Union leaders and employees tell House panel DCF Economic Services culture is harming staff and clients

Members of the Vermont State Employees Association and several Economic Services Division employees told the Vermont House Committee on Human Services on an extended panel that workplace decisions and management practices at the Department for Children and Families are damaging employee morale and the delivery of services to Vermonters.

Steve Howard, executive director of the Vermont State Employees Association, told the committee “there is a term called concerted activity,” and said union organizing and testimony to legislators are protected under state and federal law and the bargaining contract. Howard said union members have faced pressure after meeting with legislators and that the union will pursue remedies through the Vermont Labor Relations Board and the courts if necessary.

The witnesses described several specific problems in Economic Services: the department’s caseload counting method does not reflect differences in case acuity; a shortage of case aides and foster families; widespread fear of retaliation for speaking up; and the sudden revocation of preferred hybrid telework arrangements. “The deputy commissioner has betrayed the trust of hundreds of employees,” read Howard from a statement submitted by a long‑term Economic Services employee who asked to remain anonymous.

Amy Bertrand, president of the Vermont State Employees Association and a 25‑year state employee with most of her tenure in Economic Services, described a string of events she says show retaliation tied to union activity. Bertrand said she replied to a departmental email on the telework change and was later criticized by department leadership for that response. She said her evaluation subsequently cited her union activity and delayed or reduced a pay‑step opportunity tied to an “outstanding” rating.

“I am being retaliated against because of my activism,” Bertrand told the committee. She also described being notified that her family medical leave would be audited and then being told she was the subject of an investigation into a confidentiality violation stemming from an all‑staff meeting. Bertrand said that during the investigation she was shown screenshots and a video that, she said, showed a colleague recording her during a Teams meeting; she said the investigation concluded as unfounded.

Both Howard and Bertrand said the department’s reversal or tightening of telework rules came with little explanation or staff input and with a two‑week notice window in at least some communications. They said telework had been an essential workplace accommodation for many employees who rely on hybrid schedules for child care, elder care and other caregiving responsibilities.

Witnesses also raised staffing and operational concerns: they asked the committee to reconsider how caseloads are counted because “there are different types of families,” and urged more hiring of case aides to free social workers for direct work with families. Howard said foster‑parent recruitment and support are underresourced and in some places handled by part‑time temporary staff working about 20 hours per week.

Committee members asked about available employee‑satisfaction surveys and whether survey results are broken down by division; Representatives on the panel were told DCF results appear below state averages and that more granular division‑level data may be needed. Howard and Bertrand urged more inclusion of frontline staff in decision making and said the department’s labor‑management processes are only as effective as management’s willingness to act on the committee’s recommendations.

No formal committee action or vote was recorded during the testimony. Union leaders requested the committee use its oversight role to press the administration for remedies, to protect staff who testify, and to explore restoring or redesigning telework arrangements with staff input. Bertrand said the union filed an unfair labor practice with the Vermont Labor Relations Board on her behalf and that the union’s general counsel advised impact bargaining on telework was requested of the department.

The hearing included repeated appeals from speakers that department leaders acknowledge the effect management decisions have on employees’ abilities to serve clients. Committee members thanked the witnesses for their testimony and said the concerns would not simply end with the hearing.

Ending: Witnesses asked the committee to follow up with the Department for Children and Families on telework policy, staffing and recruitment practices, and on reported instances of surveillance and retaliation; no committee directive or formal remedial action was announced during the session.