County workers press supervisors for higher pay and to preserve current health benefits

Dozens of county social workers, eligibility specialists and other frontline employees told the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors on July 22 that the county’s latest contract offer is insufficient and would weaken employees’ health protections.

Speakers — many representing United Public Employees (UPE) locals including UPE 8 — criticized a 2.8% salary proposal the county has offered and a separate county proposal that would allow the county to change health-plan offerings and co-pays without joint approval with unions.

The comments came during the meeting’s off‑agenda public comment period and focused on staffing, compensation and benefits at departments that serve vulnerable residents. "We are 7% below the median of comparable counties," said Sarah Singleton, identifying herself as a social worker and vice chair of the UPE 8 governing board. "Somehow there's always money for managers, and now there's no money for social workers."

Union leaders and rank‑and‑file employees warned that the county’s health‑care proposal removes language that required county and union agreement before plan changes, that it could eliminate Kaiser from the county’s plan lineup and that it would shift costs to employees through higher co‑pays. James Starr, chair of the UPE board of directors, framed the losing of those protections as a central grievance: "The county's proposal removes the guarantee that changes to health insurance plans and co‑payments require approval from both the union and the county," he said.

Frontline staff described the operation they run and the consequences of low pay and understaffing. Jennifer Zeph, a human services worker, said employees struggle to afford housing and medications even while carrying caseloads for persons in crisis. Zach Holitz, a UPE member, said his annual take‑home pay was roughly $40,916 and that the county’s proposal would not allow him to afford a studio apartment for even a month.

Several speakers said morale is low and warned of staff turnover. "We are the lifeblood of this county," Olivia Brown, a Department of Human Assistance employee, told supervisors. "During the pandemic, we were deemed essential employees, which to many meant disposable. Hence, as essential employees, we deserve essential, livable income."

Board members did not take action on the union’s demands during the meeting; the Brown Act restricts extended board discussion of off‑agenda items. Supervisors acknowledged hearing speakers and noted the county’s process for contract negotiations but did not change the county’s earlier public proposal during the session.

The union has been publicly pressing for higher raises, protection of plan design (including maintaining Kaiser), and other contract provisions. Employees said they are also asking the board to return to mediation and to work toward a contract that addresses inflation, rising housing costs and retention in front‑line jobs.