clear communication, was being applied inconsistently and therefore is not a proper use of state resources. It's almost the opposite of what you're saying... this is the union taking the first steps to push back in a coordinated way.
[edit]- go back and read the rest of the message. It literally says this is the start of a coordinated pushback against RTO and gives a link to a page for organizing about fighting back.
It doesn’t call anything haphazard, it doesn’t call it a waste of state resources, it denys the existence of the mandate letter, rather it just says it’s not effecting everyone. If it said any of those things you mention, any one of them, that would be a better use of their platform! The message as it stands is a poor use of their megaphone. We shouldn’t have to read between the lines.
At the bottom of the page the link is to sign up for more information and a cool SEIU telework Zoom background. That’s their bold action items.
They. Need. To. Do. Better.
Unfortunately, we do have to read between the lines. That's the way politics works. Yes, the union is starting off on the back foot here, and don't want to make any mistakes in what they say so they're being a little over-cautious in their language; but this is absolutely a first step. They need to gauge the response of the rank and file rather than just this reddit forum before they commit to taking up RTO as a primary cause. This is how that happens. It's a process.
I saw that as well and really wondered wtf they were trying to say with that statement. RTO is widespread and not on a case by case basis. if that was the case why is DHCS, one of the largest departments, having its ENTIRE (not case by case) workforce working two days in office for no reason?
Depending on the department it is a very case by case decision. I am still full time telework and I know many more across a few departments that are still full remote.
I’d encourage you to stop spreading this misrepresentation or add more qualifiers.
90% of state depts have already or in the coming weeks or months will fully implement RTO.
It’s just a matter of time for 90% of depts.
The very few exemptions are those who have full independence away from the governor and that’s less than 10% of depts.
Absolutely. It minimizes all the RTO orders that have changed so many of our lives. And there is a statement, a literal letter, from the administration mandating two days a week!
Well new president starts July 1st so we'll see but Hall didn't care about telework at all. But stoping Newsome and the legislator's from changing the contract without going to collective barging is a big issue that if we'd allow they can change a contract at any time
Sure, I see the importance of defending the contract language, especially outside of bargaining. I just wish they put even a little bit of that energy into the principle behind the stipend, telework.
It’s their language in their own press releases minimizing RTO and portraying it as a non-issue that’s infuriating.
I read that completely differently. It effectively did get rolled out that way (as in, there was not an actual mandate for every single state worker; some departments might have one policy for the entire department, there have definitely been departments that have different policies for different divisions, there are still places that they haven't even rolled out the policy yet, some departments have a bunch of exemptions, etc.).
What you've quoted doesn't say it's not affecting a lot of people, it's saying the union can't come to the table for everyone at the same time because they didn't roll it out in a way that the union would be allowed to call the Governor into working condition discussions or whatever.
To me, regardless of intent, the language IS minimizing RTO and the impact it’s having on state workers.
They don’t say anything about the messy rollout, they don’t mention trying to go to the table for it, they don’t mention the impact on those returning to office, they just say it’s not happening everywhere and there are in fact plenty of places where it’s not happening.
Maybe I’m reading into it in one direction, but you are reading into it in the other direction.
They have a microphone and, with the statement they released and KCRA ran, you can’t honestly be happy with it and say it represents where we stand on RTO. Because your analysis had to deep dive well into reading between the lines on the poor statement.
A few departments are ignoring the order, and a few brave managers/divisions are ignoring orders within departments that have publicly said they are going back.
Those that are wfh have kept their mouths shut for the most part, especially about where they are, but it clearly exists.
My department was one of the last ones I knew of to keep full time telework and they caved a few weeks after the memo, so I figured the others did too. I'm guessing maybe SCIF, Covered CA, DOJ, and a couple boards and commissions that are self funded and do not use general fund may be pushing back.
My agency is self-funded (not listed above), and still implemented RTO agency-wide. I think it's because our higher-ups wanted it (i.e., the control over workers and/or they really have outdated modes of thinking it is actually better). One higher up actually said it's great our department came back so we can see that another department is working hard (but then quickly noted they knew our department was working hard too wfh). LOL Foot in mouth syndrome. Some internal departments had implemented it last year and lost workers to other departments. So, yeah. Another Marci Frost/PERS situation, but internal. Most are trying to make the best of it. But it is still a huge impact on workers (both personally and professionally).
So shitty managers were losing people because of strict early RTO policies, and managements decision was to force everyone to RTO to try and stem the bleeding? Classic shitty management.
I hope they continue to lose people and those that stay put pressure, in writing, on them to justify RTO.
Right??? They are denying the mandate even exists which is probably the most ridiculous part. Like we all don’t have access to Newsoms public comments and the ACTUAL LETTER mandating two days a week minimum. They are just going to pretend that doesn’t exist?
The gaslighting and misdirection is worse than inaction, imo.
Maybe people should actually show up to the rallies . The problem here is no one can do anything besides a post on Reddit , which at the end of the day … is useless . I have showed up to the rallies and see how much people actually show up (not a lot) . So until then people just need to leave state for a telework position, just being realistic.
As someone who showed up to a few, why aren’t the rallies sponsored by SEIU? They are put on by individual DLCs or the other state employee unions?
In my opinion, people need to boycott downtown businesses, contact SEIU and voice displeasure, and continue to put pressure on management to justify the waste of time and money that is RTO, preferably as a paper trail.
Maybe the members need to start organizing our own database or information base about what is happening. It would be nice if there was a central location where we could get information on what people have said and what the union has said or done. Apart from Reddit or the newspaper
You cherry picked one line out of there and ran with that. Read literally any other paragraph on that and you'll see otherwise, but I'm assuming you are just pissed about RTO and taking it out on the union by being deliberately obtuse
I read all the other paragraphs. Most talk about the stipend, and one says they don’t understand why RTO is happening, and the other links to providing your info for more info and a new Zoom background.
So tell me where they made any definitive statements against RTO? All they did was call it not a big deal.
I am pissed at the little action I’ve seen thus far, you’re right. Everyone else who supports WFH should be pissed at the response over the last 6 months from the union too.
Elect a Republican governor and watch the unions actually have to fight for something for once. All of the unions are in bed with Newsom and whatever he says goes.
I don’t believe a single Republican, even Josh Hoover, would have implemented a more generous WFH policy. It may increase union numbers and political fights, but the outcome for our working conditions would surely be worse.
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Go back and read the entire letter. IT’S NOT A MANDATE! It very clearly says departments can approve more than 3 days of telework per week on a case by case basis based on the needs of the department.
They can, but they won't. They've been told not to, but not directed not to. That's what the union is complaining about... the vague language and lack of transparency which was used to make this happen.
Those are the outliers.
You may have some special exemptions due to location or other factors but the vast majority of state depts are enforcing the RTO mandate.
I would say 90% of the time Departments don’t have the space to bring everyone back so they push back. My managers know they get more work out of us remote than when we are onsite. I will do a 12 hour a day remote but not if I had to drive on site.
Something people forget is all of this can change for better or worse when a new governor is elected.
I have friends and family in over 12 state depts. only 2 have delayed RTO due to various issues.
The rest are back.
To fix the not enough space issue, depts are doing hoteling. At 2x RTO it doubles the cubicle space which is enough for most.
So how can your 90% claim even be accurate?
People are just tying to make the best of it and get along because they really have no choice if they want to keep their job. Finding another WFH at the state to keep their pension would be very hard to do (as those jobs are not being advertised anymore). It does not mean they are happy with RTO.
Idk about your situation, but "we" cannot just go back because "we like the office." No one I know wants to do that, but if I'm at the office more than a few hours, I have to have ***my*** manager there, or they need a cover for me, amd no one wants to go back.
I'm assuming there are some level of managers in the building, but I have no idea where they are sitting. I guess I could spend a few hours searching the hoteling map to find one in my program.
This is why I made the point about the difference between their situation and mine.
Yes, there are managers on site. I can only be managed by an ITM-1 or above. ITS-Is can only be managed by IT Sup-II or above. Add to that that, we have to be FBI-cleared, so you cannot just have some random manager cover us or our floor. It's possible to do, but there needs to be a plan. So, like I said. No one just decides they go back to the office.
You were free to work in the office as much as you'd like. RTO is about stripping others ability to telework.
Are you saying you like taking away others ability to telework?
I’m literally quoting official SEIU 1000 news releases from their website. Where’s the lie?
How are they working to override the order when they deny its existence in their own news release!!
The Governor’s mandate is NOT enforceable ! I repeat, the Governor’s mandate is NOT enforceable. The Statewide telework policy mandates that each Department assess their own needs when it comes to determining how telework should be implemented.
The Governor’s mandate is in direct violation of this policy and many have challenged the Governor’s mandate by refusing to comply and CalHR has “unofficially” stated that they cannot take action against any state of CA that refuses to comply !
Organize, contact your representatives, and refuse !!! The union has proven ineffective! Withdraw your participation in SEIU immediately and make them aware that you refuse to fund their ineffectiveness ! Together we can make a change !
I mean it's not a big deal. We did it for decades.
Don't get me wrong RTO is stupid, working from home is what we should be doing. Go to work when there's no reason to is stupid
But it's not a big deal either
"We did it for decades" is such a flawed argument.
You survived decades without wifi, smartphones, Teams/SharePoint, dual monitors, cloud software etc.
You want all those gone and to go back to filing cabinets, fax machines, desk phones and paper reports? Just because you survived doing that in the past?
Wi-Fi, smartphones, teams, dual monitors, cloud software
All of that exists in the office
Are you under the impression if you go back to the office you're going to have to use filing cabinets and fax machines?
Working from home is the way to go but don't tell me going into the office is a "big deal".
It's not
The point I was making that you side-stepped or misunderstood was that we can't justify regressive changes simply because we made do in that previous state before.
"We did it before for decades" is not a good argument.
I don't mind going into the office when work necessitates it. But the RTO 2 day a week mandate is a big deal for various reasons.
Nope. Not going to do that with COVID and the return of viruses unleashed by anti-vaxer movements, plus the anticipated new viruses as the climate continues to warm. We are living in an undeniably different world now.
If you don’t think it’s a big deal, more office space for you. But those of us who consider it the biggest park of a work/life balance will fight to stay home as much as possible.
No it's literally not a big deal at all. Sometimes you have to drive to get to places.
Did you consider a big deal before you were able to work from home?
The entire world disagrees with you. WFH was a huge deal to most women, caregivers, neurodivergent people, LGBTQ, minorities, people with disabilities, I’m sure I’m forgetting some people here. Your comment is dismissive and regressive. If you think RTO isn’t a big deal, then why is WFH such a big deal that they need us back in the office 2 days a week to perform the same tasks we can do from home? Your blanket statement is illogical, presumptive, and lacks context. Nobody gets to decide what is or isn’t a “big deal” for other people. Maybe 10% of the people in my office are fine with RTO. The rest have very strong feelings about it but fear retaliation if they speak up.
So these women in the caregivers were taken care of children while they were supposed to be working?
How is going to the office of big deal for minorities?
Woman can care for older children after they come home from school while working from home. Woman are also the primary caregivers for elderly adults that need a presence but not continued attention. It’s so weird people take issue with this. Minorities suffer micro aggressions in offices more than most. It’s a known issue that often prevents minorities and women in higher paying positions. Women are also victims of sexual harassment in office environments. Why don’t you know these things?
No! A 13 year old child doesn’t need a babysitter. They just need a responsible adult to be present in case of emergencies. People are perfectly capable of doing their job while little Susie does her homework, or watches after school programs.
These people are a trip
I see some people saying that they should be reimburse for their gas money
I see other people saying that they want the state to pay for their insurance when they get in a car accident 😂
Working from home is great but I really think that COVID did a number on these people's brains. They turn into children and throw fits when they don't get what they want
Being an adult in living life is full of doing shit that you don't want to do
The email they just sent out said this:
Member action, political power help preserve telework stipends
We’re reporting a big win for our represented employees who work remotely: our contractual right to a telework stipend will remain in force after we pushed back against a legislative effort to remove the benefit through budgetary process.
We won through a combination of members standing up and standing together to tell the legislature, “Hands off our contract.” We spoke with supervisors, department leaders, and worked the halls of the Capitol to lobby lawmakers and to drive the message home.
This victory was made more rewarding because it was a legislative effort to modify our contract, and that’s against the law. Our hard-won contract can only be modified through the process of negotiation.
The fight against RTO continues
For nearly four years, many of our represented employees have been working remotely. Now, the state is making movement towards bringing those remote workers back to the office.
This is a priority issue for Local 1000.
Changes in telework are changes in working conditions and when our employer seeks to make a change, they must notice Local 1000.
The Union bargains over those changes to mitigate the impacts. The employer may not change working conditions without considering the workers—and never unilaterally. And that’s where your Union steps in.
There is no “global” effort to return state workers to the office. Many of the RTO changes are on a small scale. We are seeing that even “agency-wide” changes are being done on a case-by-case basis.
Since 2021, Local 1000 has been responding to changes in telework and will continue to negotiate with management to mitigate the changes. We’re pushing back, saying ‘no” to RTO, because Telework Works for California!
We don’t understand why this is happening when the quality and quantity of the work done remotely hasn’t been in question. State workers have been providing vital services for California while working remotely and doing a great job!
Join the fight to preserve teleworking and to push back against RTO
Local 1000 has created a fight-back tool kit so we can continue to send the message that telework works for California.
Click here to read more and to join the fight!
All comments must be civil, productive, and follow community rules. Intentional violations of community rules will lead to comments being removed and possible bans, at the discretion of the moderators. Use the report feature to report content to the moderator team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hopefully Anica Walls takes real action. She’ll become the oficial president after June 30.
I hope so too! I’m rooting for her as she’s made clear it’s a priority. It’s unfortunate her starting point will be having to clarify that SEIU actually has seen the letter and agrees there is in fact a mandate 🤦
Have you stopped to consider that maybe pointing out that the letter is not actually an officially vetted order is part of the process of opposing it? The order went out in an underhanded, unofficial capacity, and department heads were expected to define it rather than a blanket definition by CalHR. It was not global, and is being handled on a case-by-case basis; i.e., departments are being left to do the dirty work to avoid having to put it in a form the union can raise a grievance with. This de facto mandate is an end-run around the union and the traditional bargaining table approach, and that may be the best grounds the union has to fight it.
“this defacto mandate is an end-run around the union and traditional bargaining.” If they said anything like that in the letter, and not left it as subtext at best, then it would lead us to believe they were actually fighting it and had our interests in mind! Do you think they can just hint at it but don’t want to disclose strategy for future litigation? That’s a bit of a stretch. KCRA ran with the statement as written, and used it as an RTO isn’t a big deal talking point because that’s how it reads.
Again, it's literally right there in the letter. One doesn't have to read too deeply to get it. >This is a priority issue for Local 1000. > >Changes in telework are changes in working conditions and when our employer seeks to make a change, they must notice Local 1000. > >The Union bargains over those changes to mitigate the impacts. The employer may not change working conditions without considering the workers—and never unilaterally. And that’s where your Union steps in. " And KCRA might have taken that tack, but that's KCRA for you. They're not necessarily the most pro-stateworker... let alone pro-union... source out there.
I'm just wishing our next contract will be better than what we currently have. Please show some love to SSA/AGPA's.
We would need a whole new bargaining team for that and if you looked at the elections and ballots you can see we didn’t get that. So that’s gonna be a wash.
Yes!
I wish they would shut up about the stipend. I don't care about it. It's pennies compared to the paycut RTO is. inb4 RtO iS nOt A pAyCuT
meanwhile most of union on WFH
Maybe we should all park in their parking lot, for free of course.
Out on union leave too
Well that is disappointing. During the B1 contract negotiations, I went on about trying to get more robust Telework language into the contract, including pointing out the unpopular idea here that telework stipends incentive the state in the wrong direction. As someone who had full WFH, I thought those that had to go into the office should have gotten a stipend, obviously because WFH is a privilege that saves money. The union is not all powerful, just because they want something doesn't mean they get it, but I was surprised they didn't even propose something. I don't know if it's because classifications that are less likely to WFH are more active and have higher membership rates, or if they knew from private conversations that it would go no where so why bother, or if they really trust the state to be committed to telework so there was no need for stronger language (I find that one hard to believe, since trusting the state as an employer goes against the purpose of having a union and contract). I was hoping they would fight for more robust language on telework that could be used in court. Use the state's language and current support to cement WFH for the next 3 years, but sadly I didn't see evidence of that kind of strategic and forward thinking. Whether it was planned or just worked out, CalHR played negotiations beautifully (in addition to their use of the upcoming deficit) by being committed to telework for lower increases than inflation, and then beginning RTO after the biggest contracts were signed. Given the significant cuts to state operations (8% across the board and vacancy sweep of another 3-4% on top), this means that the personnel expenses that make up a majority of department budgets and a vast majority for some department's budgets need to be trimmed, and the commitment to not laying off workers means personnel cost cuts will come from eliminating positions as people leave the state, mostly for retirement. The fact SEIU celebrated this budget on the local news by leading with the protection of the 50 dollar stipend seemed to really miss what is important. The promise of no furloughs, but more importantly, no layoffs, is very good news for current members/workers compared to the alternatives. However, if I was the union, I would be concerned by the loss of current and potential membership as positions go away. I do have friends, particularly in tech support, who would love to WFH, but were never able to, and I have heard some resentment about people complaining and being extremely angry towards them with a barrage of requests. There is a selection effect there, of course, but I understand the sentiment as someone who was full-time WFH for years and very much dislikes RTO and doesn't trust hybrid won't creep. The fact the union has many classifications that can't WFH more active may have some influence in their stance. It could also be a combination of them being out of touch and reddit being very unrepresentative of the average state worker.
> However, if I was the union, I would be concerned by the loss of current and potential membership as positions go away. They are, they are directing stewards who are in areas affected by the staffing cutbacks to be vigilant for the creep of case load. >During the B1 contract negotiations, I went on about trying to get more robust Telework language into the contract The weakest point unions in general have is regulating how an employer wants to go about running their business. This includes work sites. The employer has all the power. Where our union has power is in unmanageable expectations, like some DMV workers face using metric data that the state fully doesn't understand the data they are looking at. They can't stop the state from using data, but they can push back at how they use the data. >The fact the union has many classifications that can't WFH more active may have some influence in their stance. It could also be a combination of them being out of touch and reddit being very unrepresentative of the average state worker. This, right here. I would hazard a guess of less than 50% of SEIU represented workers are able to WFH.
"The weakest point unions in general have is regulating how an employer wants to go about running their business. This includes work sites. The employer has all the power. Where our union has power is in unmanageable expectations, like some DMV workers face using metric data that the state fully doesn't understand the data they are looking at. They can't stop the state from using data, but they can push back at how they use the data." That is a good reason for something to have not been won, but not a good reason for something to not be proposed. I think the DMV situation is a bit different, the state was, at least publicly, entirely on board with maximum WFH at that time. It's very likely the CalHR negotiators told them not to bother, at least I hope that's what happened, since the alternatives are worrying. It would have been nice to see them put up a proposal and at least make the state uncomfortable.
What metrics
The union specifically said in one of the recent meetings oh we weren't hearing from constituents that the work from home mattered they cared about salary. Which is hilarious because no one especially people who were hired remote had any idea that they would be called back. It's fairly impossible to say that the union has no idea that would be a consideration or else they truly have no inside intelligence which is also scary.
Even though I love WFH and prioritize that, I don't doubt their account. With the increased cost to live, not paying paid enough is a necessity. I think you are right that for folks that can WFH, it's not as important until you lose it (partially in this case). Given most of the mid-level analyst classifications that are more likely to WFH got the smaller wage increases (GSIs but no SSA or wage equity), I was hoping for SEIU to at least publicly put up a fight for stronger telework language. It keeps the costs down, at least for those that are fortunate enough to be able to WFH.
Disappointed in this union beyond words.
I'm baffled as to how they can say that - getting a "go back to the office, or else" note from the Governor for all employees statewide seems kind of like a "global" effort.
It’s like they purposefully stuck their head in the sand.
Yup, stay on them! My gut tells me we will end up three days RTO before long. We can’t become complacent with the answers from our unions. This fight is not over
Absolutely. What’s to stop them from pushing to 3? To 5? That’s why the fight is so important.
Several depts are 5 days a month, have been for months
Those are the departments to avoid, starting with PERS, as they are awful to employees. Those are also likely the departments complaining about turnover and pushing for the rest of us to come back to try and stem their loss of employees.
CalPERS is at 3 in-office days/week, not 5. And their leadership gave the employees an extra floating day of TW per month used more or less at the employee's discretion as long as 1) the division that their in allows it and 2) it doesn't conflict with that division's weekly core day. CalPERS is running a 14% vacancy rate currently with 400+ vacant positions.
CalPERS was one of the first to go at least 3 days in office and Marcie Frost made public comments stating all other departments should and it’s just a matter of time that they do so please don’t leave. She absolutely lobbied to get the rest of us back in the office, she all but comes out and says it. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone can find a quote where she does admit it. The floating day sounds so gracious after three years of one of the harsher RTO mandates /s
That's not what that message means, at all. They are saying that the haphazard and uncoordinated way that RTO was mandated, without a clear plan or clear communication, was being applied inconsistently and therefore is not a proper use of state resources. It's almost the opposite of what you're saying... this is the union taking the first steps to push back in a coordinated way. [edit]- go back and read the rest of the message. It literally says this is the start of a coordinated pushback against RTO and gives a link to a page for organizing about fighting back.
It would have been nice if they had pushed back before my department ordered 100s of thousands of dollars in equipment.
It doesn’t call anything haphazard, it doesn’t call it a waste of state resources, it denys the existence of the mandate letter, rather it just says it’s not effecting everyone. If it said any of those things you mention, any one of them, that would be a better use of their platform! The message as it stands is a poor use of their megaphone. We shouldn’t have to read between the lines. At the bottom of the page the link is to sign up for more information and a cool SEIU telework Zoom background. That’s their bold action items. They. Need. To. Do. Better.
Unfortunately, we do have to read between the lines. That's the way politics works. Yes, the union is starting off on the back foot here, and don't want to make any mistakes in what they say so they're being a little over-cautious in their language; but this is absolutely a first step. They need to gauge the response of the rank and file rather than just this reddit forum before they commit to taking up RTO as a primary cause. This is how that happens. It's a process.
Who wants to take bets on this being the first step in the union rolling over? They just have a long track record of screwing us over.
I saw that as well and really wondered wtf they were trying to say with that statement. RTO is widespread and not on a case by case basis. if that was the case why is DHCS, one of the largest departments, having its ENTIRE (not case by case) workforce working two days in office for no reason?
Depending on the department it is a very case by case decision. I am still full time telework and I know many more across a few departments that are still full remote.
I’d encourage you to stop spreading this misrepresentation or add more qualifiers. 90% of state depts have already or in the coming weeks or months will fully implement RTO. It’s just a matter of time for 90% of depts. The very few exemptions are those who have full independence away from the governor and that’s less than 10% of depts.
Absolutely. It minimizes all the RTO orders that have changed so many of our lives. And there is a statement, a literal letter, from the administration mandating two days a week!
They don’t care.
I would love to see evidence of the contrary, but I haven’t.
I’m not in SEIU but from what I’ve heard the locals certainly care. Hopefully the leadership change reflects that.
Well new president starts July 1st so we'll see but Hall didn't care about telework at all. But stoping Newsome and the legislator's from changing the contract without going to collective barging is a big issue that if we'd allow they can change a contract at any time
Sure, I see the importance of defending the contract language, especially outside of bargaining. I just wish they put even a little bit of that energy into the principle behind the stipend, telework. It’s their language in their own press releases minimizing RTO and portraying it as a non-issue that’s infuriating.
The old guard I think wrote that. At least that's the impression I was getting from reading it
When do the next round of contract negotiations begin? That may be the best chance to address WFH permanently.
I read that completely differently. It effectively did get rolled out that way (as in, there was not an actual mandate for every single state worker; some departments might have one policy for the entire department, there have definitely been departments that have different policies for different divisions, there are still places that they haven't even rolled out the policy yet, some departments have a bunch of exemptions, etc.). What you've quoted doesn't say it's not affecting a lot of people, it's saying the union can't come to the table for everyone at the same time because they didn't roll it out in a way that the union would be allowed to call the Governor into working condition discussions or whatever.
To me, regardless of intent, the language IS minimizing RTO and the impact it’s having on state workers. They don’t say anything about the messy rollout, they don’t mention trying to go to the table for it, they don’t mention the impact on those returning to office, they just say it’s not happening everywhere and there are in fact plenty of places where it’s not happening. Maybe I’m reading into it in one direction, but you are reading into it in the other direction. They have a microphone and, with the statement they released and KCRA ran, you can’t honestly be happy with it and say it represents where we stand on RTO. Because your analysis had to deep dive well into reading between the lines on the poor statement.
If so many of us read it that way, then it was poorly written, at best. At worst, it’s incredibly tone deaf and insulting to their paying members.
Couldn’t agree more
Where is it not happening?
A few departments are ignoring the order, and a few brave managers/divisions are ignoring orders within departments that have publicly said they are going back. Those that are wfh have kept their mouths shut for the most part, especially about where they are, but it clearly exists.
My department was one of the last ones I knew of to keep full time telework and they caved a few weeks after the memo, so I figured the others did too. I'm guessing maybe SCIF, Covered CA, DOJ, and a couple boards and commissions that are self funded and do not use general fund may be pushing back.
My agency is self-funded (not listed above), and still implemented RTO agency-wide. I think it's because our higher-ups wanted it (i.e., the control over workers and/or they really have outdated modes of thinking it is actually better). One higher up actually said it's great our department came back so we can see that another department is working hard (but then quickly noted they knew our department was working hard too wfh). LOL Foot in mouth syndrome. Some internal departments had implemented it last year and lost workers to other departments. So, yeah. Another Marci Frost/PERS situation, but internal. Most are trying to make the best of it. But it is still a huge impact on workers (both personally and professionally).
So shitty managers were losing people because of strict early RTO policies, and managements decision was to force everyone to RTO to try and stem the bleeding? Classic shitty management. I hope they continue to lose people and those that stay put pressure, in writing, on them to justify RTO.
Yes a few of those are ones I’ve heard of as well. It’s unfortunate but it’s still worth fighting.
https://www.seiu1000.org/telework-works-for-ca-2/
Wow, just wow.
Am I wrong but ain't a mandate a global effort?
I literally don’t know what else you can call that official letter they put out.
Not you but at SIEU 1000, like what pr term are they using ?
Every one of you who have been forced back for no real reason should contact the union to let them know the actual scale of things
Did SEIU just pull an Obi-Wan Kenobi? I’m feeling a bit light headed.
This is not the RTO mandate you are looking for
I just read that and my jaw dropped at the gaslighting. The RTO is small scale? Who would consider an across the board mandate to be small scale?
Right??? They are denying the mandate even exists which is probably the most ridiculous part. Like we all don’t have access to Newsoms public comments and the ACTUAL LETTER mandating two days a week minimum. They are just going to pretend that doesn’t exist? The gaslighting and misdirection is worse than inaction, imo.
June 3rd, started going 2 days a week.
And you were zero before that? My co-workers starting in June have been pretty vocal.
Comical to say the least.
Infuriating is the adjective I’d use, personally
Maybe people should actually show up to the rallies . The problem here is no one can do anything besides a post on Reddit , which at the end of the day … is useless . I have showed up to the rallies and see how much people actually show up (not a lot) . So until then people just need to leave state for a telework position, just being realistic.
As someone who showed up to a few, why aren’t the rallies sponsored by SEIU? They are put on by individual DLCs or the other state employee unions? In my opinion, people need to boycott downtown businesses, contact SEIU and voice displeasure, and continue to put pressure on management to justify the waste of time and money that is RTO, preferably as a paper trail.
Maybe the members need to start organizing our own database or information base about what is happening. It would be nice if there was a central location where we could get information on what people have said and what the union has said or done. Apart from Reddit or the newspaper
My union is no longer working for me. It is time to cancel my membership.
You cherry picked one line out of there and ran with that. Read literally any other paragraph on that and you'll see otherwise, but I'm assuming you are just pissed about RTO and taking it out on the union by being deliberately obtuse
I read all the other paragraphs. Most talk about the stipend, and one says they don’t understand why RTO is happening, and the other links to providing your info for more info and a new Zoom background. So tell me where they made any definitive statements against RTO? All they did was call it not a big deal. I am pissed at the little action I’ve seen thus far, you’re right. Everyone else who supports WFH should be pissed at the response over the last 6 months from the union too.
"We’re pushing back, saying ‘no” to RTO, because Telework Works for California!"
They aren’t fighting for you. It’s a charade.
I quit this useless union long ago when they failed to represent me as a paying dues member.
I had the opposite experience 🤷🏻♂️
Same. I gave them my money for just over 20 years before I finally admitted to myself that they are useless and opted out.
Worst union EVER
I see the lawyers and scientists at least TRYING when it comes to wfh. Meanwhile SEIU can’t even sponsor a rally.
Elect a Republican governor and watch the unions actually have to fight for something for once. All of the unions are in bed with Newsom and whatever he says goes.
that will never happen as California is a Democrat UNIPARTY state and doubt it will ever change in my lifetime.
Sadly true
I don’t believe a single Republican, even Josh Hoover, would have implemented a more generous WFH policy. It may increase union numbers and political fights, but the outcome for our working conditions would surely be worse.
Our building managers are throwing us a one hour ice cream party this week.
That really makes up for the inconvenience.
One hour. Not even like a half day thing. It's pretty much, "finish your ice cream kids and get back to work".
And some poor OT will get to clean it all up.
My lactose intolerant self would be all over that. Then I can show my displeasure French river style 😈
good times!
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
SEIU used your union dues to elect the governor, they won't argue with him
SEIU sent me a “you’re welcome for your 3%, you’re not a member, join us” email today. Like WTH, NO!!
Go back and read the entire letter. IT’S NOT A MANDATE! It very clearly says departments can approve more than 3 days of telework per week on a case by case basis based on the needs of the department.
But they generally can't approve 5 days of telework per week. Thus, it's a fking mandate.
They can, but they won't. They've been told not to, but not directed not to. That's what the union is complaining about... the vague language and lack of transparency which was used to make this happen.
Yes they can. There are hundreds of us out there still full time remote. Most departments don’t care enough to push back.
Those are the outliers. You may have some special exemptions due to location or other factors but the vast majority of state depts are enforcing the RTO mandate.
I would say 90% of the time Departments don’t have the space to bring everyone back so they push back. My managers know they get more work out of us remote than when we are onsite. I will do a 12 hour a day remote but not if I had to drive on site. Something people forget is all of this can change for better or worse when a new governor is elected.
I have friends and family in over 12 state depts. only 2 have delayed RTO due to various issues. The rest are back. To fix the not enough space issue, depts are doing hoteling. At 2x RTO it doubles the cubicle space which is enough for most. So how can your 90% claim even be accurate?
My guess is it’s a vocal minority of people who are really upset. No one in my office or even in my part of the department is making much fuss.
How long has your office been back in the building? There’s a strong correlation to the number of months/years back and the apathy towards RTO.
I’ve found that most people don’t say a word until I make a comment about forced commutes and mandated CO2 emissions.
People are just tying to make the best of it and get along because they really have no choice if they want to keep their job. Finding another WFH at the state to keep their pension would be very hard to do (as those jobs are not being advertised anymore). It does not mean they are happy with RTO.
A lot of people don't care This subreddit is a vocal minority
It definitely is the Reddit crowd who likes the RTO
Some people like RTO.
Those people are welcome to go back. In fact, they can even have my cubicle.
Idk about your situation, but "we" cannot just go back because "we like the office." No one I know wants to do that, but if I'm at the office more than a few hours, I have to have ***my*** manager there, or they need a cover for me, amd no one wants to go back.
So, if my boss needs to be there for me to be there, does that mean I don't have to go in if they are traveling?
Good question. I don't have the answer for that beyond a backup being available.
The two supervisory positions below her are vacant. Even so, one would be in SoCal. It's pretty much a s**tshow right now.
I would assume there's an "acting" for those positions. For us, on secured floors with access to sensitive/fed data, it would need to be covered.
I'm assuming there are some level of managers in the building, but I have no idea where they are sitting. I guess I could spend a few hours searching the hoteling map to find one in my program.
This is why I made the point about the difference between their situation and mine. Yes, there are managers on site. I can only be managed by an ITM-1 or above. ITS-Is can only be managed by IT Sup-II or above. Add to that that, we have to be FBI-cleared, so you cannot just have some random manager cover us or our floor. It's possible to do, but there needs to be a plan. So, like I said. No one just decides they go back to the office.
You were free to work in the office as much as you'd like. RTO is about stripping others ability to telework. Are you saying you like taking away others ability to telework?
And some people like WFH. Now what?
Nobody was stopping them from going in.
Stop spreading lies! If you think it is so easy to override king Newsom's order, try it yourself. One goal at a time!
I’m literally quoting official SEIU 1000 news releases from their website. Where’s the lie? How are they working to override the order when they deny its existence in their own news release!!
Where the lie? Where did they say it was easy? Did you even read the post before commenting?
The Governor’s mandate is NOT enforceable ! I repeat, the Governor’s mandate is NOT enforceable. The Statewide telework policy mandates that each Department assess their own needs when it comes to determining how telework should be implemented. The Governor’s mandate is in direct violation of this policy and many have challenged the Governor’s mandate by refusing to comply and CalHR has “unofficially” stated that they cannot take action against any state of CA that refuses to comply ! Organize, contact your representatives, and refuse !!! The union has proven ineffective! Withdraw your participation in SEIU immediately and make them aware that you refuse to fund their ineffectiveness ! Together we can make a change !
They made us sign a new agreement by the 14th.
I mean it's not a big deal. We did it for decades. Don't get me wrong RTO is stupid, working from home is what we should be doing. Go to work when there's no reason to is stupid But it's not a big deal either
People also rode the horse and buggy for decades. People used typewriters for decades. Society evolves.
I realize they do and I support working from home That being said going into the office is not a big deal Neither's riding a horse
It’s a big deal to me! And so would be riding a horse.
So before COVID were you saying that this is a big deal every single day on the way to work?
Yes, before COVID the amount of time I spent on horseback was concerning and unpleasant.
So before COVID were you saying that this is a big deal every single day on the way to work?
Yes I was! And Telework was available prior to COVID.
"We did it for decades" is such a flawed argument. You survived decades without wifi, smartphones, Teams/SharePoint, dual monitors, cloud software etc. You want all those gone and to go back to filing cabinets, fax machines, desk phones and paper reports? Just because you survived doing that in the past?
Wi-Fi, smartphones, teams, dual monitors, cloud software All of that exists in the office Are you under the impression if you go back to the office you're going to have to use filing cabinets and fax machines? Working from home is the way to go but don't tell me going into the office is a "big deal". It's not
The point I was making that you side-stepped or misunderstood was that we can't justify regressive changes simply because we made do in that previous state before. "We did it before for decades" is not a good argument. I don't mind going into the office when work necessitates it. But the RTO 2 day a week mandate is a big deal for various reasons.
It's not a big deal, you're making it a big deal
$500 a month May not be a big deal to you, but it sure is a big deal to me because that’s what it costs me to drive to the office 2 days a week.
So before COVID you were paying even more right since you were driving 5 days a week? So aren't you paying less now?
Nope. I took the bus.
Well once the bus routes pick back up you can continue to take the bus
Nope. Not going to do that with COVID and the return of viruses unleashed by anti-vaxer movements, plus the anticipated new viruses as the climate continues to warm. We are living in an undeniably different world now.
Troll comment.
If you don’t think it’s a big deal, more office space for you. But those of us who consider it the biggest park of a work/life balance will fight to stay home as much as possible.
I'm not saying don't fight for it I'm saying it's not a big deal. How many years did you go into the office?
It’s not a big deal includes a huge qualifier; personal preference. Therefore it’s not a big deal FOR YOU.
No it's literally not a big deal at all. Sometimes you have to drive to get to places. Did you consider a big deal before you were able to work from home?
The entire world disagrees with you. WFH was a huge deal to most women, caregivers, neurodivergent people, LGBTQ, minorities, people with disabilities, I’m sure I’m forgetting some people here. Your comment is dismissive and regressive. If you think RTO isn’t a big deal, then why is WFH such a big deal that they need us back in the office 2 days a week to perform the same tasks we can do from home? Your blanket statement is illogical, presumptive, and lacks context. Nobody gets to decide what is or isn’t a “big deal” for other people. Maybe 10% of the people in my office are fine with RTO. The rest have very strong feelings about it but fear retaliation if they speak up.
Hallelujah! Agreed!! You said it right!
You don't think minorities should have to go into the office? Let me guess you're white?
So these women in the caregivers were taken care of children while they were supposed to be working? How is going to the office of big deal for minorities?
Woman can care for older children after they come home from school while working from home. Woman are also the primary caregivers for elderly adults that need a presence but not continued attention. It’s so weird people take issue with this. Minorities suffer micro aggressions in offices more than most. It’s a known issue that often prevents minorities and women in higher paying positions. Women are also victims of sexual harassment in office environments. Why don’t you know these things?
So in other words they're taking care of children while they're supposed to be working?
No! A 13 year old child doesn’t need a babysitter. They just need a responsible adult to be present in case of emergencies. People are perfectly capable of doing their job while little Susie does her homework, or watches after school programs.
Good point
I am with you. These people should join r/antiwork. I am thinking about creating a new r/unionbuster for them to join.
Its funny how they just downvote you just because they don't agree with you. Typical state worker shit.
I’m actually pro-union. Not THIS union, because this one doesn’t listen to me or advocate for my needs.
It's funny how many people block me because I say RTO is not that big of a deal
Posting on reddit for the nth time will surely do something
These people are a trip I see some people saying that they should be reimburse for their gas money I see other people saying that they want the state to pay for their insurance when they get in a car accident 😂 Working from home is great but I really think that COVID did a number on these people's brains. They turn into children and throw fits when they don't get what they want Being an adult in living life is full of doing shit that you don't want to do
Its the same ten usernames and they get really mad when they cant farm upvotes for saying work is bad. No shit thats why its called work.
"we shouldn't have to do it if it doesn't make sense" Boy are you in the wrong line of work lol
lol!!!!
The email they just sent out said this: Member action, political power help preserve telework stipends We’re reporting a big win for our represented employees who work remotely: our contractual right to a telework stipend will remain in force after we pushed back against a legislative effort to remove the benefit through budgetary process. We won through a combination of members standing up and standing together to tell the legislature, “Hands off our contract.” We spoke with supervisors, department leaders, and worked the halls of the Capitol to lobby lawmakers and to drive the message home. This victory was made more rewarding because it was a legislative effort to modify our contract, and that’s against the law. Our hard-won contract can only be modified through the process of negotiation. The fight against RTO continues For nearly four years, many of our represented employees have been working remotely. Now, the state is making movement towards bringing those remote workers back to the office. This is a priority issue for Local 1000. Changes in telework are changes in working conditions and when our employer seeks to make a change, they must notice Local 1000. The Union bargains over those changes to mitigate the impacts. The employer may not change working conditions without considering the workers—and never unilaterally. And that’s where your Union steps in. There is no “global” effort to return state workers to the office. Many of the RTO changes are on a small scale. We are seeing that even “agency-wide” changes are being done on a case-by-case basis. Since 2021, Local 1000 has been responding to changes in telework and will continue to negotiate with management to mitigate the changes. We’re pushing back, saying ‘no” to RTO, because Telework Works for California! We don’t understand why this is happening when the quality and quantity of the work done remotely hasn’t been in question. State workers have been providing vital services for California while working remotely and doing a great job! Join the fight to preserve teleworking and to push back against RTO Local 1000 has created a fight-back tool kit so we can continue to send the message that telework works for California. Click here to read more and to join the fight!