Since July 1, California state employees have been required to report to their offices four days a week under an executive order Newsom signed earlier this year. The mandate covers roughly 108,000 of the state’s more than 245,900 workers — those who previously had some flexibility to work remotely. The rest, including prison staff, firefighters, law enforcement personnel and custodial workers, were already required to be on-site full time.

The policy has put Newsom at odds with labor unions that have historically been reliable allies. Members helped him survive a 2021 recall attempt and have campaigned for him in past elections. Now, some of those same unions are pushing back hard, arguing the governor is ignoring evidence that remote work is just as productive — if not more so — than showing up in person.

“It’s confusing to people when they think that they’ve done a great job to be told, ‘Well we don’t think it’s good enough and you should incur going back into the office,'” said D’Arcy McLeod, who chairs the bargaining team for the Professional Engineers in California Government.

Service Employees International Union Local 1000, which represents about 96,000 state workers and is currently negotiating a new contract, contends that remote work cuts costs for both the state and its employees while easing traffic congestion and pollution. The union filed an unfair labor practice complaint with the California Public Employment Relations Board in May and is backing a legislative proposal that would let individual state agencies set their own telework rules rather than follow a single statewide policy.

“A blanket mandate does not work for all the jobs that our workers do,” said SEIU 1000 President Anica Walls. “Let the departments decide.”

The governor’s order does include some carve-outs. Workers who live 50 miles or more from their office, or whose jobs require them to be elsewhere — telehealth providers and inspectors, for example — can request exemptions. The state also reimburses public transit costs for commuting employees. Union leaders say those provisions don’t go far enough.

California’s approach stands apart from many other states, including several with strong union presence. Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon and Washington all continue to allow some degree of remote work for state employees. Nevada and New Mexico require five days in-office, while Utah asks for two.

Texas, meanwhile, took a path opposite of what one might expect given its Republican leadership. Abbott banned remote work for state employees in early 2025, not long after President Trump ordered federal workers back to their desks. But after a multi-agency review found that telework hadn’t hurt productivity and had actually helped retain employees, Abbott reversed course and signed legislation this summer allowing telework across state agencies.

That contrast hasn’t been lost on union leaders. Ted Toppin, executive director of the engineers’ union, noted that Newsom has long championed technological innovation in government, even authoring a book on the subject.

“It strikes me as interesting and ironic that Texas would have a more modern, flexible and efficient take on state employee telework,” Toppin said.

A state audit released last year estimated that expanded telework could save California as much as $225 million annually. Despite those findings, Newsom signed his return-to-office order in March 2025, requiring most affected employees back at their desks at least four days a week.

Speaking to reporters in May, Newsom said he understood workers’ frustrations but believes in-person work strengthens workplace culture, encourages collaboration and accountability, and supports small businesses that rely on foot traffic from office workers, particularly in downtown Sacramento.

McLeod said he was struck that Newsom held firm even after state officials who testified before auditors reportedly praised the quality of remote work during and after the pandemic.

“Every single Newsom appointed official that testified for the state auditor indicated that the work that was being delivered during telework was substantially of higher quality and more efficient,” McLeod said.

The standoff echoes tensions between labor and California’s previous two governors. Arnold Schwarzenegger clashed with public employee unions over ballot measures aimed at curbing their influence and later imposed unpaid furloughs during the recession. Jerry Brown, meanwhile, pushed through pension reforms that required workers to contribute more toward their retirement benefits and was known for tight-fisted contract negotiations.

Newsom, by contrast, had cultivated goodwill with public employee unions — offering targeted concessions during the pandemic, approving one-time bonuses, and negotiating contracts that sweetened deals for workers in hard-to-fill positions.

The fight over return-to-office rules threatens to undo some of that goodwill. Democratic strategist Steve Maviglio, who has advised public employee unions on pension matters, said Newsom’s stance is puzzling for a politician widely believed to have national ambitions.

“It’s political malpractice to come across as anti-labor,” Maviglio said. “The only thing you’ll be able to say is that ‘I stood up to state workers,’ which isn’t particularly helpful in a Democratic primary where labor is the key constituency nationwide for Democrats.”

Not everyone sees it that way. Will Swaim, chief executive of the libertarian-leaning California Policy Center, argues the dispute reflects a broader question about who controls government workplace policy. SEIU 1000 has donated at least $2 million to sitting state lawmakers, according to CalMatters’ Digital Democracy database, and is simultaneously pressing its case through both contract talks and a bill now before the state Senate.

“That’s simply undemocratic,” Swaim said. “I don’t know anybody out there who believes that in their jobs they could tell their boss, ‘I’m not coming to the office, no matter what you want.’ It just doesn’t fly.”

Walls, the SEIU president, rejected that framing, saying employers should be willing to adapt to their workforce — especially a governor widely seen as considering a future run for president.

“As a state employee I would have trouble voting for someone who would be the boss of federal employees when I know he hasn’t shown to be a stellar employer to state employees,” Walls said.

Original source: CalMatters

The post Newsom’s Office Mandate for State Workers Outpaces Rules in Texas, Other States appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.