Sample Letters – No to RTO

GENERAL LETTER OUTLINE

Ideas for the outline of your letter: Your occupation, how things were better when state workers worked from home, how the increase in state workers going back to the office will negatively impact you, rebuttals to suggested improvements/solutions, suggestions for solutions.

Feel free to use the samples provided below. Edit your letter to make it personal and share your concerns.

SIMPLE SHORT LETTER (EDIT TO ADDRESS GOV./LEGISLATORS)

California has implemented groundbreaking policies like Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, and AB 1279/SB 100, committing to carbon neutrality by 2045 and a 100% clean electricity grid. The state has also prioritized quality of life through efforts like CalAIM, expanding access to mental health care and social support, and by promoting remote work during and after the COVID-19 pandemic as a cost-effective, sustainable, and humane solution.

Telework reduced emissions and erosion of the infrastructure while helped address housing, cost of living, and regional inequities. State workers not only meet the needs to keep California going, they were more efficient.

Please rescind / ask Gov. Newsom to rescind the return to office (RTO) portion of Executive Order N-22-25. Let departments implement RTO policies that best meet their needs to serve Californians.

SAMPLE LETTER FOR STATE WORKERS

I am a state employee in ___________ County who worked from home full-time during the COVID-19 pandemic. Like many of my colleagues, I demonstrated that remote work was not only feasible but highly effective. Studies, including a 2023 California Department of Human Resources (CalHR) report, showed state worker productivity increased by up to 20% during telework periods. My work-life balance thrived: I saved hours daily on commuting, reduced stress, and had more time for family. However, in June 2024, Governor Newsom mandated a 2-day-per-week in-office policy, disrupting this equilibrium and causing significant stress as we adjusted schedules and budgets. Now, a new mandate effective July 1, 2025, demands 4 days per week in the office, amplifying these challenges.

With approximately 90,000 state workers in Sacramento County alone, this shift will flood roads with cars. Public transit isn’t a viable solution. Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT) faces ongoing issues with reliability, safety, and cleanliness, as reported in a March 2025 Sacramento Bee article citing rider complaints and driver shortages. For me, driving means longer commutes, higher gas prices (averaging $4.80 per gallon in California, per AAA’s March 2025 data), and parking fees up to $15 daily. For colleagues unable to afford driving, public transit exposes them to risks like assault, panhandling, or missed buses; issues SacRT acknowledged in a 2024 service review. Meanwhile, remote work had slashed my carbon footprint; Sacramento’s air quality noticeably improved in 2020-2022, per California Air Resources Board (CARB) data, with vehicle miles traveled dropping 15%.

The Governor argues that in-office work boosts the economy, but our days of disposable income are gone — local eateries won’t see my money. I’d rather not fund Big Oil or wear out my car for tasks I excel at remotely. Returning to the office also strains my family; childcare costs (averaging $1,200 monthly per child in Sacramento, per 2025 Economic Policy Institute estimates) and the emotional toll of worrying about my kids’ care are burdens I avoided at home. I urge a hybrid model – say, 1-2 days in-office – to balance collaboration with the proven benefits of telework.

SAMPLE LETTER FOR TAX PAYERS

As a California taxpayer, I’m alarmed by the fiscal impact of state workers returning to the office nearly full-time starting July 1, 2025. The Department of General Services (DGS) requires agencies to report telework savings annually, yet transparency is lacking. Assemblymember Josh Hoover’s 2024-118 audit request of DGS and CalHR, filed in late 2024, seeks to uncover these figures – could your office expedite this review? A 2023 DGS report estimated telework saved California $1.5 billion annually in office leases, utilities, and commuting subsidies. Reverting to in-person work could reverse these gains, hiking costs for rent, maintenance, and employee reimbursements – expenses taxpayers like me will shoulder.

Californians deserve to know the price tag of this policy shift. Budget analysts speculate that returning 90,000 Sacramento-area state workers to offices could cost $500 million yearly, factoring in infrastructure and lost efficiency. When we worked from home, taxpayers saved, and workers thrived – why abandon that? I request a public report detailing telework savings versus in-office costs, empowering us to hold policymakers accountable.

SAMPLE LETTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES

I’m an environmental advocate deeply concerned about the ecological fallout of mandating state workers to report to offices 4 days per week starting July 1, 2025. Sacramento’s traffic is already gridlocked – adding tens of thousands of commuters will worsen congestion and emissions. CARB data from 2023 showed telework cut state worker vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by 12 million annually, reducing greenhouse gases by 150,000 metric tons. Assemblymember Hoover’s 2024-118 audit of DGS and CalHR, requested in 2024, could reveal how these agencies assess VMT and emissions impacts – could your office push for answers? I’d also like to know how this policy aligns with California’s 2030 climate goals, which target a 40% emissions drop from 1990 levels.

Remote work proved its worth: Sacramento’s skies cleared during 2020-2022, and wildlife thrived with quieter streets, per a 2025 UC Davis study. Now, I dread smoggy days and longer commutes for essential travelers like delivery drivers or parents. The Governor claims in-office work aids collaboration, but virtual tools like Zoom suffice – why sacrifice our planet for marginal gains? I suggest incentivizing telework or bolstering SacRT with cleaner, safer transit options to mitigate this rollback’s harm.

EMAIL TEMPLATE FOR THE GOVERNOR’S CABINET, LEGISLATURE, OTHER STATE LEADERS

This was copied from a Reddit post (https://www.reddit.com/r/CAStateWorkers/comments/1cr3ef7/fight_rto_email_the_governors_cabinet_the/) regarding the first round of RTO. We updated where the original post had “June 17” to reflect the current Executive Order.

Email template for the Governor’s Cabinet and the Legislature below.

Yes, it is long, but it captures a lot of our frustrations.

This subreddit has over 38,000 people. If even 1,000 people emailed all of these folks, they will definitely take notice.

THIS IS OUR MOMENT.

There are areas in this email template for you to customize, so please read through it.

I highly recommend Hotmail or Yahoomail. If you use Gmail, you may need to click “Tab” multiple times when entering in so many emails.

You may also wish to send a copy to your own manager, section chief, branch chief, Dept. Director, etc.

Guidelines:

USE BCC (not in the “To” or “CC” section.
REMAIN RESPECTFUL.
OPTICS MATTER. Do not make us look bad in any way.

Dear California State Leaders,

I write to you today as a voter, taxpayer, constituent, and as a State of California employee. My ________ years of dedicated work serves Californians every day because my role focuses on supporting _________.

I want to share my personal story and provide some facts and data about the return to office (RTO) portion of Executive Order N-22-25 (PDF). This mandate will cost taxpayers more during this budget deficit crisis and it is a poorly thought-out, one-size-fits-all, chaotic approach. According to the survey data from 110 State Departments, telework was a huge success for recruitment, productivity, morale, collaboration, and decreasing office space. This chaotic, mandatory, arbitrary RTO simply creates a long list of unnecessary problems. For all of the reasons outlined in this email, I strongly support Assemblyman Josh Hoover’s audit request.

My message is simple: Encourage the Governor to rescind the RTO portion of Executive Order N-22-25. The decision for the frequency that employees should all meet in-person and collaborate should rest with those closest and most familiar with the work: individual Unit Managers. These managers know the true collaboration, mentorship, and operational needs of their individual teams. Individual Unit Managers should be allowed to make decisions on accordingly to carry out the Department’s goals and mission. This is the bottoms-up approach that balances the needs of both the employer and employees. The Governor’s mandate and top-down approach fails to acknowledge the many financial and environmental repercussions to not only its own employees, but also to the State of California.

I want to share my personal story as a working class, public servant. With high inflation, I simply cannot afford to shoulder the cost of commuting, which averages $8,466 annually.. According to this 2023 LAO (Legislative Analyst Office) report, for most employees, our State provided wages have consistently been lower than the inflation rate, year-after-year, since 1999, constantly eroding our purchasing power. Other employees have it worse, such as scientists who have had their salaries be frozen for 4 years since 2020 as CalHR has refused to budge on reaching a contract. Purchasing power is a key metric since a $50,000 salary in 2024 buys far less than in 1999. This 2023 UC Berkeley Labor Center report confirmed that “State workers struggle to make ends meet throughout California.” Even the 2023 California State Auditor reports “that hiring and retaining qualified IT staff is the greatest challenge that they [State Departments] currently face.”

If the State is unwilling to provide market wages that keep up with inflation, the state can recruit and retain employees by improving working conditions, such as telework. Being allowed to telework 5 days a week has helped stretch my limited dollars, especially in this inflationary period. This arbitrary RTO mandate is effectively yet another pay cut for me that I simply cannot afford.

Personally, having the opportunity to telework 5 days a week has dramatically improved my quality of life by:

#############################################################

Tell them why the RTO issue is important to you, your family member and your community.

IF YOU DISCUSS CHILD CARE, ONLY TALK ABOUT THE HOURS BEFORE AND AFTER WORK. DO NOT DISCUSS CHILD CARE DURING YOUR REGULAR 8-5 JOB.

###########################################################

I have saved ____ hours on my roundtrip commute per week. This has allowed me to reinvest that time toward _____. [helping my kids with their homework, taking care of elderly relatives ]
I have saved $___ on commuting costs, which has helped me better afford ___ for me and my family. This has been especially helpful because high inflation has negatively affected me by _____.
By teleworking, I am reducing my environmental impact and contribution to climate change, which is _____
I have a physical disability and telework is more accommodating than using public transportation, etc. (Feel free to expand on it)
I do not live in an area with access to efficient public transportation, so teleworking helps by _____
For childcare during before and after work hours, it would cost me ________.

The State will incur many financial and environmental costs:

If even 33%, or 73,086 out of the 221,474 State employees use the monthly maximum IRS public transportation benefit, that would cost the State $276.3 million every single year.
State Departments already spend $600 million per year on rent. Many State Departments also simply do not have enough office space for all of their employees currently. There is nowhere near enough quiet conference room space for employees to hold confidential meetings with stakeholders. Will these departments sign new leases for office space?
State Departments will be forced to buy many millions of dollars worth of additional office equipment for employees to effectively carry out their jobs including additional webcams, headsets, keyboards, standard office supplies, etc.
Pursuant to the reasonable accommodation process for employees with verified medical needs, State Departments will need to purchase other expensive equipment, including but not limited to specialized chairs and stand up desks.
1. It is important to note that many employees have already invested their own money into equipping their own home office that best meets their needs. It is not simply not possible to ask an employee to bring in their own large equipment from home to the office and back, so the State Departments would incur these additional purchases.
State Departments will be spending much more in maintenance costs for elevators, bathroom repairs, printer repairs, electricity, water, gas, and other utilities.
State telework has also eliminated nearly 400,000 metric tons of carbon emissions. Mandating RTO will needlessly cause more carbon emissions, which directly runs counter to the Governor’s own words for his trip to the Vatican: “global temperatures [are] hurtling towards alarming new heights, the stakes could not be higher. There is no greater authority than moral authority — and the Pope’s leadership on the climate crisis inspires us all to push further and faster.”

The arbitrary mandatory RTO causes chaos among State Departments:

Across various departments, it’s common knowledge that a sizable number of executive-level leaders do not reside near Sacramento and instead live in other regions in California, such as the Bay Area and Southern California.

The next logical question is, will the state offer these executive-level leaders special exemptions and privileges not available to rank and file staff and risk the hypocrisy that undermines the Governor’s stated policy for more “collaboration?” This creates another “rules for thee, but not for me” situation.
Or will the State risk losing these executive-level leaders en masse across numerous departments, undermining policy and program implementation?
For Departments considering exempting those who live over 50 miles away, it also destroys employee morale. For example, a 20 year veteran staff member with technical expertise may be forced to commute and come into the office twice a week to train a newer employee over Microsoft Teams or Zoom simply because they live in Los Angeles. This naturally breeds frustration and resentment.
For exempted employees who live over 50 miles away, some Departments are creating policies that their 5 day remote status only applies to their currently held position, so these employees are “forever stuck” and cannot promote upward, even if they have the expertise the Department needs.
The State is starting to open itself up to lawsuits as some Departments are already denying reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities.
Being able to recruit employees from areas other than Sacramento helps ensure Departments get perspectives from different counties all across the State. People from rural, suburban, and urban areas all have different experiences and to best serve ALL Californians, we need a geographically diverse workforce.
As previously stated, many Departments already do not have the office space or needed equipment for all of their employees. With RTO, new equipment will be needed and purchasing equipment notoriously takes a long time. These factors, combined with many departments trying to implement a hoteling system, will ultimately result in a extremely chaotic return-to-the-office and tank productivity. Many Departments have held Q&A sessions and time and time again, HR offices have been unable to answer basic questions about RTO logistics. Again, RTO creates unnecessary problems.

Some state employees have discussed that this is their number one quality-of-life issue and may galvanize them to start engaging with media contacts and spread the hypocrisy on social media. Their goal is to highlight the glaring mismatch and hypocrisy between CA’s proud public policies and the actual reality of choices being made by this Administration. Quite frankly, I fear that this may hurt the Governor and other State Leaders in the future. By unilaterally imposing an arbitrary RTO mandate across the board, the Administration is actively choosing to make working class public servant’s lives worse off, so I understand my colleague’s sentiments.

As MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow recently stated to her own bosses, “Hearing legitimate criticism, responding to it and correcting course. Not digging in, not blaming others. Take a minute, acknowledge that maybe it wasn’t the right call. It is a sign of strength, not weakness, to acknowledge when you are wrong.”

To reiterate, my request is simple: Encourage the Governor to rescind the arbitrary, mandatory, one-size-fits-all, chaotic RTO mandate. Allow individual Unit Managers the flexibility to enact telework policies that best meet their team’s needs to effectively carry out the Department’s mission. They are the ones closest to the work and the ones most knowledgable about what the team needs to succeed.

I respectfully request a response within ten business days.

Respectfully yours,