ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT: COURT OPERATIONS SLOWED BY WORK ACTION

Court hearings and the processing of lawsuits and other legal documents are disrupted today due to a strike by the union representing most employees at the Superior Court of Alameda County.

Court Reporters and some managers represented by other unions have been calling in sick, requesting personal time off today, or stating that they will not cross the picket line.

The Court has instituted an emergency operations plan which utilizes available managers and unrepresented employees to fill key positions, helping keep critical cases on schedule and essential court filings processed. Nevertheless, the job action instituted by the union has placed our community at risk.

Without court clerks, court reporters and some managers working, it will be harder for domestic violence victims to receive emergency restraining orders against violent partners and some felons could be released from jail if their case cannot be heard before state-mandated deadlines. The limited court staff currently working has been assigned to key courtrooms in hopes of minimizing the impact of this strike.

The work action comes as the Superior Court of Alameda County’s administration attempts to bargain in good faith with the leadership of the Service Employees International Union Local 1021 (SEIU Local 1021), Alameda County Management Employees Association (ACMEA) and the SEIU Local 1021/Alameda County Official Court Reporters Association (ACOCRA).

A main obstacle to reaching agreement with SEIU Local 1021, the union leading the strike, is the union’s continued insistence on a salary increase and retention stipends that are unsustainable given the Court’s dire budget situation caused by the State of California’s significant cuts to the funding provided to the Court. If the Court were to provide union membership with the salary increases proposed by their bargaining team, it would require the Court to lay off a significant number of staff members to ensure it maintains a state-mandated balanced budget.

While the Union’s claim in a press release today that they are striking because of lack of staffing and training, this issue has not been the primary focus of recent bargaining discussions. While the Court and unions have discussed staffing and training, the Court has maintained that it is overstaffed and has that it has provided an overabundance of training to staff members. In fact, the Judicial Council of California estimates that based on the current case load at the Superior Court of Alameda County, our Court is overstaffed by more than 100 employees.

Despite the Judicial Council’s analysis that the Superior Court of Alameda County is overstaffed, the Court continues to work to keep clerks employed.

The Union leadership recommended that their members go on strike despite recent positive budget developments that have allowed the Court to provide employees with backpay for furloughs taken last year, and, during recent contract negotiations, propose a salary increase and one-time stipend next year.

“As shown during past contract negotiations and just last month, when the Court has the money, we strive to take care of the people who are critical to our operations,” Presiding Judge Thomas Nixon said. “Over the last year, we have done everything in our power to keep all our employees working by making decisions to cut costs rather than lay off employees.

The Court is funded by the state and had $4.4 million cut from its budget at the beginning of this fiscal year as part of a statewide $97 million cut to trial court budgets. This lost revenue, along with other budgetary cuts the Court has incurred over the last several years, resulted in the Court having to eliminate vacant positions, institute mandatory unpaid furloughs, and place a soft freeze on existing positions. The soft freeze prevents the hiring of a replacement for 90 days after an existing employee leaves their position.

The continued cost-cutting efforts coupled with new state budget projections announced last month have allowed the Court to begin repaying employees with a stipend for wages lost during furloughs last year and make a proposal to the union that would give employees a 1% pay rise and a one-time stipend at the time of contract signing.

“We truly understand our employees’ frustrations and their desire to receive continued raises to help them offset the rising cost of living,” Judge Nixon said. “They absolutely deserve the added peace of mind that increasing their wages will bring and we are doing everything we can to make sure they get some increase in salary.”

Clerks earn an average of $75,062 a year with generous benefits that include free health care coverage for them and their family, 14 paid holidays, three floating holidays, and up to five weeks of paid vacation for employees who have worked at the court for more than 20 years. All court employees receive a pension upon retirement which is partially funded by the Court, and they receive court-funded life insurance.

The average tenure of a clerk is about 10 years.

Employees represented by ACMEA average $123,852 a year in salary with an average tenure of 16 years at the Court, while Court Reporters’ salary/wages average $131,040 per year with an average tenure of 12 years at the Court.

Over the last three years, the employees in the three bargaining units currently on strike received more than 10% in pay increases among other benefits requested through negotiations.

Negotiations with the two bargaining units represented by SEIU Local 1021 (the clerical bargaining unit and the court reporter bargaining unit) began in September 2024, and negotiations with ACMEA, which represents some supervisors and managers, began in November 2024. The Court has had 15 bargaining sessions with SEIU (court clerk unit), 11 bargaining sessions with SEIU (court reporter unit), and 8 bargaining sessions with ACMEA to reach new labor agreements.

“I cannot stress enough that this isn’t a matter of us not wanting to give them a raise and that we’re somehow hoarding a pot of money. Just the opposite. It’s that we lack the financial wherewithal to do so,” Judge Nixon said. “We don’t have the ability to raise money other than by asking for more from the state, which we do constantly, and we continue to hope that the Governor’s 2025-2026 budget will restore and replace those funds taken last year.”

Despite this job action and the financial uncertainty faced by the Court due to the State funding cuts, the Court administration continues to be available for negotiations and mediation to reach agreement.

While the unions’ work action threatens public safety, the court’s executive team and available employees are diligently working to keep some courtrooms open to ensure the most critical cases can be heard.

Residents called for jury duty or who have cases pending before the Court should continue to plan to go to court to check the status of their jury service or case. If you have a criminal case pending and are ordered to appear in Court, you still must attend. The Court will also post updates on its website at alameda.courts.ca.gov.

You can view the full notice here.