SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — A San Francisco public employees’ union this week asked the California Public Employment Relations Board to block Proposition F, a controversial measure passed by voters that will require city welfare recipients that use drugs to accept treatment or lose their benefits.
The Service Employees International Union Local 1021 on Thursday filed an unfair practice charge with the Public Employment Relations Board because they say the city did not discuss Proposition F with the union prior to placing it on the ballot — giving the union no chance to bargain over the impacts the measure will have on its workers.
SEIU Local 1021 represents 16,000 city workers who will have to implement the controversial new policies of Proposition F. The union also filed a request to expedite, which asks PERB to put the case at the front of its queue because of the urgency of the matter.
In a statement late Thursday night, SEIU Local 1021 President Theresa Rutherford said that the passage of Proposition F will have “significant adverse impacts” on workers and the public and that the union was dedicated to advocating for the well-being of its workers and the community.
“At a time when city eligibility workers, social workers, healthcare workers, and other vital public service classifications are critically short-staffed, adding new requirements, processes, and responsibilities to their daily workload makes Proposition F all but impossible to execute fairly and consistently without substantial new investment in staffing, training, and worker safety,” Rutherford said.
The union sent a letter to the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office in February, arguing that Proposition F would negatively affect union workers.
Union attorneys said the city violated the law when it did not meet and confer with the union to discuss the proposal’s impact on its workers, as required by the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, a California labor law that requires public employers to meet and confer in good faith with employee representatives about wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment.
Jen Kwart, a spokesperson for City Attorney David Chiu, said the office was "reviewing the filing and will respond in the PERB proceedings.”
There is precedent for a measure such as Proposition F being blocked. In 2018, the California Supreme Court ruled that San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer violated state law when he promoted a ballot measure cutting employees’ pension benefits because he failed to meet and confer with the union beforehand.
In this case, Rutherford said that Proposition F will not solve the homelessness and drug crises in the city but will instead perpetuate them.
“In addition to stigmatizing poverty, it will have a chilling effect on San Francisco's most vulnerable communities that all available clinical expertise and evidence indicates will result in increased homelessness, overdoses, and health emergencies with poor outcomes, which our members will be responsible for treating,” Rutherford said.
Mayor London Breed, who is facing reelection in November and polling poorly in early polls, put the measure on the ballot to address the city’s overdose epidemic and public drug use.
The year 2023 saw the most overdoses in San Francisco history. More than 800 residents died, mostly from fentanyl use.
Proposition F passed on Tuesday, with roughly 62% of voters voting in favor. It is slated to go into effect on Jan. 1, 2025.
The measure takes aim at the city’s County Adult Assistance Program, which provides debit cards to extremely low-income or no-income residents that don’t have children. Benefits range from $109 per month for homeless individuals to $712 for people who are housed or agree to enter housing, with 30% automatically deducted for rent.
There are roughly 5,200 single adults enrolled in the program, which is administered by the city’s Human Services Agency. Proposition F’s passage does not affect state or federal welfare benefits. Breed has claimed the measure will pay for itself with the money saved from people disenrolling from the Assistance Program.
If Proposition F is not blocked, Rutherford has threatened further legal proceedings and collective worker action — including a potential worker’s strike — to protest what she called the city’s “persistent unfair labor practices."
“Any legal or job actions would be undertaken on behalf of workers and the most vulnerable residents of our city,” she said.
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
Chipotle consent decree May 2, 2024 -
