State workers will do anything to not have to go back to work. A California state worker union is invoking one of the state’s most powerful environmental laws in an effort to block Gov. Gavin Newsom’s return-to-office mandate, arguing that requiring tens of thousands of employees to commute four days a week would significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions.
The union representing state attorneys and administrative law judges, California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and Hearing Officers in State Employment (CASE), sent so-called “exhaustion” letters Wednesday to more than 100 state departments. The letters contend that Newsom’s planned return-to-office policy would trigger environmental review requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act, commonly known as CEQA, writes The Sacramento Bee.
The mandate would affect more than 90,000 state employees and, according to the union, generate more than 15,000 additional tons of carbon dioxide emissions each month because of increased vehicle traffic.
“Putting 90,000 people on the road and pumping that much carbon into the air has an environmental impact,” said Matthew Gauger, CASE’s vice president. “It should only be done if there’s a proper environmental impact report, and that hasn’t been done.”
CEQA requires state and local agencies to evaluate the environmental consequences of major projects before implementation. CASE argues that the four-day, in-office requirement qualifies as such a project because of its anticipated impact on traffic congestion and emissions.
The union’s letters were accompanied by an analysis from Baseline Environmental Consulting, which concluded that the return-to-office policy conflicts with California’s long-term goal of achieving carbon neutrality. CASE also pointed to state data published during the COVID-19 pandemic that highlighted reduced emissions and cost savings associated with remote work.
Union leaders argue that the current hybrid arrangement, which generally requires employees to work in the office two days per week, demonstrates that a less environmentally disruptive alternative is already available.
“Importantly, the CEQA review requires that each agency and department consider feasible alternatives, and we’ve been living in one of those for the last six years,” CASE President Talene Ghazarian said. “Status quo is a feasible alternative.”
The exhaustion letters are a procedural step that could pave the way for litigation. Under CEQA, parties challenging a project generally must first raise environmental concerns during the administrative process before seeking judicial review.
If state agencies decline to conduct environmental impact evaluations, the union said it plans to pursue a writ in superior court.
“We expect to be very successful,” Gauger said.
The environmental challenge marks the latest effort by state employee unions to resist Newsom’s return-to-office directive. Earlier this year, unions supported legislation that would allow individual agencies to establish their own telework policies rather than follow a statewide mandate. Several labor groups also filed lawsuits last year alleging violations of California labor law before the governor agreed to delay implementation of the original order by one year during contract negotiations.
Opposition to the policy has also extended beyond the courtroom. Last year, anonymous state employees financed billboards along Interstate 80 warning that the mandate would increase traffic congestion.
Despite the pushback, Newsom has continued moving forward with the policy. Earlier this month, he instructed cabinet secretaries to begin preparations for a four-day, in-office workweek.
[Read More: DOJ Investigating Trump Accuser]Â
