u/Commercial_Fault_772

If Newsom and CalHR are going to run out the clock and wait for us to strike before they are willing to negotiate fairly, then I believe the union and all of us need to stand firm and not back down. If we go on strike, we should be prepared to stay united until every one of our basic demands is addressed, without giving unnecessary concessions.

The union has already shown a willingness to negotiate by offering concessions from its original demand of 20% over three years. However, the State also needs to negotiate in good faith. For the past several months, many of our proposals have been rejected outright, despite evidence and budget information suggesting that the State has the ability to afford meaningful improvements.

My concern is that if the State intentionally runs the clock past August 30 and waits for a strike, just as we saw in 2016, then we need to make it clear that we are not striking simply to come back to the table and accept another inadequate agreement. If we are forced into a strike, then we should be prepared to fight for a comprehensive contract that meaningfully addresses our concerns: the 20% wage increase over three years, meaningful telework protections, better health insurance, and the other fundamental demands that State employees have been asking for.

Why go to war if we are not prepared to fight for a meaningful victory?

The State should understand that this is not an empty threat or a temporary disagreement. If negotiations continue to be delayed past August 30 without meaningful concessions on our basic and reasonable demands, then the union should communicate clearly that any resulting strike will be a serious and sustained fight. We should not enter a strike without a clear commitment to achieving a fair agreement.

At the same time, our goal should remain a fair contract—not conflict for the sake of conflict. We need to negotiate seriously, listen to the evidence, and reach an agreement that recognizes the value of State employees and the work we perform every day

So let me get this straight.

The union is bargaining until August 30, and then the Legislature goes into recess until January 2027. If we don't have a contract by August 30, doesn't that mean the window is effectively closed until next year? At that point, even if we vote to strike, wouldn't it mostly be symbolic?

This is exactly how I remember the 2016 situation. A strike was being discussed late in the year, CalHR finally came to an agreement, and the contract was signed in January 2017.

The whole purpose of a union is to prevent employees from being pushed around and disrespected by management. If this is how every fight plays out, then what real leverage do we have?

Here's how I see it:

- No contract by August 30.

- Strike authorization vote.

- A strike is planned for November or December.

- By then, Governor Newsom is already on his way out, so when the media asks about the strike, he can simply say it's a matter for the next governor.

- We eventually settle and sign a contract in January 2027.

If that's how this ends, then Newsom gets everything he wanted. His policies are implemented, he leaves office without facing meaningful consequences, and moves on to whatever comes next.

So where is the union's bargaining power? A strong union shouldn't be dragged through months of delays while members are left waiting. If we truly had leverage, we wouldn't be in this position year after year.

You don't have to agree with my opinion, but based on the timeline, this outcome seems entirely possible. I'd genuinely like to hear why you think it won't play out this way.

I honestly don't even care that much about RTO anymore. What I care about is the level of disrespect I feel Governor Newsom has shown to state workers.

Every interview, every dismissive response, and every smug attitude only fuels my frustration. It feels like our concerns are being brushed aside, as if the people who keep California running don't deserve to be heard.

At this point, I don't believe letters, emails, or complaints will get his attention. The only thing that truly sends a message is a large, united strike that the public and the media can't ignore.

This isn't just about RTO. It isn't just about raises. It's about respect.

If we let this slide, what message are we sending to future governors? That they can ignore state workers, make decisions without meaningful engagement, and face no consequences? That's a dangerous precedent.

Whether you care about RTO, pay, or neither, we should stand together because this is bigger than any single issue. It's about making it clear that state employees deserve to be treated with respect, listened to in good faith, and recognized for the work we do every day.

No governor is above accountability. Public servants deserve to be treated with dignity, not dismissed. If we stay united, we have a far stronger voice than if we allow ourselves to be divided by individual issues.

We're now in the second week of the RTO mandate, and it looks like the union may drag this fight out until a possible strike in November. Based on the information sessions posted, strike meetings are scheduled through the end of August, which suggests the earliest a strike could happen is late October or November.

I don't like that timeline. By then, we'll be focused on the next governor, and Governor Newsom will have largely escaped accountability for creating this situation and standing by his RTO order.

If a strike is going to happen, I believe it should happen no later than September. Delaying Striking only reduces the pressure on the people responsible for this policy. If workers are going to take a stand, it should be while the decision-makers are still directly accountable for the consequences of their actions.

Why are we moving to 4 days in the office instead of finding common ground at 3 days and embracing a modern, flexible workplace?

We've gone backwards instead of forward. Technology has proven that many government employees can successfully do their jobs remotely while maintaining productivity and serving the public.

The State doesn't seem willing to meet employees halfway with a 3-day hybrid schedule, even though it would balance collaboration with flexibility. Instead, we're being pushed to 4 days in the office, increasing commuting costs, traffic, and time away from our families with little evidence that the extra day improves performance.

What's even more frustrating is that employees have little leverage. We have collective bargaining, yet many feel their voices aren't being heard. A reasonable compromise should be possible, but instead we're moving away from the future of work rather than modernizing it.

A 3-day hybrid schedule is a balanced approach. Four days feels like a step backward.

The Governor should be leading us into the future, not forcing us back into the past. Four days in the office is not modernization — it's a step backward.

I'm done with PECG starting in September. I'm giving them one more chance to step up and advocate for us on RTO and pay issues before I officially pull out.

After more than five years as a member, I've never felt as disappointed or disrespected as I do now. We got a 0% raise this year, only 2% next year for most members, we're still furloughed, and now we're expected to return to the office four days a week while gas prices remain high and many of us have to pay for parking.

In my opinion, PECG hasn't just failed to improve conditions—it has allowed things to get worse for its members.

I've raised these concerns multiple times, and the response is always that we've received pay increases over the past 20 years. Of course we have. The State still has to offer competitive salaries to attract and retain licensed engineers, with or without a union. That's not a convincing argument for the value of membership.

Another point that is constantly emphasized is legal representation. Personally, I don't need it. I'm a hardworking engineer and a team player. If I ever have a serious issue at work that can't be resolved, I'll hire my own attorney.

To me, PECG has become more like an insurance policy than a union that fights every day for better pay, stronger benefits, and improved working conditions. It's essentially, "If something goes wrong, call us." I don't need an insurance policy for my job.

Looking back, I've spent around $5,000 in union dues over the past five years, and I honestly have to ask: what did I get in return?

If we allow the Return-to-Office (RTO) mandate to continue for several more months without meaningful action, it will become much harder, perhaps nearly impossible, to restore the flexibility we once had.

The longer RTO becomes the norm, the easier it is for the State to argue that employees have accepted it. Once that happens, future contract negotiations will likely shift back to focusing mostly on pay raises, while telework and workplace flexibility take a back seat until another major event—like the next pandemic—forces the issue again.

This isn't just about where we work. It's about protecting a benefit that has improved work-life balance, reduced commuting costs, lowered emissions, and helped the State recruit and retain talented employees.

I'm also not sure why the union hasn't at least raised the possibility of a strike as leverage to encourage more serious negotiations. Even if a strike never happens, showing a willingness to consider stronger collective action could signal that employees expect this issue to be taken seriously. Right now, many members feel like our concerns about telework are not being given the attention they deserve.

If we believe telework is worth protecting, this is the time to act. Waiting another year or two will only make it harder to reverse course.

This fight is now or never.

If the State refuses to negotiate in good faith, the union needs to take a much stronger stance. Simply filing unfair labor practice charges and lawsuits is not enough.

Legal challenges can take months or even years. By the time any meaningful ruling is issued, Governor Newsom could already be out of office, which is only just four months from now. Delaying the process benefits the State while employees continue working under unacceptable conditions and with no raises.

The union should make it clear that a strike is on the table, even if every legal avenue has not yet been exhausted. The credible threat of collective action is often what brings employers back to the bargaining table. If the State continues making far-fetched proposals and refuses to negotiate seriously, it shouldn't be rewarded for stalling.

Good-faith bargaining requires both sides to make genuine efforts to reach an agreement. If one side is simply running out the clock, the union must respond with urgency and show that there are real consequences for bad-faith negotiations. Our members deserve leadership that is willing to stand firm and fight for a fair contract—not just wait while the process drags on.

Why are we expected to follow every procedural step before even considering a strike?

If Governor Newsom can refuse to negotiate in good faith since May and intentionally delay bargaining while knowing the July 1 RTO mandate was approaching, the only consequence is that we file a lawsuit or an unfair labor practice complaint. There are no immediate consequences for the State.

So why doesn't the union take the same approach? Why not tell CalHR and Newsom that a strike is on the table, even if every procedural requirement hasn't been completed? If they believe it's unlawful, they can sue the union or file complaints against us—just as we're expected to do when the State ignores its obligations.

Why is it that employees are expected to strictly follow every rule and procedure, while the State can delay, stall, and ignore its legal obligations with little immediate accountability? It feels like there is one set of rules for workers and another for the employer.

Today is our chance to show that employees are united. Every person who shows up sends a message that our voices matter and that we care about protecting telework, fair working conditions, and respect for state workers. Join us today from 11:00 AM to 1:00 PM at the California State Capitol West Steps (1315 10th St., Sacramento). Real change happens when people stand together, not when they stay home hoping someone else will do it. If you support these goals, stand shoulder to shoulder with your coworkers and help make our voices impossible to ignore. Together, we are stronger. SEE YOU THERE!!!

If I don't see at least 1,000 people tomorrow, then nothing will change. At that point, I blame the members—not the union. We also need to take responsibility for our lack of action.

Throughout history, nothing has been freely given to ordinary people without collective action. Freedom, voting rights, fair wages, and better working conditions all came because people stood together and demanded change.

I encourage everyone to show up and bring your friends, family members, and coworkers. I hope to see well over 1,000 people on July 1, because only then will our voices be impossible to ignore.

If you work in Downtown Sacramento and can't take 30 minutes during your lunch break to stand with your fellow workers, then I don't want to hear complaints later. Real change requires participation, not just frustration.

I'm driving all the way from Stockton to attend this rally because I'm willing to do my part. I hope you'll do yours too!

Before we talk about a strike, everyone and their mama should show up on July 1. If we can't get at least 1,000 people standing together demanding respect for our telework rights and fair raises, then a strike won't have much impact.

Just imagine what happens if 1,000 state workers show up. Every major news outlet will cover it, and it will be a terrible look for Newsom. When our unions go back to the negotiating table, they'll have the backing of thousands of workers, not just emails, Reddit posts, and billboards.

At that point, we start steering the conversation: negotiate seriously now, or this is only the beginning. The July 1 protest should be just a drop in the bucket, not the end of our efforts.

Nothing hurts a politician more than bad publicity, especially during the final months of an administration. Seeing thousands of state employees publicly united sends a message that can't be ignored. If we show up in force—not just online—we have a much better chance of making our voices heard.

To all the State workers who took the time to testify in support of the AB 1729 bill, THANK YOU! Your voices, dedication, and willingness to stand up for your fellow employees made a real difference. We appreciate your commitment to advocating for better working conditions, fair treatment, and the future of the State workforce. Again, Thank youuuu!!!!!

Does anyone have any insight on what PECG is doing regarding RTO? From the outside, it feels like the union has largely given up on fighting it.

I'm also concerned that there doesn't seem to be any effort to renegotiate our compensation. We received only a 3% raise last year, nothing this year, and only 2% next year, despite the state now having billions available in the budget. If PECG isn't fighting RTO or compensation, what exactly was gained from the last contract? Was it simply delaying RTO for a period of time?

At this point, this feels like a do-or-die moment not just for RTO, but for the union's credibility and long-term relevance. If the union doesn't use every available tool to advocate for its members before full RTO is implemented, many employees will start questioning the value of union representation altogether.

I'm a strong union supporter and have been a member since I started with the State six years ago. However, if the union can't effectively push back and negotiate on major issues like RTO, then I have to question what real power it has.

I understand the union helps with grievances and disputes, but a union should also be fighting for working conditions, telework flexibility, and fair compensation. Otherwise, it starts to feel more like an insurance policy than a powerful bargaining organization.

I'm not saying the union isn't doing anything, but what leverage do we actually have if a major policy like RTO can be implemented with little resistance and no clear justification? If there were ever an issue worth considering a strike over, this would be it, because once we're back in the office, it's unlikely we'll regain those telework days.

On top of that, going years with little or no meaningful raises is not something to celebrate. We received no general salary increase this year, inflation has eaten away at our purchasing power, and next year many employees may only see a 3% raise. Employees are being asked to give up flexibility while falling further behind financially.

As a union member, I'm simply trying to understand what the union's strength is if changes this significant can move forward without a major challenge.