Sacramento County union members urge better pay, deliver 10‑day strike notice during public comment

Dozens of frontline county employees told the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors on June 10 that contract negotiations between United Public Employees (UPE) and the county have stalled and that the union had filed a 10‑day strike notice.

The comments came during the board’s public comment period. “Our contract is expired. We haven’t reached an agreement because there’s a philosophical disagreement between the county and the union about what it needs to be done here,” said Seth Alexander, identifying himself as a business agent and co‑chief negotiator for UPE, describing roughly 15 bargaining sessions and a recent mediation.

Union members and bargaining team representatives said the county is prioritizing pay and relocation for senior managers while not making comparable investments in frontline staff who deliver services directly to residents. “The county is not valuing its employees, the ones that run the county sufficiently,” Alexander said. Other speakers described specific proposals and personal impacts: Stephanie McCall, who said she is chair of the UPE governing board and a human services specialist, told supervisors the county’s bargaining position would have limited bereavement leave to three days and called a proposed $5 per paycheck contribution to a health savings account “insulting” during a time she said she and her 13‑year‑old son are financially vulnerable after her husband’s death.

Union negotiators and rank‑and‑file members said bargaining has been ongoing since December 2024 and described high vacancy rates in County departments and frontline recruitment and retention challenges. “We have vacancy rates in this bargaining unit in double digits,” Ted Samara, executive director of United Public Employees, said. Samara also said union members had to use vacation time to appear at the board and said the union had submitted its strike notice to the county.

The union speakers identified bargaining concerns that included wage increases sufficient to meet rising local costs of living, expansions of bereavement and leave protections, restoring staffing levels, and resisting contractual language they described as efforts to limit legally protected collective bargaining rights. Several speakers tied staffing shortages to service impacts, such as delays in child welfare and refugee benefits services.

Board members did not take action on the matter during the meeting; public comments were heard under the off‑agenda portion of the agenda. County staff and the board have earlier publicly stated labor negotiations are handled through meet‑and‑confer processes and, when necessary, through mediation or interest‑based bargaining; no new county proposal or settlement was announced at the June 10 meeting.

The union’s public comments on June 10 included statements that the union had filed a written 10‑day strike declaration with the county. The board did not respond with policy action during the hearing, and the matter remains in active negotiation.

Clarifying details recorded in public comments included that bargaining has continued since December 2024, the parties engaged in mediation, the union represents multiple classifications across County departments (speakers referred to “bargaining unit O‑8 / 008”), and the county had offered a $5 per pay period contribution to a health savings account that a union speaker calculated as roughly $138 per year.

The board did not vote or direct staff on the union’s requests during the June 10 meeting. The union speakers said they intend to pursue the strike process if an agreement is not reached within the notice period.

(Ending) The union’s statement to the board on June 10 makes labor negotiations a near‑term issue for Sacramento County government. If the parties do not reach a negotiated settlement, the county could face a labor work stoppage that would prompt further public briefings and potential board action.