‘No-strike’ clause becomes election issue for SEIU Local 1000 amid pay cut frustration

Two candidates running for president of SEIU Local 1000 are promoting a long-shot contract change that would give workers more flexibility to strike but would likely carry big implications for other employment protections.

Tony Owens, a CalPERS IT specialist and elected vice president of the union, and Richard Louis Brown, an analyst with an advisory committee at the State Treasurer’s Office, said in interviews that they would push to remove the “no strike” clause from the union’s employment contract.

The two candidates are campaigning for president of the state’s largest union against incumbent Yvonne Walker and challengers Sophia Perkins and Miguel Cordova. Mail ballots are due May 20.

Owens and Brown have promoted the change amid state worker frustration over the pay cuts their unions agreed to last year, when California faced a projected $54 billion budget deficit during the early months of the coronavirus outbreak. The projected deficit has since been replaced by a surplus, while the pay cuts remain.

But the proposed change to the strike rule, if it were to reach the bargaining table, could raise all kinds of unanticipated issues and would likely require major concessions to become a reality, according to attorneys representing both unions and public employers.

“I think there are a lot of ramifications here, and I don’t think a lot of people have thought them through,” said Gary Messing, a partner with Sacramento-based firm Messing Adam & Jasmine who represents state public safety unions. “Even if they have thought them through, I don’t think anyone knows what the answers are.”

Messing spoke generally about state law governing strikes, noting that public safety employees face much tighter restrictions on strikes than non-safety employees.

Tim Yeung, a Sacramento-based attorney who served as a legal adviser to the Public Employment Relations Board and now represents public and private employers, said no-strike agreements are a cornerstone of negotiated contracts.

“It’s all about labor peace,” Yeung said. “When we agree to a contract, we’re agreeing that for the next three years or whatever, we’re not going to have a strike. If you can walk out at any time, that defeats much of the purpose of what we’re trying to do.”

Yeung said no-strike clauses are nearly universal in union contracts. Typically the clauses expire when contracts expire, but the law governing collective bargaining among California state employees keeps the provisions in place even after contracts expire.

The law, known as the Ralph C. Dills Act, preserves the terms of state employment contracts as long as good-faith bargaining continues. Unions continue to honor no-strike clauses, and the state continues to honor provisions important to unions, including binding arbitration provisions that force the state to honor a third-party arbitrator’s decisions in some employment disputes.

The situation can change when good-faith bargaining ends and the parties reach impasse. The state may impose its last, best and final offer even without union agreement, and — according to union and employer attorneys — public employees likely can legally strike in certain circumstances.

Pay cuts for state workers

SEIU Local 1000 held strike votes in 2009 and 2016 after negotiations broke down with the administrations of former Govs. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jerry Brown, but the strikes were called off. No state unions have yet followed through on strike votes.

Owens said the union might have been positioned to take a stronger stance at the bargaining table over last year’s pay cuts if it weren’t for the no-strike clause.

“If the state is aware that that option (to strike) doesn’t really exist, it’s kind of like you’re fighting with one hand tied behind your back, so to speak,” Owens said.

Local 1000 and all of the other state employee unions reached agreements in June that reduced most state workers’ base pay by 9.23% while giving them two flexible days off per month and suspending the contributions they normally make toward their retirement health care.

Walker, who led the union’s negotiations with the state, declined an interview request for this story through a spokesman.

The unions agreed to the reductions after Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature passed legislation that would have automatically imposed more onerous furloughs if the unions didn’t agree to the terms.

SEIU Local 1000’s membership

Richard Louis Brown, a perennial candidate who has described himself as an outsider, said he would only agree to keep the no-strike provision in the contract if the state agreed not to impose any kind of furloughs or to lay off any workers covered by the union.

“What I’m suggesting is, for all future contracts, when I’m president, if we have a no strike clause in that contract, it’ll be because our money and our jobs can’t be changed,” Brown said.

Sophia Perkins, an office technician who lost to Walker in 2018’s election but topped a slate of candidates who swept out Walker’s allies, said she supports building a strike fund but doesn’t see the union expanding its authority to strike anytime soon, particularly since Local 1000 represents groups of public safety employees who work at prisons and state hospitals.

Miguel Cordova, an education programs consultant who is chairman of a unit representing educators, consultants and librarians, said discussions over the no-strike clause are premature for a union with a membership rate of around 54%.

Cordova said his priority would be to bring more members on board and engage them in organizing.

“To me, the power of getting your members to the point of striking is the kind of power you’re going to need even to move toward this request,” Cordova said. “I feel like there’s a lot that has to happen to get Local 1000 to that point.”

This story was originally published April 28, 2021 at 5:00 AM with the headline "‘No-strike’ clause becomes election issue for SEIU Local 1000 amid pay cut frustration."