On July 1, Governor Gavin Newsom signed a pivotal executive order that mandates all state agencies and departments offering remote work to require a minimum of four in-person days each week. This decision comes amidst ongoing discussions about the balance between remote work flexibility and the benefits of in-person collaboration. Exceptions to this new requirement may be granted on a case-by-case basis, allowing for some flexibility in the implementation.
In a statement regarding the executive order, Governor Newsom emphasized the importance of in-person work, stating, “In-person work makes us all stronger — period.” He argued that when employees work together physically, it enhances collaboration, fosters innovation, and increases accountability. These factors, he believes, lead to improved service and solutions for Californians while still maintaining some level of flexibility for employees.
The executive order is expected to escalate tensions between Governor Newsom and various labor unions that represent public employees. These unions have previously resisted efforts to limit telework among the state workforce. Currently, approximately 95,000 employees are engaged in remote or hybrid work arrangements, according to the governor’s office.
Last April, Newsom had already mandated that state workers return to the office for at least two days per week. He cited that in-person work enhances efficiency, mentorship, and supervision. However, the new executive order contends that the benefits of in-person work have been compromised due to misaligned employee schedules. Furthermore, it notes that numerous leading private sector employers are also increasing their in-person work requirements.
Despite this new mandate, the governor’s office did not provide clarity on the timing of the decision to bring state workers back to the office more frequently. Legal challenges surrounding return-to-office orders are still pending, and it’s anticipated that these disputes will continue even after Newsom's latest directive. An arbitration decision from the previous year, which involved the California Attorneys, State Employees (CASE) union, supported California's right to require in-person work, but the union has since appealed this decision, and other legal battles are ongoing.
Timothy O’Connor, president of the CASE union, criticized the governor's decision, stating that it overlooks the benefits of remote work. Proponents of telework argue that it enhances employee productivity, well-being, and can result in cost savings for the state. O’Connor described the executive order as a “very harsh order” that appears sudden and misguided.
Governor Newsom has framed the executive order as a matter of fairness for the entire state workforce, which comprises over 224,000 employees. He pointed out that more than half of these employees have consistently reported to work in person throughout the pandemic and that many more have returned to their physical workplaces since then. This includes essential workers such as law enforcement officers, healthcare providers, highway maintenance workers, and janitorial staff.
As California navigates the complex landscape of post-pandemic work policies, the implications of Governor Newsom's executive order will likely continue to unfold, affecting both the state's workforce and the broader conversation about remote work in public sectors.
