Court fiscal management and its impact on you

Dear OCEA Court Member:

You and your co-workers are trying to make life work. In the midst of a global pandemic, the personal lives, work lives and the lives of loved ones are competing for time, energy, understanding and accommodations. There is little normal about life today.  And, it doesn’t look like there’s an end in sight; at least for the foreseeable future. This is your reality. So, how do we continue to make life work for OCEA members and your co-workers? That is the question we have been​ confronting with Court management as they began to plan for back-to-school realities and the need to continue the public service of administering justice.

As you know, the Orange County Superior Court, along with many other jurisdictions, is navigating its own operational and fiscal realities. Operationally, the Court is still trying to determine the appropriate service levels and how to manage the backlog of cases created during the court-wide closures. Fiscally, the Court is facing potential cuts to judicial branch funding if federal aid is not passed in Congress by October 1st.  

As a ​Court employee, how does this affect you?  Court management believes the ​Court faces a $3.5 million budget shortfall for Fiscal Year 20/21. Many other public agencies are taking a patient, wait and see approach before they seek to ​make cuts to their ​workers' livelihood​s. We applaud these agencies and their worker-friendly approaches. Others, including the OCSC, are seeking to balance their budget on your back to the detriment of you ​and your family’s​ economic security. That may sound extreme​. After all, the Court just ​reached out to you by circulating a “back-to-school” survey and asked for your opinions and needs about work and school. However, is the Court using your information to help you navigate your COVID-related challenges?  No. They want every court employee, excluding Judges, to take 64 hours of mandatory unpaid furlough between October 1, 2020 and June 30, 2021.  That’s ​not fair or worker-friendly, it’s simply lazy and uncreative. ​

The Court will contend that everyone will sacrifice equally. ​But we all know that's not true. ​For the CEO, other Court executives, and managers, ​64 hours of furlough​ may mean fewer take-out dinners. For the single parent ​living paycheck-to-paycheck and trying to educate ​a third​-grader remotely,​ it may mean coming up short for rent or struggling to put food on the table. It's not equal, it's not fair, and it's not worker-friendly. That’s our reality. 

This is what the Court’s survey really reveals:

• Approximately 30% of survey respondents indicated they WILL ​NEED or PROBABLY WILL NEED some level of scheduling accommodation to make their life work;
• 6.5%-7% of survey respondents indicated a need for UNPAID leave in order to make their life work (this is a ​legitimate source of cost-savings ​for the Court);
• 40% of survey respondents indicated​ they WILL NOT ​NEED or PROBABLY WILL NOT NEED any level of scheduling accommodation (this makes the Court’s operation work); and,
• 58% of survey respondents indicated they need some level of telecommuting as a scheduling modification.

Court workers need help and individualized scheduling accommodations. Court management has acknowledged this. Yet, the ​Court has propose​d a “one size fits all” approach that leaves all Court workers in the dark ​about how they are going to make their life work in the upcoming months, particularly with school uncertainties.

We expect your wage improvements to be implemented. We expect more from Court management. We expect the Court to demonstrate a genuine willingness and desire to work with ​its staff ​to develop schedules which meet workers’ needs and the needs of the Court.  So far, the Court’s actions have failed to meet these  expectations. Therefore, we​ are assembling a team of representatives from each bargaining unit (General, Court Clerk and Supervisory units) to meet with the Court and negotiate mitigat​ion of the impacts of the Court mandatory furlough proposal.  We are set to begin discussions next week.

These are trying times. Workers should not have to choose between keeping their jobs and educating their children.  We need champion employers who will rise to the occasion and partner with their workers to meet short-term needs in ​order to build long-term​ commitment and loyalty.

Stay informed and engaged as these important discussions ​occur over the next several weeks. 

In trying times, we stand together.

Charles Barfield
OCEA General Manager

Publication Date: February 26, 2020