Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Operations Telework topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to require written telework agreements for state agencies amid return‑to‑office mandate
Summary
House Bill 51 96 would require each state agency to adopt telework policies, allow agency heads to enter written telework agreements to address limited office space or mission needs, and require agreements be renewed annually; witnesses including state employees and unions urged passage, saying telework improves productivity and retention.
Senator King laid out House Bill 51 96, which would require state agencies to develop a telework policy, post it online and permit agency heads to enter written telework agreements with employees “for the purpose of addressing a lack of available office space for the agency or providing reasonable flexibility.” The bill requires the agreement to be in writing, to state the reasons telework is authorized, to set terms for revocation and to be renewed at least annually. The bill also specifies that agencies may not make telework a condition of employment and that an agency may revoke a telework agreement at any time.
State employees and employee groups told the committee that telework can increase productivity, improve recruitment and retention, and save money. Chase Norris, a General Land Office employee who testified on behalf of himself and the Texas State Employees Union, said his hybrid schedule makes him “more productive,” and that the Legislative Budget Board’s report found agencies reported improvements in productivity, retention and recruitment due to hybrid schedules. Anne Bishop of the Texas Public Employees Association said the bill “puts around parameters around the discretion that is allowed to be used on this issue.” Blaise Berkman, a state employee, said telework is a “valuable nonmonetary benefit” and warned that a strict return‑to‑office mandate has already driven resignations.
Committee members asked about revocation without notice and potential impacts on working parents; the sponsor said the intent is to give agency heads authority but acknowledged concerns and encouraged conversations to address hardship cases. The committee closed public testimony and left HB 51 96 pending.
