Dear OMEA Member,
I want to provide a candid update on workplace flexibility and the City’s recent rollout of alternative schedules.
As you know, your new agreement (pending Council adoption, currently anticipated next week) includes the creation of a working group to thoughtfully evaluate flexible scheduling options. That was intentional—this is a complex issue that requires planning, equity, and input from the people actually doing the work.
The City has now moved forward with alternative schedules before that process has even begun.
To be clear, the push for flexibility didn’t come out of nowhere. Engagement survey results made it clear this is a real recruitment and retention issue. And given the City’s current financial situation, flexibility is being treated as a lower-cost way to address those challenges. On its face, that makes sense.
Where this breaks down is in the execution.
Staffing levels across the City—especially within OMEA—are already stretched thin. That reality limits how much flexibility is actually possible right now. Some members may benefit immediately. Others may have to wait. And some classifications, because of the nature of the work, may never see options like 4/10s or telecommuting. That disparity is real, and during a transition like this, it’s going to feel uneven.
Compounding that, the City paired this rollout with a shift away from maintaining current hours (every other Friday closures) to being open every Friday. What that means in practice—and where it applies (City Hall and other departments)—remains unclear.
That tradeoff sends the wrong message—to you and to the public. This organization is already operating on fumes. Acting otherwise creates a disconnect that could undermine broader efforts to address the City’s long-term financial stability, including any future revenue measures.
Your OCEA labor representatives and OMEA Board met with the City Manager and HR on April 13 to raise these exact concerns. We were told they would take the feedback into consideration and circle back. Instead, the City moved forward less than two days later after meeting with department heads. We did not receive a follow-up before implementation.
It would be one thing if the City were gathering input to assess what might be feasible. Instead, many of you have already been told not to even submit requests for certain options because they “won’t apply.” Even if that ultimately proves true in some cases, the lack of consideration and communication matters.
We want to be clear about one thing: flexibility has been, and remains, a priority for OMEA members. You told us that in surveys, and we raised it accordingly. But we did not ask for a rushed rollout without a process, without input, and without intention. And we certainly did not propose expanding Friday operations as part of that.
Scheduling is a management right, but the impacts of those decisions are subject to meet and confer. That process exists for a reason—to ensure changes are implemented thoughtfully and fairly. We are actively evaluating next steps.
Our goal is simple: no member should be worse off because of these changes. We are pushing for a process that results in the same or better for everyone, even if that takes time to get right.
We will keep you informed as this develops.
In solidarity,
OMEA
