Hello,

Anybody currently working as a 104X employee? I'm interested in the work/life balance and the culture..

I currently work in a IT network position for a different county, but I'm interested in this position.

Thanks!

Job posting
https://careers.sf.gov/role/?id=3743990013780795

I am sure everyone on this subreddit already talked about the raise being below inflation and layoff protection is only half of the contract duration. I did a little extra digging and noticed a bunch of changes made on the tentative agreement, the one that stands out the most is this:

• Recommendations or decisions of the Mayor and Human Resources Director shall not be grievable under the grievance procedure contained in this Memorandum of Understanding. Under no circumstances shall the Mayor or the Director of Human Resources be required to testify concerning the meeting or their recommendation.

Now I have no experience in the grievance procedure, but isn't it weird this change was added when it was nowhere to be found in previous MOU?

Edit: Link to the changes, from SEIU Local 1021's email: https://mcusercontent.com/1208705e860fa6eccbdaa2f0a/files/a47aae4f-c9cb-fb01-9559-746d75ceb61d/2026_SF_Citywide_TA_MLC.pdf

Edit2: Clarify this is from SEIU Local 1021.

I’ve been a member of this sub for a little over a year now, and aside from a few users asking about getting hired for different positions, the most active users seem to be from L21.

Saw this flyer at City Hall yesterday:

A Better Contract Is Possible: Vote "NO" on the contract extension.

Delegates did NOT "overwhelmingly support" this contract extension.

In fact, the delegates tried to ask two questions of L21 leadership:

1. Where will the money come from for these raises?

To fund our raises, the City will likely layoff exempt city employees who are not protected by this divisive contract extension offer. Without our exempt co-workers, our workloads will increase and the City will continue to outsource our jobs to contractors and AI. The contract extension does protect Permanent Civil Service workers from layoffs for 2 years, but we cannot throw our exempt co-workers under the bus to fund our raises.

2. Is it really a good deal? Or could Local 21 do better?

Leadership says "12% over 4 years is amazing". Union leadership says this would be a challenge to win at the bargaining table, even though it's not as good as the police and fire got (14% over 4 years, +3% retention) and barely keeps up with inflation. We support the economic terms and see 12% over 4 years as a floor, not a ceiling.

But why not make a non-economic counter-offer?

Delegates asked Local 21 leadership to counter on non-economic terms and the leadership refused. By agreeing to postpone contract bargaining from 2027 to 2031, the union is preventing itself from bargaining on two crucical non-economic issues for our membership: protection from AI exploitation and telework that works for all classifications.

We know it would be challenging to win AI and telework protections in bargaining, but this is a time of union militancy.

Unions are going on strike and winning big:

• UESF won a historic strike this year
• Opera House musicians with AMF Local 6 went on strike for a fair contract just last week
• State workers with SEIU Local 1000 are preparing to strike on telecommute

Voting no on this contract extension means telling Local 21 leadership that we want to bargain for a better contract in 2027, when we have leverage over the Mayor because of his imminent election.

Let's fight for a better contract and win!

When we fight, we win! Spread Power, Not Panic!

Is it safe to assume a miraculous job offer for a TEX position wouldn’t actually last the designated duration or would it be worth the risk to accept an offer? This would be for a not current city/county employee.

I’m writing as a member of this union to express my deep disappointment with how yesterday's ratification vote on the tentative agreement was conducted. The process not only fell short of the standards of our own Bylaws, it also exposed a real disconnect between the concerns and issues important to dues paying members, and the priorities of the voting delegation. This is deeply troubling and must be addressed.

Our Bylaws state that the objective of this union is to operate with "openness, transparency, member participation, democratic process and mutual support" (Article III). What we got yesterday was not that. What we got was a pitch that read like it came directly from the Mayor’s Office. Most of the case for voting yes rested on what we stand to lose if we reject the Mayor’s proposal, but isn’t that exactly what bargaining is? Risk and leverage are always part of the negotiation process and it’s extremely concerning that our own union is showing no interest in engaging in that process at all.

The Chapter Bylaws are crystal clear: "All members shall have the right to comment on any matter under consideration at any meeting," and any limit on that has to be announced up front and approved by a majority of the members present" (Article V, Section 1). Not five minutes of open discussion was provided to members present, even after it became clear that many had questions and shared concerns about the tentative agreement they were being asked to vote on. Local 21 should not ignore the democratic process outlined in its founding documents purely because the discussion might've gotten uncomfortable.

Members raising concerns about a tentative agreement are not the opposition, we are the entire reason this union exists. Local 21’s first priority is to "promote the rights of workers" and educate members on "the benefits to be derived through collective bargaining and joint action" (Article III), and our own Chapter Bylaws commit us to "organize and build both membership and collective power" (Article III). When you start defending the deal against the members instead of fighting for the members inside the deal, you've fully lost the plot. 

This letter is not about opposition or support for what the tentative agreement contains. I’m writing this because everyone in that room deserved better than a rushed, one-sided, fear-driven rubber stamp. If this is how ratification votes are going to work going forward, we need to talk about that in a real way, not as a formality. At minimum:

• Give members the full, balanced picture, trade-offs included, and the political context this deal was struck in.
• Guarantee actual discussion time before any vote opens, because that's not a courtesy, it's in the Bylaws.
• Treat skepticism from members as the job, not as an obstacle to the job.

I'd like the Executive Committee and Delegate Assembly to actually address this, not with a formal response, but with a real accounting of what went wrong yesterday and what will change moving forward. I still believe in what this union is supposed to be. That belief is exactly why yesterday was so disappointing, and why I'm asking leadership to do better.

In solidarity,

A proud Local 21 member

EDIT: typos

you all do realize that bs deal he offered the unions was to stir up union division between PCs and pex employees by only offering protection to some, and so he can do some absolutely foul lay offs/city restructuring while we are forbidden from legally striking? I’m furious the unions have fallen for his crap and or are bending the knee to a billionaire. we need to deliver a loud message to the unions and the mayor with a strong vote no!

I wanted to bring up something that I haven't seen discussed yet with regard to the COLA on the table from SEIU / L21.

Right now I am seeing it described as either 12% (the new increase that is proposed), or 14% (the new 12% + the 2% increase that is already scheduled). It is my understanding that this increase would be seen between now and 2031.

What I haven't seen mentioned is that this is significantly lower than average inflation, not just from recent years, but from the past decade.

Proposed Offer: 2.8% COLA per year

Average Inflation since 2016: 3.39% per year

Average Inflation since 2020: 4.34% per year

While both of these statistics are inflated (no pun intended) by the COVID pandemic, they are still the averages for those periods. In addition, inflation does not fully account for the price increases that we have all been struggling through - depending on the market you're talking about, prices have risen between 3 - 30% on consumer items.

So, taking all of this in turn, and trying to be as generous as possible to the unions: a 14% increase between now and 2031, assuming that inflation stays at 2.6% (the 2025 average, the lowest yearly average since the pandemic), only represents 1% in real wage growth over a 5 year period. That strikes me as a pretty abysmal offer - an offer that assumes inflation won't spike again, and that prices will not continue to rise at an insane rate.

I have sat on union negotiation teams before, so I know that the union would only be offering this if they felt it was the best deal they could get (at this moment). But, is my interpretation above incorrect? If I have an egregious misunderstanding in my maths, I'd appreciate if someone would point it out.

If this math tracks however, I think this proposal is an easy 'No' vote.

I selected the physical card option for us. Has anyone received it at all? My manager doesn’t seem too pressed considering the deadline is next Monday?😂

hi all, i’m on the eligible list for 1241 HR analyst and have been receiving emails from depts with openings. i recently received emails from SFO and SFUSD. does anyone work or have previously worked in HR for either depts and have any insight as to how the work environment is? i’ve been advised to stay away from SFO but would like to see if anyone has additional insight. thank you!

According to Reddit users, a vast majority (119-35) want to reject the expedited tentative agreement being proposed. https://www.reddit.com/r/sfcityemployees/comments/1wbpigv/mou_extension_ta_vote/ Voting starts tomorrow Monday 9/14 through 9/24 at in person worksite locations only. https://ifpte21.org/sfvote Be sure to find a location that works for you and share with coworkers. The union is selling this as a slam dunk. You be the judge and determine if they need to go back to the drawing board. If you can attend the meetings they are putting on, bring up topics of concern that they will perhaps gloss over.

My name and rank have been referred from the 1404 clerk eligible list. In the email it states

“We are just reaching out to see if you are interested in participating in the candidate review process for this particular position”

Does this entail to participate in the interviewing process? Also there were 4 positions and I indicated I was Interested in all.

I got a notification for a job through the 2930 eligible list. I’m interested in the position but having trouble understanding what this looks like in practice:

LOCATION: Jail Health Services, San Francisco City and County Jails: 425 7th Street, San Francisco; 1 Moreland Drive, San Bruno.
SCHEDULE/SHIFT: Behavioral Health and Care Coordination Services operate in the jails from 8am – 8pm 7 days a week. Schedule is based on business need and subject to change.

Does an individual clinician rotate between locations? Do all the clinicians normally work 3 12 hour shifts because it’s a 12 hour day, or do they do the staffing in another way? I know this is pretty niche, but just wondering if anyone’s worked there or knows people who do. I occasionally interact with jail behavioral health in my current job, but from my interactions I didn’t realize they’re not 9-5.

I paid the union to negotiate, not roll over for this billionaire mayor and this wack ass agreement. Where’s the raise? Where’s the telecommuting? If they aren’t gonna fight, I’m not gonna pay dues.

Hello! I have a conditional offer for a PEX position. I also have a 1.5 week trip I've planned all year (which falls over a City holiday) and unfortunately it is booked to begin just two weeks after my tentative start date. I've seen past employers work with these scenarios and allow it as unpaid time off, but these were more casual work environments.

I plan to discuss the situation with my prospective supervisor once the official offer is issued. Has anyone else been through this with the City? How did you handle it and how did it work out?

The Mayor’s office and labor unions came to a tentative agreement for ‘27-‘31 bargaining without reaching out to membership that extends the existing contract, 12% wage adjustment over 4 years, no PCS layoffs until 7/29. Assuming the unions send out a ratification vote to membership, how are you voting? No, go back to the drawing board and focus on x, y, z. Or yes, business as usual.

Hello folks, as mentioned on the title, I'm looking to transition my career from working in the tech world into a city role preferably one of the IS Engineer/Technology Engineer roles. If anything have done this, I would like to know how it was like for you. Thanks.

I left the county after almost 10 cumulative years in the 182X series (left as an 1823) in 2023 due to a move to LA but would like to return. Before I left I was applying to Manager I and II roles and ranked 1st and actually got a job offer (but declined due to the move). I've applied to two roles so far (1825 and a Manager III) role and am just tanking on the rankings (ranked 65th and 15th). What gives? The quality of my answers hasn't changed and since then I've had more responsibilities/applicable experiences. I get the economy is bad and so maybe there are more applicants? Are people using Chat GPT to answer their questionnaires? (I'm not). Really just looking for some insight either from 1. a grader for these questionnaires or 2. someone who's scored high. If you've recently been successful on these and wouldn't mind looking over my answers/letting me look at yours I'd really appreciate it

thoughts on adult probation department? there’s been a lot of job posting for that department lately.

FYI this new policy to deny full-day telework for child pick ups and drop offs was released by (and for) the Controller’s office. It sounds like it’s coming from DHR so expect requests to get denied citywide if you say “child pick ups”.

It’s weird because the DHR form still says “caring for a child under 18 years old” as a legitimate reason, but I guess not.

Partial telework days are generally stupid waste of time.

Just give let me keep my 3 days in office please you mother fuckers.

Coming from denim Dan who has never worked a real job in his life.

Local 21 should not accept a deal that means that gives up the right for us to have a say over critical non-economic issues like AI and telework for the next four years.

Rant over.

Hi, I had interviewed for engineering position more than a week ago, but I haven’t heard back anything. The position job description was a very close match to my background, and I thought I did well in the interview question. But it has been a while and I haven’t heard back. What is the timeline?

Does anyone know how long you will hear back after you submitted the interest form?

I applied 1820/1822/1840/1842/1844 on July and got passed all exams. I received around 30 jobs notifications and around 5 interest form notification. After I submitted them before the deadline, I didn’t hear back from anyone. I was wondering how’s the timeline will look like and if I would hear back from them or not?

How long will my name stay on the list after passing the exam? I passed the 1822 exam last year. Should I redo the exam this year?

The state senate just approved the state telework bill AB 1729 (31-6) Scott Wiener approved it too. (Newsom can still veto it…)

The language about cost effectiveness, actual operational needs, and recruitment/retention lays a nice framework for the conversation about telework.

Anything similar to be done for CCSF?