Union files environmental lawsuit against California over imminent in-person work requirement
A California legal professionals' union filed a lawsuit against the state last week over Gov. Gavin Newsom's in-person work requirement for state workers, citing environmental impacts.
The requirement, which Newsom enacted by executive order in March 2025, begins July 1 and requires all state workers to work in the office at least four days a week. California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges, and Hearing Officers in State Employment (CASE) argues that in forcing more than 90,000 workers to regularly commute to state offices, Newsom is violating the California Environmental Quality Act.
CEQA, a statute passed in 1970 and signed into law by then-governor Ronald Reagan, requires that all public projects made by the state and local governments undergo environmental evaluations. It also includes a requirement that the state adopt all measures to mitigate those impacts.
The union alleges that the state has not completed or even started the required CEQA Environmental Impact Report, despite a State Auditor's report showing the governor's mandate would result in 15,115 additional metric tons of CO2 emitted per month.
Many of these impacted state employees have either been working remotely since the COVID-19 pandemic, have never regularly worked in a physical office, or may not even have dedicated office space to return to, according to the complaint. The defendants also noted the State Auditor report's findings that telework policies benefited state employees significantly.
"The law is clear - the Report must be completed before this mandate is enacted," said attorney Richard Drury of Lozeau Drury LLP, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of the union. "We look forward to making our case to the court in the weeks ahead."
A spokesperson for Gov. Gavin Newsom's Office told CBS News Bay Area in an email, "We will review the complaint and respond appropriately."
The suit is the latest pushback from state workers over the return-to-work mandate. California's largest public-sector union, SEIU Local 1000, has issued multiple challenges against the directive, and last month filed an Unfair Labor Practice charge with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), alleging that the state abandoned collective bargaining and unilaterally forced the directive.
Several other unions also filed unfair labor practices over the unilateral nature of the policy change, which was originally set to be implemented on July 1, 2025.
In June 2025, the union representing state engineers sued the Newsom administration alleging that the order violated state labor law by failing to confer with the union over its impacts. The Professional Engineers in California Government dropped the lawsuit after the state agreed to postpone the policy for a year. Pushback from SEIU Local 1000 also led to an agreement with the state to have the implementation delayed for a year.
In February, Assemblymembers Alex Lee (D-San Jose) and Josh Hoover (D-Folsom) introduced AB 1729, which would protect the ability of state employees to work remotely and suspend Newsom's return-to-office mandate. The bill passed the full Assembly floor last month and has been referred to the Senate Rules Committee.
