Vermont labor board orders state to end return-to-office requirement

The Vermont Labor Relations Board on Wednesday ordered Gov. Phil Scott’s administration to rescind a policy requiring state employees to return to their physical workplaces three days per week, a labor dispute the board said involved bargaining and employee rights. The non-judicial body said in its decision that the administration “refused to bargain in good faith and interfered with employees’ exercise of rights” by requiring in-person work.

In its response, Scott described the ruling as expected based on how he viewed the board’s composition. Speaking at his weekly press conference Wednesday, Scott said the decision was “disappointing, but not surprising,” and he said the board’s membership is “weighted towards labor.”

Scott also addressed how the state board is staffed, telling reporters that “parameters” governing the makeup limited his choices, a description that the AP reporting said appeared to refer to statutory guidelines. Earlier the same day, his office issued a statement criticizing the labor relations board and its decision and calling the body “broken,” AP said.

Union leaders said the ruling affirmed their position that the administration should have negotiated with employees rather than impose the return-to-office requirement. In a Wednesday email to members, the Vermont State Employees’ Association called it a “stunning victory” and said the order protects “the rights of our members to have a say in their conditions of employment.” Steve Howard, the union’s executive director, said in an interview Wednesday that “The governor is not a king,” and that “When you have a union, you have to collectively bargain in good faith.”

The board’s order included remedies tied to employees affected by the in-person policy. Wednesday’s decision required the state to offer to rehire former employees who left their jobs after the requirement took effect, and it also said the administration would need to “make all affected employees whole” by reimbursing “any monetary losses” caused by the return-to-office policy.

Scott said the reimbursement requirement could require Vermont taxpayers to cover costs related to extra commuting and possibly child care. He told reporters his administration expected to secure a stay on the labor board’s order while the state appeals, according to the AP reporting. Howard, in turn, said the limits of reimbursement should be “as broad as possible,” and he said he was uncertain how many former employees might return if given the chance, pointing to members who testified they quit because of the in-person mandate.

The dispute traces to policy changes Scott’s administration announced last year. AP said that in August, the administration told state employees—many of whom had been working from home since the Covid-19 pandemic—that starting in December all staff would have to return to designated offices at least three days per week, including employees who work from outside the state. A survey conducted last fall indicated that more than 3,000 of roughly 8,000 state workers were working from home at least three days per week, AP said, and representatives of the union raised concerns that the return-to-office plan would force “return to commute” and drew the matter to the labor board.

Administration officials, according to the AP report, said the move would improve collaboration and make state government more accessible to Vermonters. Administration Secretary Sarah Clark repeated that position Wednesday, saying in Scott’s press conference that continuing to push the return-to-office requirement will help to “ensure that state government is able to deliver services to Vermonters that they expect.”

The state has said it will seek further review. AP reported that officials said Vermont has already filed a notice of appeal with the Vermont Supreme Court. The union leader said the earlier effort to block the mandate through a lawsuit had failed and that, in his view, the result reflected the union’s choice of venue—Washington County Superior Court—rather than the substance of the case. Howard said he was “really confident that the Supreme Court will uphold the decision of the labor board,” and he added that the governor needs to “clean up the mess that he created,” according to AP.