HomeMy WebLinkAbout12. (Handout) Written Public Comments (read into record) Item 12. (Handout)
Written Public Comments
Comment 1 of 2
1 have worked at Central San for almost 15 years. I have opted to submit this
anonymously.
During the April 7th Board Meeting, the term "haves and have nots" was used quite a
bit when referring to the "return to the office" subject. Things said in that meeting
compelled me to submit this letter; it is the first time in my 15 years here that I have
submitted a letter to the Board.
I was an "office staff' employee sent home in March 2020 when the pandemic hit. I was
grateful to have the opportunity to work from home, stay safe and remain employed. I
was also never asked —or offered —to work a hybrid schedule.
In July 2021, 1 was told I would have to return to the office full time, I was given less
than two-weeks-notice. I was also told I would have to work different hours, creating a
longer workday for me. I pleaded with my supervisor, the manager of HR and the union
leadership to allow me to keep the hours I have had since I started here in 2007. 1
explained that I needed to keep these hours for the needs of my family. I was denied
again and again; I was crushed and defeated.
Along with a very small group of other office employees, I was forced to return to the
office full time, work face to face with the public indoors, and share bathrooms,
breakrooms, and other facilities with fellow employees each day.
Meanwhile, management sent the occasional email saying how important employees'
health and welfare was, and to "stay safe and well." It was like a slap in the face every
time I heard or read "stay safe and well," since some employees simply had (have) no
choice but to work in person.
It became abundantly clear that the health and welfare of SOME employees is NOT as
important or respected as that of the MANY employees who were (and still are) working
remotely in the safety of their own homes.
It is also evident that some employees' families' needs are far more important than
those of us who were brought back with almost no advance notice whatsoever, and with
no hybrid work schedule option.
Let me point out that July was NINE months ago, and most of the office staff is still not
back in person, they are going to be given a minimum of 30-days-notice before they
return in person, and many may be offered a hybrid schedule —enormous benefits
never even considered for a huge portion of the employees at Central San.
This brings me back to the HAVES and HAVE NOTs. Any person who thinks this is
NOT an accurate way of viewing the current situation at Central San is sorely mistaken.
I would like to share four obvious examples of the Haves and Have Nots with the office
(and other) staff at Central San
The HAVES are working remotely and do not have to pay the ridiculously high gas
prices or put daily wear and tear on their cars to drive to and from work every day.
Meanwhile, the HAVE NOTS have to spend well over$5 a gallon to commute to and
from work 4-5 days a week. Some employees are paying upwards of$500 per month
on gas for their commutes.
--------------------------------------------------
The HAVES are remote working in the safety and comfort of their own homes.
Meanwhile, the HAVE NOTS are coming to work and are forced to work with the public
and other employees—and all their accompanying germs and viruses —everyday; often
bringing illnesses home to our families.
--------------------------------------------------
The HAVES can use their time working at home to take care of their kids and other
family members, exercise, do housework, cook meals and drive family to appointments
and school on "their lunch hour' or between Teams meeting. They also have the luxury
of being available for home maintenance appointments, emergencies, and the like.
Meanwhile, the HAVE NOTS do not have any of these options; we are forced to use
our precious sick and/or vacation leave to take care of any of our personal or family
needs. We do not have the luxury to work remotely to care for ill family members or if
our washer or HVAC breaks down. We are forced to submit sick leave and/or vacation
time for any of these family and life needs.
Please take note of all the sick and vacation leave "the HAVES" are saving by working
from home, while the "HAVE NOTS" are forced to drain their sick and vacation leave
balances. How is that even remotely fair?
--------------------------------------------------
The HAVES come into the office for the occasional meeting or to pick up paperwork;
many employees use company time to drive to and from the office.
Meanwhile, the HAVE NOTS are forced to leave their homes up to an hour(or more)
before their workday starts and spend another hour on the road after their workday ends
to get home. We do NOT get paid for this commute time, and we are being denied an
extra 2+ hours a day to tend to our families' needs.
In closing, there are endless examples of the "haves and have nots" here at Central San
right now, it is truly sad and unjust.
I think everyone likes the idea of a hybrid schedule, but if some of us are told we cannot
have that luxury, at minimum there should be some sort of benefit given to us, be it
extra vacation or sick leave, or monetary stipends. Thank you for your time.
Comment 2 of 2
From: Central San <webmail@centralsan.org>
Sent: April 21, 2022 02:31 PM
To: Secretary of the District
Subject: SPEAKER/COMMENT CARD ID#1249 - Debbie Miller
....C S
t
AL SAN
CENTRAL F . CDSTA SAiqffARir DiSTRicr
04/21/2022-2:31 pm Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
COMMENT/SPEAKER CARD ID#1249
Submitted on Thursday, April 21, 2022 - 2:31 pm
I wish to submit a written comment.
I would like to express my concern about what transpired at the last
board meeting on April 7, 2022. 1 am familiar with other agencies' Board
meetings, but this was my first time watching one of your meetings on
your website. When you got to the agenda item about employees
returning to work, I watched in dismay and complete disbelief as one of
your board member's, Mr. Tad Pilecki described many of your
employees as essentially lazy and not working, even when in the office.
It was off-putting. He provided details of rampant employee misbehavior
from his former time working at Central San as a MSEG President. He
shared he has witnessed employees who would sleep, read the
newspaper, or play Solitaire at their desks. What an embarrassing thing
to put out in a recorded public forum to the world about your work force
and perpetuate a stigma about government workers. To me, this
showed a complete lack of professionalism while using his status, as an
elected official, to bring up one-sided examples from the past to support
his position that office employees can't be trusted to work from home.
When one of your female board member's, Mrs. Barbara Hockett,
started to defend the employees and express her concern for his
blanket statements of mistrust for the employees at Central San, Mr.
Pilecki began to raise his voice, bully and railroad her. This behavior is
completely unacceptable, in any setting. It was shocking to watch this
transpire, but even more appalling that this behavior was allowed to
happen without intervention early on in a public forum. Not only should
members of the public be able to voice their opinions respectfully at
your Board meetings, but Board members should model this behavior
as well. Mr. Pilecki's voice raising and statements, regardless if they are
I
warranted or not, were not considerate of your employees or Mrs.
Hockett in anyway. It was not delivered with any tact and should have
been immediately stopped before it became the circus it did. Mrs.
Hockett was clearly visibly upset and left the meeting. I would have
done the same thing if I was in a public setting amongst my peers and
having someone try to dismiss my opinion and raising their voice. Mr.
Pilecki then he proceeded to take the opportunity, after she left the
room to, to point out he gets "no respect" instead of taking the
opportunity to address any concern about her leaving. In my line of
work, we call that gaslighting. This was not a safe space.
It's fine to disagree, and not to share the conclusion as another, but it's
not ok to diminish a female board member's opinion and feeling, and
then argue the point why they are wrong. I do not feel private personnel
issues should be aired during a public board meeting - anywhere. It
sends out a negative message to us taxpayers that your employees
can't be trusted. This showed a lack of judgment, and concerns me that
this is normal acceptable behavior your public agency allows. Would
Mr. Pilecki have spoken this way with one of your male board
members? It made me very uncomfortable and sad for those who work
there, to have a governing board that allowed this behavior to happen.
Shame on Central San. Mr. Pilecki should not only apologize to Mrs.
Hockett, but the employees and the taxpayers for his unprofessional
behavior. I know who I won't be voting for in upcoming elections.
My speech/comment is not about an item on the Agenda. I wish to address the Board
during the PUBLIC COMMENT item on the agenda.
[item number]
Submitted by:
Debbie Miller
You are receiving this e-mail because you signed up at our website: Central Contra Costa Sanitary
District. If you did not sign up, or you are receiving this message in error, please contact us so we can
promptly resolve the problem.
2