Committee of Labor and Civil Service, June 17, 2024

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE OF LABOR AND CIVIL SERVICE Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Monday, June 17, 2024 2:08 p.m. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN JIM HARRITY, CHAIR COUNCILWOMAN NINA AHMAD COUNCILWOMAN KENDRA BROOKS COUNCILWOMAN KATHERINE GILMORE RICHARDSON COUNCILWOMAN RUE LANDAU COUNCILWOMAN QUETCY M. LOZADA

240514 - - -

All right, everyone. We're about to get started. We got a bunch of my colleagues that have come out to participate so we're going to let whoever wants to participate and my colleagues to participate because that is democracy. All right. Good afternoon. Welcome to this hearing of the Committee on Labor and Civil Service. I note that the hour has come and a quorum of the Committee is present. I will now I guess take attendance. Vice-chair O'Neill I know is excused. Councilwoman Brooks.

Present.

Councilman Phillips.

Present.

Councilwoman Lozada, present. Councilwoman Ahmad.

Present.

Majority Leader Katherine Gilmore Richardson is on her way. Councilwoman Rue Landau, my buddy.

Present.

And, Councilman O'Rourke is joining us. Thank you, sir. Appreciate everybody coming out here today. I appreciate everybody coming here. I know this is the middle of the day on a Monday. I appreciate you coming out and voicing your opinions. This is what it's about. It's about you guys having a chance to -- everybody having a chance to speak and get their opinions heard. So right now we're going to go into a quorum of the Committee being present. This hearing is now called to order. This is the public hearing of the Committee on Labor and Civil Service regarding Resolution No. 240514. Mr. Palmer, will you please read the title of the resolution.

Resolution 10 240514, authorizing the City Council Committee on Labor and Civil Service to hold public hearings on the Administration's proposed Return to Office Policy and the impact on the City's workforce.

I would like to note that Majority Leader Katherine Gilmore Richardson is in the house.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. All right. Before we bring up the first panel, I'd just like to read a statement because we're getting a lot of questions in regard to City employees testifying and anything that may happen because of that. So I'll remind all individuals here to testify that everyone, including City employees, have a First Amendment right to express their opinion. For City employees in particular, there is no retaliation for expressing those opinions, especially as they relate to working conditions and other policies adopted by the City. I hope that everyone will keep this in mind as they testify today. Mr. Palmer, call the first panel to testify.

Camille Duchaussee, Chief Administrative Officer. (Witnesses approached Witness table.)

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Chairperson Harrity and members of the Committee. I am Camille Duchaussee, Chief Administrative Officer of the City of Philadelphia. Joining me today are Michael Zaccagni, Director of Office of Human Resources; Joseph Brasky, Interim Commissioner Department of Public Property; and Rocky Shepalittie(ph), all right, Director of Safety and Loss Prevention. I appreciate the opportunity to address you today regarding the decision to return all employees to full-time in-office work on July 15, 2024. This decision, while impactful, is one made by the Administration with full consideration of the factors affecting City of Philadelphia employees and the City's operations, strategic objectives and commitment to becoming the safest, cleanest, greenest city in the nation with access to economic opportunity for all as well as an employer of choice. The decision to establish work location as an in-office requirement is an employer's prerogative and not a mandatory subject of bargaining. While this is a point of contention as you will likely hear from some of our labor partners, our position is supported by longstanding case law. As stewards of the City's mission and vision, it is incumbent upon the Mayor to make decisions that best serve the interests of the City and the City's workforce as a whole, even when such decisions may be difficult or unpopular. While we value input from employees and welcome constructive dialogue on work- related matters, certain decisions are made in the best interest of the City and based on the Administration's discretion, vision and philosophy. Work location is one such decision that falls within the purview of management authority and the decision to return the full workforce to in-person reflects a strategic investment in cultivating a work environment that thrives on team work, creativity and shared purpose, serving the residents of the City of Philadelphia. (Audience interruption.)

That's going to happen a lot, yeah. We endeavor to maximize and capitalize on the spontaneous conversations, impromptu brainstorming sessions and the face-to-face collaboration that fosters a dynamic work culture that cannot be fully replicated in virtual settings. The landscape of work has changed and is evolving. Driven by a number of factors such as technology changes and shifting societal and employment practices regarding the navigation of personal and professional demands, remote work options have proliferated. However, a critical concern in the calculus of remote work versus in-person decision-making is the fundamental difference in service delivery and public administration obligations between other employers and organizations and municipal governments. This difference -- (Audience interruption.)

This difference is a significant factor in our decision to require in-person work. The shift to more prolific remote work arrangements made in response to the COVID-19 pandemic is an example of how shifts in managing work location are necessary to respond to the strategic objectives and responsibilities of the City. Remote work enabled employees to fulfill their responsibilities in the midst of an unprecedented public health threat and emergency. Now, we are again adjusting the conditions with which we are faced in Philadelphia to ensure we provide culturally informed -- I'm sorry. Now, we are again adjusting to the conditions with which we are faced in Philadelphia to ensure we provide culturally informed services to residents and our resident workforce. Returning all employees to full-time in-office work is a decision not made lightly nor is it one that is taken without careful consideration of the implications for our workforce. We recognize that -- (Audience interruption.)

All right. Listen, I'm not going to do this. We got a lot of people that are going to testify. We are going to respect everybody who is testifying regardless of whether you like what they have to say or not. Your chance to speak will come up sure enough, so let's let everybody speak or I will clear the room. Thank you.

Thank you. We recognize that employees may have concerns or preferences regarding their work location and we are committed to addressing these concerns to the best of our ability. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that work location changes are not intended to disregard the preferences or the well-being of our employees but are driven by them and the City's operational requirements, objectives and municipal governance priorities. Mayor Parker has been clear about her priorities, creating a government that people can see, touch and feel, and establishing the work location as an in-office requirement is an intentional decision aimed at optimizing collaboration, communication and productivity within City departments. The in-person interactions and spontaneous exchanges that occur in a shared office environment are invaluable for fostering teamwork, maximizing innovation and a sense of belonging among employees. Furthermore, the physical presence of employees in the workplace enables more effective supervision, on-the-job training and professional development opportunities which are essential for organizational efficiency and sustainability. Mayor Parker has also clearly communicated that addressing workplace inequity is also at the heart of this decision. Face-to-face interactions facilitate more coaching and mentorship, which are essential for individual growth and access to opportunity. By maximizing in-person work time, we are prioritizing belonging, equal access to invaluable engagement and exposure and support. And we cultivate a culture that values and leverages differences and fosters a more inclusive and equitable workplace culture, rather than normalizing more narrow virtual versions of ourselves. Furthermore, in making this decision the inability of the majority of the City of Philadelphia's workforce to exercise the option to work from home or remotely was remarkable and influential. The bold and robust plan for making the city of Philadelphia the safest, cleanest, greenest city in the nation with access to economic opportunity for all and an employer of choice also includes changing and improving the way resident and business services are delivered. Our government will operate within an informed framework which is influenced by a workforce that is accessible and experiencing the communities and conditions they are entrusted with serving and improving. Functions such as educating, emergency response, public health and social services, permitting community engagement, cleaning and greening and contracting access benefit from direct and organic interaction with our communities and other stakeholders who experience our city. Philadelphia is the poorest big city in the nation and in order to solve its problems, all approaches, all strategies and all resources and resource management practices will be brought to bear. Cultural competence is an important dimension of responsible service delivery, especially in a diverse and multi-cultural city like Philadelphia. Recognizing and respecting the cultural backgrounds, values and preferences of residents is critical for building trust, rapport and mutual understanding. Cultural competence goes beyond the virtual and digital services which are a valued part of effective service delivery. It is a value upon which the decision to generally return to in-person assignments was based. The City of Philadelphia's workforce is currently over 26,000 employees. Of that number, approximately 4,300 employees or 7 percent are working either remotely 8 or using a hybrid schedule.

More 9 specifically, excluding our 10 colleagues working in the Police, 11 Fire and Prison Departments, 12 12 percent of the non-supervisory and 13 15 percent of the supervisory 14 members, which is roughly 840 15 employees of District Council 33; 16 and 57 percent of Local 2187, 47 17 percent of Local 2186, which is 18 roughly 1970 employees for District 19 Council 47; as well as 46 percent 20 of our exempt workforce are working within a work-from-home or remote situation either fully or partially. We endeavor to make the adjustments necessary to minimize the impact of the increased onsite hours. Actions taken in this regard already include those benefits announced during the Mayor's press conference, which for our represented employees require Union negotiation. We will continue to engage our Union partners and employees to identify and implement, where feasible, additional benefits which improve employees' ability to maximize the value of their paychecks and realize a healthy and safe work experience where in-person work is not perceived as inherently antithetical to equal employment opportunity and diversity, as has been unfortunately and repeatedly represented. The decision to default to in-person work locations for the City of Philadelphia's workforce was not driven by a decline in productivity. Instead this decision was made to enhance the collaborative environment and improve service delivery to our residents and ensure equitable access to resources and support for all of our employees. The impact -- sorry, the impact of remote work, working from home on the workforce is multi- faceted. While virtual work offers approximately percent of our 13 workforce flexibility and work 14 location, it presents challenges 15 related to engagement, mental 16 health equity and community 17 competence and connection and 18 effective supervision and 19 mentorship to more than 20 percent 20 of our workforce. We would believe that in-person interactions foster a stronger sense of community and facilitate better communication, which are essential for the effective functioning of our City's operations. This decision has been subject to significant scrutiny before its implementation as well as claims ranging from a lack of notice to irreparable harm to recruitment and retention. While we disagree with many of these claims, we are undeterred in our commitment to working with our labor partners and employees to mitigate challenges to the full return to in-person and onsite work locations. We're committed to supporting our employees and cultivating a work experience where equal employment opportunity and diversity, equity, inclusion are centered regardless of the location where the work is performed. We welcome and look forward to today's testimony from our Union partners and our colleagues. All voices are important to informing and shaping workplace culture. While their testimony will be personal and from the perspective of individual experiences and personal preferences, we will continue to accept and use all information and feedback to build our commitment as an employer to create and improve the work environment. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony today. I am available to answer the Council's questions.

Thank you. Are you making a statement?

(Shaking head).

No? All right. Good. So we're going to move on. I have a few questions and my colleagues have a few questions. My first question: In what way would the City's Return to Office Policy improve customer service?

So at the end of the day, we are looking at a number of initiatives to improve our resident service delivery. One of the things that I think is essential in improving service is making sure that that service is informed by the residents that will receive the service, to whom we're providing that service, being in person, allowing us to be in the spaces and the places where not only are we interacting with our residents but we're also interacting with our colleagues who have that same interaction or our colleagues that support the service delivery. So at the end of the day, we believe that having an informed workforce, a culturally competent workforce, a workforce that is seeing, understanding, experiencing, speaking with, engaging with our residents, as being residents themselves, I think all of that improves the way we deliver services.

Okay. And is there an equity issue in allowing some City workers to work virtually or hybrid schedules while other City employees only have the option of working in-person?

So there are two facets to this question, right. At the end of the day, there is data, there is anecdotal information that suggests that the benefits of networking and the benefits of exposure and opportunity, the benefits of being in a room when a conversation is happening has much more to do and much more influence on promotion opportunities than the application itself in some cases than the qualification determination itself. And so, from an equity perspective there have been longstanding concerns and institutional concerns that we've had relative to who you know and who's in the room having more opportunity than our underrepresented employees. And so, being in person allows us to make sure that we are maximizing those opportunities for all of our employees.

All right. And just one more question. I mean, just to get to the bottom line, has the work-from-home hybrid schedule, has it been working? Are we seeing -- (Cheering.)

Are our numbers comparative to before we had hybrid work? So in other words, are we servicing the same number of people? Are we servicing more people? (Cheering.)

So in response to the question is it working, are we providing services to our residents right, is our workforce able to receive training, are they able to promote, are they able to qualify, the answer to that question is yes -- (Audience interruption.)

-- but at the end of the day, leadership does not have to be satisfied with the status quo. They don't have to be satisfied with the yes. (Audience interruption.)

They can be satisfied with doing more. They can be satisfied with making sure that there is more consideration, more exposure, that we improve equity concerns that we have throughout the City, that we improve service delivery. (Audience interruption.)

Okay. All right, everybody. Everybody let's try to be a little civil here. I love you all, you are my people, but I will clear the room. Please let's let everybody say -- I want to hear what they have to say because I want to make an informed opinion of this matter. And I'm asking questions because we need to know the answers. So please allow them to at least answer the question. I believe the question ultimately you said yes, correct?

Yes. And I also added that it is important from a leadership perspective determinations may be made in order to improve service, in order to improve equity, in order to improve compliance with equal employment opportunities, right. And so, while the Mayor has been very clear we are at war with the status quo, we want to make sure that we're doing better, not the same.

Okay. I'm going to pass it on now to my colleagues starting over here. Majority Leader Katherine Gilmore Richardson.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the resolution that you provided for this Committee this afternoon and thank you very much to our first panel for your testimony and all full transparency so that I can be very clear on where I come from on this issue. My sister is a member of AFSCME Local 2187 and -- (Cheering.)

-- my brother-in-law is a member of D.C. 33. (Cheering.)

So for my own purposes, I just would like to get some information on the record so that we have this when we go back to the transcript. In reviewing the testimony, you stated that there are a total of 1,969 employees of D.C. 33; is that correct? And then 841 employees --

No --

Non-supervisory -- let me go back. 88 percent of the non-supervisory and 85 percent of the supervisory members are totaling 841 employees of D.C. 33, and 42 percent of Local 2187 and 53 percent of Local 2186 are totaling 1,969 employees of D.C. 47; and 54 percent of the exempt workforce are working from home fully or partially?

Correct.

So that would be a total of 2810 employees, give or take, total?

Yes, with the exception of -- yes.

Okay. Excellent. And then of those employees, I have a question relative to when they were hybrid. And so, how long have those employees been hybrid? Did that start with COVID or did it happen prior to that time?

So prior to COVID, and Mike can correct me if I'm incorrect, prior to COVID we did not have a citywide remote work policy. The remote work policy that was in place prior to COVID was specific to our exempt and nonrepresented employees.

Okay. And so, my next question is relative to the Collective Bargaining Agreements. This type of circumstance, would this typically be something that is negotiated in a Collective Bargaining Agreement to make this decision for employees to return to work?

No, work location is not something that we would typically bargain.

Okay. And my next question is relative to the timing. As a working parent, as a mother I have three children. My sister who works for 2187 has five children between the ages of 1 and 10, including a set of 1-year-old boys. Why was the decision made to do this on July 15th in the middle of the summer -- (Cheering.)

-- recognizing that the summer schedule is -- we all know this -- as working parents is much different than the school year schedule that begins in September.

Yeah.

Now, this is just me, this is personal to Katherine. If Katherine had to make this decision, Katherine would have gone to the Unions and had a conversation with them first. Katherine would have waited until September 15th once school is back in -- (Cheering.)

-- because school resumes prior to Labor Day for the Philadelphia Public School System this year. And so, my question is on the timing --

Sure.

-- of the July 15th?

Understood. So we agree that having a conversation with the Union is important and we did have a conversation with the Union. We attempted to have several conversations with our Union partners. We do have a fundamental difference of opinion, and I think that is pretty much what was the impetus behind those conversations not moving in such a partnered fashion, right, in a collaborative fashion. But at the end of the day the decision of the when, we thought about that for quite some time. I don't know that there would have been a particular time in the year that would have impacted one group, one community differently than another community. At the end of the day, getting through the school year not disrupting the school year earlier, we thought that was an important consideration. Also, not invoking this in the very beginning of July when we know that there was a lot of vacation time that was probably planned, that was a considerable influential part of the decision- making. And then really lastly, ensuring that there was sufficient -- there was notice, right. So regardless of when the decision was made, ensuring that we had at least 60 days in advance knowing that this had been a topic of conversation even throughout the campaign. We wanted to make sure that there was sufficient notice. And so, really the notice, the timing, not disrupting the middle of the school year, those things went into the consideration.

Sure. I just wanted to put that on the record particularly relative to child care and parents who have children. July 15th is very difficult for individuals who must now look for child care in the middle of the summer. It's very difficult to find quality child care even in 60 days. (Cheering.)

And I say that as someone who when I was a staffer here in Council, my father died, my grandmother died and then my mom fell and broke her hip six weeks later. I had to look for quality child care for my 8-month-old baby in the middle of the summer, and she did not start until September because that's how long it took me to find child care. And I had to bring a playpen into my office at City Hall in order to work.

Yes.

This is a personal issue for me. I do feel that we are all seeking to achieve levels of productivity within our teams and provide the best quality of service to the residents of City of Philadelphia. I know we all share that goal, but I do believe that the timing should be considered, particularly for those who are working parents who have young children. (Cheering.)

Yes.

I will return. I will reserve the balance of my questions. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to offer as well that I appreciate Majority Leader Gilmore Richardson's perspective. We deal with personal -- personally I've had a very similar -- I have three children, had a very similar path in terms of both parents being ill and needing care and the difficulty of finding care. But at the end of the day, those issues can happen at any time during the year, right. And so, they're very difficult to navigate. In terms of taking those types of personal matters into consideration, they're just absolutely difficult to navigate, to find the perfect time to do this.

Okay. I'm going to go to my colleague Kendra Brooks, followed by Councilwoman Nina Ahmad and then Councilman Anthony Phillips, Rue Landau and so on. All right.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. So I'm kind of on the same lines. I want to know when the Work-from-Home Policy was presented? When was the Union notified? Did they know this before May 20 when the announcement came out or was it at the same time everyone else found out?

Our Union partners were specifically notified on the same day as the press conference. (Audience interruption.)

I will also share that there were conversations prior to that press conference with all of our Union partners making them aware that we were returning -- they did not have the date, but we've had conversations well before the official press conference where the date was established.

And this is a concern to me, because like my colleague I'm a mom too, my children are much older now, but still July is like the worst, in the middle of the summer to try to figure out what you're going to do with children if you had not already made plans. And summer camp plans start in January and February, so that's problematic. In your testimony you talked about legal precedence. So can you tell me the names of the legal case precedence that you're relying on -- (Cheering.)

-- when you said that the work from home is non-bargainable. So I would love to know what the legal case precedence is for my team to look into that.

We certainly can have our Labor team provide that information to you. (Audience interruption.)

I don't want to take up so much -- I have another line of questioning. So when an employee makes an ADA accommodations request, what is the average time it takes to get employee requests from implementation to accommodation? As being the Chair of Disabilities, I've experienced a lot of questioning around ADA compliance here in City Hall. So what is the time frame for that and how will that work for folks having to return to work on July 15th?

So our process doesn't change. The ADA or reasonable accommodation request process does not change. In terms of what is the average time, I don't have that information available for you. That is handled on a department-by-department basis. And as I'm sure you can understand that different departments handle and have different processes relative -- and it also depends on what is the nature of the request that is being made. So to the extent that we can gather that information and provide it to you, we certainly will do that.

It would be very helpful because I would hate for folks to be penalized because reasonable accommodations were not made if people had already been assigned or assigned work-from-home way prior to the COVID pandemic because this mandate is for everyone. So I really would make sure that we have our reasonable accommodations in place --

Sure.

-- before we make decisions that can impact our workforce.

So our policies do not impact reasonable accommodations. A reasonable accommodation is an accommodation because it at times operates outside of our policy. If policy was the only driver for an accommodation, it wouldn't be an accommodation. So if there is a reasonable accommodation that an employee has on file and is being implemented, that is not impacted by this policy.

So is there any precedent around reasonable accommodation since this is like a new Administration? And I know this is something that had been bargained in the past, and I'm just concerned like -- so reasonable accommodations you said upon -- suppose this Administration does not agree with the reasonable accommodation request that a person was already allotted for prior to, how do we plan on dealing with that? And is there a time frame because there are folks that were doing this for years and we're asking them to come into office places that may not be able to accommodate them? Is there a time frame to speed up this accommodation for them to get to work or it's going to be provisions made for people to still work from home?

So we are very much aware that this is a concern. We are completing reasonable accommodation training for not only our supervisor managers but our HR professionals as well. We want to ensure that the practices that are not subject to the Administration's consideration but they are subject to the law. We want to ensure that we are following the law, we are making sure that reasonable accommodation is -- we are handling that process consistent with ADA. And to the extent that a particular appointing authority or this Administration in particular will influence an existing accommodation because of this new policy, that is inconsistent with ADA. Now, what that doesn't do, that does not remove from the City's ability or any employer's ability to determine what is an effective and responsible accommodation. It may not be work from home if that's what this is -- what we're kind of leading to here. We're going to continue to do what we've been doing, which is ensuring that we are engaging our employees who come to us and ask us for a reasonable accommodation because they have a medical need to do so. If we have departments or any individual that's acting inconsistent with the ADA, we're going to ensure that that gets to our attention and that we manage it the same way we would manage any other concern that is raised inconsistent with Human Resource practice.

And on another note, can you tell us any details about the child and adult, elder care, programs that have been suggested by the Administration? Do we know where it will be, who's eligible and how many children can be cared for under the program?

At this time I can't elaborate or provide specifics. It is at the -- (Audience interruption.)

-- end stages of the contracting process. As soon as we have that completed, we will ensure that there is a full bulleted kind of short form information, and we will also have those vendors onsite to provide training on how to use the benefit.

And do you have any idea when this will be announced to employees?

I don't have a date for you when it'll be announced. (Audience interruption.)

And one other question: Where's the money coming from to pay for these benefits for elder care and child care? (Cheering.)

The money is coming from our General Fund.

They're coming from the General Fund, so the money is already allocated --

Correct.

-- for these services?

Yes.

You're good?

Yep.

Okay. Councilwoman Nina Ahmad. Then (inaudible).

Good afternoon. Thank you for being here. Just following up on Chair Harrity's question about the cost- benefit analysis of doing this move. You said that it has been working. So the reason for you wanting to change it is to improve on services or improve on customer service. It sounded to me like do you actually have evidence-based ways of knowing? (Cheering.)

So productivity in and of itself was not the driver for this decision. The driver for this decision was a leadership philosophy. The leadership philosophy is simple. We believe having our employees, having our colleagues in-person leads to better communication, leads to better mental health -- (Audience interruption.)

-- leads to more equity, inclusion, leads to more compliance, better compliance with our equal employment opportunity responsibilities. At the end of the day, we know that we're not going to have, I think, consensus in this room about whether this is a good thing or a bad thing. But at the end of the day as a leader, as an Administration, there are benefits to ensuring that my colleagues are in my presence. There are employees in the CAO's office who I have not met. And in so doing, there are opportunities that are lost, opportunities for conversations and exposure so I have a better understanding of what their experiences are, what their competencies are and where we can benefit from them.

So the reason I asked if it's evidencebased is because we used to have that system before, right. Primarily it was in person, and I know that particularly for caregivers who happen to be mostly women and single parent households -- (Cheering.)

-- the flexibility that these hybrid schedules allow you is invaluable. (Cheering.)

Sure.

If we want, particularly focusing on women, if we want them to be their full economic potential, work to their full economic potential, we have to make family-friendly workplaces -- (Cheering.)

Councilmember Ahmad --

-- that is evidence-based that that will be an economic boom for the City. (Cheering.)

Councilmember Ahmad, we do agree with you in that workplace decisions that create flexibility, that create opportunities for underrepresented communities to thrive and take advantage of opportunities is what we're shooting for. But at the end of the day, if we're defining workplace balance, if we're defining a workplace that works for women, specifically as a place where I can be home and I can do all of the things that I typically would do while at work, that that is the definition of success, I don't know that we agree on that. At some point, I think we do have to honor the fact that we want our employees to be -- we want individuals to be healthy. That includes their mental health as well. That doesn't include -- (Audience interruption.)

That does not include doing every single thing that you can do at one time. That does not include taking care of our home, our personal responsibilities as well as our professional responsibilities in the same hour. So we do want to ensure that we are creating spaces where our employees can thrive.

So I'll go back to again evidence- based. It is evidence-based to say that people work actually longer when they have hybrid schedules. (Cheering.)

They give more to their job. But I want to pivot to another point that was made when you were talking about the ADA, making those provisions. You said it was based on the Department chair or the Commissioner, right, meaning what the accommodations were needed it was going to be job-specific. Why is it that we're not allowing our Supervisors and Commissioners to decide with the worker how this would work? Why is it a blanket -- (Cheering.)

At the end of the day --

I just want to make sure I understand what the question --

Just one second. At the end of the day, we have to disaggregate our data to understand the particular situation.

Sure.

So one department versus another can have very different needs and very different needs for people's interaction. To take away that ability from the Supervisor or the Commissioner who knows their workforce, who knows the requirements seems to be not allowing leadership to flourish.

Right. (Cheering.)

So at the end of the day, I want to make sure that we're clear in that the policy does allow for supervisors and managers to exercise flexibility in a number of ways. We have workplace flexibilities outside of working from home. And so, those flexibilities remain. They are untouched by the policy. And so, to your point as a supervisor, manager, as an appointing authority, I know my staff. I know what their individual issues are. I know what our work responsibilities are and how I might be able to leverage the other work flexibilities that remain in the Civil Service Code regulations and again realize some of those flexibilities that allow for a work and home balance.

So I'll end by saying we need to recognize the world has changed.

Mm-hmm. (Cheering.)

So we need to recognize how we have operated. So I'll leave it at that. (Cheering.)

Thank you very much.

All right. We're going to have Councilman Phillips, then Councilwoman Landau, Councilwoman Lozada and end with my man Nicolas O'Rourke if he has anything.

Thank you, Chairman Harrity. Thank you, Camille, for your testimony. Last week I provided some closing comments to our recess on City Council about how throughout my entire life no 5 matter what circumstances I've been in the DNA that I have in me still pulls at how can we all get along, how can we all work together. I recalled a story, some of our Council colleagues were here, about how I was bullied for several years. And one got to the point where I was bullied in middle school and I got jumped. And those same people who jumped me, I found a way a week later to figure out how can I ask them how can we figure out how we can move forward and how can we become better together. This pains me, right. And I'll tell you why. I'm looking at hundreds of people in this room and I recognize tough decisions have to be made. And for me, my DNA always pulls to how can we build consensus, how can we find a way to do the work of the Lord together for the City of Philadelphia. So the question that I have, and I hope that the Administration and everyone that's on your team is open to this, is there still an opportunity for your team, the Mayor and Administration to build some level of consensus with D.C. 47, D.C. 33, 2187 on this particular issue?

So that door never closed, right. We stand firm on this decision this is a management right and that it is not subject to negotiation, but that in no way closed the door to having conversations about the impact of this decision on the Bargaining Unit, on our employees and how we might be able to partner on ways to mitigate that impact. That door never closed. We opened it from the beginning and it never closed. (Audience interrupted.)

Gotcha. Well, that's good to know because I know leadership and some of the folks in the public comment are going to provide some ideas of how we can make this work better for all of us and still meet the expectations of the Administration. And so, the goal here is to make Philadelphia a better place to live, work and play.

Absolutely.

And my hope is that today's hearing will be helpful so that we can work together and really come out of this, maybe not all saying that we got everything, but we found a way to come to a happy medium so that all of us can be productive for what we're here to do, to serve people in the City. So thank you so much. (Cheering.)

Councilwoman Landau.

Thank you. Thank you so much for being here and answering our questions. I want to first thank you for in your testimony explaining more the numbers of the folks who are really working from home. I believe the Mayor in her public statements have said something like 85 percent of the people are already back to work, and that number never really made sense to me. And your testimony helped a little bit. Majority Leader Gilmore Richardson already added up that there's 2,810 members of D.C. 33 and D.C. 47 we believe who are working from home, but it also didn't add in the 46 percent of exempt. So there are more people who are working from home and it wasn't 85 percent are already back and this is just going to affect a small group of people.

I'm sorry. I know that wasn't a question, but at the end of the day that is an accurate percentage. The 80 percent that the Mayor cited in her press release is accurate.

Because it includes Police, Fire, a whole bunch of people who were never working -- not working, whoever --

It is representative of -- so her statement was that 80 percent of the City of Philadelphia's workforce is working in person and that is accurate.

I understand it's accurate. I also understand that for those of us who were trying to dig down and find the real numbers, it's now clearer for me as to where these numbers --

I just want to push back that that is a real number.

Sure. And it includes people who were never working from home?

Yes. It includes the entire workforce, which is how you would need to consider for a percentage of our workforce.

So I want to talk about the City currently has approximately a 16 percent vacancy rate of positions 17 that we're trying to fill. I had 18 the honor of overseeing two 19 agencies where I got to work with 20 many 2187 members, some 2186, a few D.C. 33, just a smattering of exempt. Great experience for me, wonderful, super flexible. I also, like our Majority Leader, at that time, different times, had a little kid, had a dad who had a deteriorating condition, was juggling everything and couldn't see it at the time because this was all pre-pandemic but sure would have loved to have the flexibility of a work-from-home schedule where I actually could have been able to do my job and also handle my life's pressures at the time. If the City already has approximately percent vacancy 14 rate and we've already heard of 15 many people who are talking about 16 leaving their jobs if they have to 17 come back five days a week, 18 including the exempt employees, not 19 just the folks who are in this 20 room, how is the City going to handle filling those vacancies in a very quick manner? (Cheering.)

Thank you, Councilmember Landau. Mike Zaccagni, HR Director, worked with you a number of times over the years. Yes, we're already seeing -- and I think I testified to this a little bit at our Council hearing seeing us turn a corner. Last year we hired I believe close to 3,000 employees, which was about a 30 percent increase over FY19, which was the last full fiscal year before the pandemic where we hired I think about 2,000. And we are on track to do the same thing this year. So we're doing a lot of work -- (Audience interruption.)

We're doing a lot of work around recruitment. We're doing a lot of work of trying to change our profile to everyone out there and really draw people here because we have a lot to offer. Even if we disagree on remote work, hybrid work, we do agree that we need a work-life balance. And when I hear Councilmember Ahmad, working longer hours, that's not what we want our workforce to do. We want our workforce to have a balanced life. We want our workforce to have an integrated life so that's a big focus of us. And one of the things -- (Audience interruption.)

And one of the things that we're looking to do is hopefully continue to turn that corner. Out of about the -- and again, I think we're down to, and it's not something to be proud of, I think we're down to about 5600, 5700 vacancies which is still way too many. I think in FY19 we were about 2000, 2500 vacancies. That's where we want to get to. Out of the first top 10 positions of information that we get from departments from our workforce planning process, there's about positions that account for half of that, and you can probably guess what those positions are. And we can certainly share that with you. And again, that's coming from our meetings with departments. So we're really focusing on trying to turn that corner and continue to generate eligible lists from candidates that we're attracting to the City, so we're putting a lot of effort and have been over, I guess, about the last year or so into doing more around that, including as Camille mentioned changing some of the benefits that we're offering, especially around things like family sick leave. This still has to be discussed with the Union because we're not going to make any changes and benefits without making sure that goes through the process that it has to go through, but we are looking at making changes because we do -- and it's not a secret here that as a developed nation, we lag far behind just about every other developed nation, not city, nation for supporting family-friendly work policies. And there's a big change we have to make. And it's not just here. It's across the nation. So we're trying to do our little piece here in making our benefits more sound, making our benefits more focused. So as we try to create better flexibility with our leave policies, that's one of the things that we're also trying to do in order to attract additional candidates to the City.

Can I ask one quick follow-up question. The Mayor has talked about renovating new space so that people can come back to the office. Is there enough space for current employees? (Audience interruption.)

Yes. I'm going to ask --

And how can that be if we have a vacancy rate?

Okay. I'm going to ask Joe Brasky, our Interim Deputy of Public Property to come up. (Witness approached Witness table.)

Thank you, Councilmember. Yes, we're working closely with the MDO's office -- NCO, CAO's office. We're coordinating to make sure everybody has a place to return when they come back. Yeah, we're still gathering information but we are in good shape. (Audience interruption.)

I don't understand if we have a 20 percent vacancy rate how is there not enough space if people come --

We didn't say there's not enough space. There is space. A lot of space became storage areas during the pandemic and we are in the process of clearing that stuff out. So we do have space and we're evaluating and we're confident everyone will have space July 15th.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much, Councilmember Landau. The Chair now will recognize Councilmember Lozada. Very quickly I just wanted to put on the record a quick point of information, if you will, for the numbers that were stated. We're seeing that there's a 26,000 employee workforce based on the numbers in the paperwork. 80 percent of 26,000 is 20,800 people that are working in person. So the percent would be the 5,200 that work hybrid. Based on the testimony that we received, 2,810 are members of D.C. 47 and 33. So my question is, and then I'll go right to Councilmember Lozada, is it 2,390 exempt employees that are also working remotely or hybrid?

No, 11 there's not 2,000 employees who are 12 working hybrid. But you also need 13 to take into account that it's a 14 26,000-plus as a denominator, and 15 that you don't have a full 16 accounting here because the 17 non-represented employees is not 18 reflected in this number. 19

No, right. But meaning the numbers just don't make sense. If you're saying -- (Cheering.)

And I'm really just -and I told our Chairman that I did have a point of information. I did not want to interrupt Councilmember Landau's line of questioning. But if you just quickly did the numbers based off the percentages that you all are speaking about, the numbers do not make sense. And if it's 26,000-plus, then that means each of these numbers would be more. And so, I would make the request that if you could provide to the Chairman --

Absolutely.

-- an exact breakdown --

Absolutely.

-- of the exact vacancy rate, what departments the vacancy exists. I know this is in the detail, but we need this current information. How many individuals work in person, how many work hybrid, how many are members of D.C. 47, how many are members of D.C. 33 and how many exempt employees are working from home so that we're not using percentages and we're looking at numbers. (Cheering.)

So to be clear and to put it on the record, I just want to identify that you do not have all of the numbers of all staff here. And so, to do quick math here it wouldn't make sense to do quick math based on what's here.

And out of respect for the Chairman, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to pass it back to you because you have returned to the hearing. But I would just like to request the questions that I ask, the answers to those questions so that we have clarity. I'm not even, you know, arg -- I'm just going off of the numbers that were provided in the testimony and --

And that's what I'm responding to, yes.

Right. If you could --

And so, we can absolutely provide you those numbers, every breakdown of bargaining unit, exempt, non-represented, what number of employees is working, in-person schedule, onsite and what number of employees, the raw numbers, what number of employees are working a hybrid or fully remote schedule.

Right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And Mr. Chair, we were at Councilmember Lozada.

Councilwoman Lozada.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Majority Leader Gilmore Richardson. That was pretty much my question, right. I would like to see the breakdown --

Sure.

-- of what are these positions, who are these people that we're looking to return, who are the people that are actually still at home. I'd also like to follow up on the line of questioning around flexibility, right. One size shoe doesn't fit all. And so, I know you all mentioned that you would leave that up to the leadership of the department. But what are we putting in place or what procedures are we putting in place so that we're protecting the worker so that they don't become a target because their leadership doesn't appreciate the fact that they can't come to work the way that other people come to work? (Cheering.)

So what I want to make very clear is that the decision of where a person works, that decision has been made, right. There were no changes made to the work flexibilities that are existing for the City of Philadelphia's workforce. Whether it is alternate work schedules, core hours, flexible start and stop times, all of those things remain. And to your point of how do we ensure that our supervisors, our managers are able to work with -- bless you -- able to work with our individualized concerns of our workforce, that remains. We still want our supervisors and managers to work based on an individual need for their employees.

I get that. But I think you mentioned to one of my colleagues that or one of my colleagues mentioned the times have changed. What we learned from COVID is that life changed for people --

Sure.

-- and so, some of the policies that we have in place still don't meet the needs of some folks, especially when you're asking them to come back within a 30-to-60-day period, right. And so, for a single mom, 30 days, 60 days is not enough to make a life change like that for themselves and their children. And they may become -- although all of those policies are put in place, they may become the target of a senior person in this department that now targets them because they can't seem to adjust quick enough or as fast as we are asking them to respond. (Cheering.)

That's all I'm saying, that let us think about those things proactively so that we're not then putting people in compromised situations where we are now risking losing potentially a good employee, right, because we can't seem to adjust or we've not been flexible enough for them. That's one. And my second question is around facilities. We know as the Chair of Public Property, I know that there are some spaces in City government that are not appropriate for us to bring employees to work in because they are in poor condition. So if we're talking about bringing back such a large workforce, are we prepared within those 30-to-60 days to be able to prepare those spaces to appropriately welcome employees back?

We are not bringing back our employees into spaces that are unsuitable for their work. (Applause interruption.)

I've visited a lot of our spaces, right. And a lot of them even where we do have people that are working in right now, they are not appropriate space for us to be in. I just want us to be -- (Cheering.)

Let's have honest, transparent conversation and let us accept that some of our spaces need to be updated and they need to be appropriate so that we can bring people back to work in safe spaces, right, in clean spaces, in spaces where we are not going to impact their mental health. Because if we're saying that we're looking at their mental health, based on testimony --

Yes.

-- we want our people's mental health to be on point, then we need to make sure that those spaces are spaces where they are going to be productive, where they're going to be able to provide services to our residents when they call or for them to be able to be good colleagues to one another. If I'm in a space that's a mess, then I'm not going to want to work. I'm not going to be productive. I'm going to be angry all the time. And so, let us make sure that we're looking at that as well. And if we're not ready to bring back such a large group of people all at the same time, then let's bring them back in phases where we're correcting the spaces or making the spaces appropriate as we bring people back. That's all I'm saying. I'm asking that we recommend that we look at it.

Got it.

Thank you. (Cheering.)

Councilman O'Rourke.

Just one. The refrain still sticks with me that work has changed. And one of the things that I have been saddened by is our inability across the country, certainly here as well, to adjust to a global shift in how we live and work and all of that. That having been said, part of this conversation has come with a number of folks expressing a readiness to go ahead and pick up and go elsewhere and work elsewhere. This is a common refrain across the country, certainly here as well. What are the City's estimates for how many additional vacancies that this particular policy will actually create beyond what already exists? What is the plan towards that and do you have any estimates about that?

Right. So we don't have hard numbers of folks who have said, we don't know, we are -- (Audience interruption.)

-- not staying, right. We have anecdotal information that suggests that there are folks who will make a decision that this is not conducive to their ability to work for the City of Philadelphia. We are going to continue to do what we have been doing. We are forecasting that. We are putting considerable funds and resources behind recruitment, around retention, around benefits improvement, around where we're sourcing information, around how we are determining what our compensation package looks like. So to the extent that -- we have no data to that because it has not happened yet, but to the extent that we can make decisions to improve our look as an employer, we're going to continue to do that so that we can recruit and we can retain. And one thing I will say is that we agree work has changed. The amount of service that we have to provide to our residents, the touchpoints that we have to make, the impact that we have every single day -- I'm preaching to the choir, I know this -- on our residents, that has changed. And we have to be nimble. We have to be resilient. We have to be able to provide those services in a culturally competent way.

Heard and thank you. I will just simply say that it was interesting to hear or striking at least for me to hear you say that the decision was driven not by productivity numbers but simply a leadership philosophy.

Sure.

And while I'm a deep respecter of leadership and that's a craft that has to be honed and all of those things, sometimes you can have leadership crafted in a world that no longer exists. (Cheering.)

Possible.

And there should be no love lost or any shame in choosing differently when it becomes clear that this is not the most effective or prudent approach to go with. So I just want to suggest that. Thank you so much. (Cheering.)

Understood.

All right. Thank you, everyone. My colleague Councilwoman Brooks has one more question and then we're going to move to the next panel.

Sure.

Thank you so much. I'm going to put them all together as one. So there's research that exists that says a full office work schedule has a negative impact on health. And how does the Administration reconcile its stated mental health improvement goals with the state of this academic research on this subject? (Cheering.)

And Part 2 of that is how does this apply to folks who were hired to work from home for the City?

Sure. Do you want to take the second part first?

Yeah.

Okay. Sure. You can take the second part first. (Audience interruption.)

All right. Let's calm it down. Let them respond.

All right. Still working -- (microphone). You would think I know how to handle these by now after as many times I've been here. So for the people who were hired during the pandemic, we looked at our postings, especially for civil service and also for exempt employees. So we posted and we promoted work-life balance. We did not specifically state that there would be hybrid work or remote work. And the same thing from the standpoint of our exempt employees, even though I think mentioned hybrid, we said it was at the discretion of the appointing authority as to whether that would be something that would be available. So what we communicated from the standpoint of those postings was that this is what's happening now. This is something that's flexible. This is something that can change.

So just to be clear, people who were hired to work from home, they're also being mandated to come back?

So we didn't hire anyone -- what I'm saying is that --

They took the job under the guise that they were able to work from home or work remotely and those people are being mandated to come into the office now after they took a job where they expected to work remotely?

So that is correct. That is correct. Again, it's a work location change. And while nothing in a solicitation for a job is a contractual stipulation, we understand that there are folks who made a decision to accept positions with the understanding that there was a hybrid or work- from-home opportunity, that location decision has changed simply as the location of your office could have changed, right. So I do understand that. We absolutely understand that. But to answer your question directly, yes, there are people who the understanding was that the position they were hired for would allow them to work in hybrid schedule and that is not the case. And so, I also wanted to kind of speak to you introduced the fact that there is data that suggests that it is inconsistent with, I guess, mental health to not have some sort of a hybrid schedule. I would offer that there's also data, a Surgeon General report -- (Audience interruption.)

-- that suggests the opposite, that there are definitely negatives to kind of prolonged isolation related to virtual -- (Audience interruption.)

All right. Let's calm down now. We're going to get through this. We're about to move on to the next panel. You will have your voice heard. Just let the people finish. We are taking notes so we get the information.

We are happy to provide that Surgeon General report, and we understand that we're not going to agree that there is a catch-all to a panacea for this situation. At the end of the day, there are negatives associated with hybrid and virtual work situations.

I'm following there are two sides of every coin. I do remember hybrid work being a very flexible opportunity for me as a parent and grandparent.

Sure.

And I'm really disturbed that we hired people under the guise that they could work from home and they're mandated to come back. That's very -- (Cheering.)

That's very disingenuous. It's very disingenuous because people could have left a job that was a much better opportunity to provide for their family to come here to work for the City. They could have left money on the table to have a different work experience. And for us to turn that around and it's not bargainable or negotiable is definitely problematic and disingenuous and it doesn't create a good workforce for us or a good look. (Cheering.)

All right. I just want to thank you for your testimony. Are there any other questions or comments from my colleagues?

Mr. Chair.

Yes.

I apologize. I just have one last question.

Go ahead.

Of all the individuals who are being mandated to return to work, could you also provide us with the number of how many of them are eligible for retirement?

Sure.

Thank you.

Yes, will do.

And if you'll please submit those numbers to us in writing -- (Cheering.)

I said if you would please submit those numbers to us in writing so that we have them.

Sure.

Thank you for your testimony. We're going to go to the next panel so we can keep this moving. This is your part of the meeting now. You'll get to voice your opinion. So let's let everybody speak. Mr. Palmer, will you please call the next panel to testify.

David Wilson, Gennifer Reed. (Cheering.)

And we have a lot of people to testify, so let's try to keep our comments brief as possible. I know it's a lot of information, but please try to keep it as brief as possible. We have over some-odd people to 16 get through. So thank you. 17

In addition, 18 April Gigetts, Bobby Davis, Gary 19 Hawkins and Greg Boulware. 20 (Witnesses approached Witness table.)

Good afternoon, Councilmembers, invited guests, my City of Philadelphia colleagues and proud Union siblings. My name is David Wilson. I'm the President of Local 2187. (Cheering.)

We represent the hard-working social workers, librarians, accountants, scientists, engineers, inspectors, planners, nurses, doctors, pharmacists, executive assistants and many, many more. Local 2187 represents the technical, administrative and professional employees in this great city. The large group of these folks for many years have been discussing and bargaining alternative work schedules. In fact, the first language on alternative work schedules was added to our contract in 1982. It then reappears in 1992 and many of our agreements thereafter. See, we are here because this topic is a negotiated and bargained topic. It's not something that can be unilaterally removed. For years we have established flexible work schedules, allowing folks to start and end in a flexible manner; four- day work weeks, remote work, core flex scheduling, hybrid work schedules and more. In 2020, the City exchanged a hybrid remote work policy to the Union and began discussions around that policy and the implementation and enforcement of it. In 2021, the City and D.C. 47 came to an agreement on hybrid remote work scheduling that was concretely implemented to our contract, with the understanding that this policy will be continued to be bargained and alternative work schedules will continued to be explored further. (Applause.)

In 2022 I, the President of Local 2187, engaged in a written and verbal dialogue with the Mayor's Office of Labor Relations in the expansion and further exploration of alternative work schedules. For the next year and a couple months the Union met with the Mayor's Office of Labor as well as Department representatives from a variety of departments and engaged in a fruitful dialogue around the expansion of alternative work schedules as well as the changes to the current hybrid work policy. We agreed upon a new list of jobs in the Health Department, the library and many more where folks could work in a hybrid fashion as well as bargained alternative work schedules out of the Department of Labor, all of which landed on the desk of the then Deputy Mayor of Labor. It was there where those policies and expanded department pilots laid dormant. After a short dialogue, I learned that Mayor Parker's folks had asked the Kenney Administration not to approve any of these alternative work schedules until they were in place. Now, I am here to explain to you all that this isn't just about retention and recruitment when the City has nearly percent 10 job vacancies. This isn't just 11 about every other major city on the 12 East Coast, let alone the country, 13 living in 2024 and providing 14 alternative work scheduling for 15 jobs that can do it. 16 This is about the process. 17 This is about following the 18 contract and abiding by the laws 19 that govern them. 20 (Cheering.)

This is about bargaining. We are all here because the evidence is overwhelming that alternative work schedules is a mandatory subject of bargaining. These dramatic changes to workers' schedules need to be negotiated. We have been negotiating alternative work schedule provisions for decades. Alternative work schedules are good for working families and good for Philadelphia communities. Turning back the clock does not make the City government responsive to the needs of the communities City workers serve. Listen to the workers that know how the community needs are and negotiate a fair and effective response work schedule to provide those services. It's 2024 and I'd like to see our government function like it is. (Applause.)

Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, distinguished Councilmembers and my Union siblings. My name is Gennifer Reed. It's Gennifer with a G, Reed, R-e-e-d, and I am the President of 2186. (Cheering.)

We're here today to talk about a new normal, 21st century workplace for 21st century services. Our Union has been pushing innovation and effective and efficient services in the City for decades. Since alternative work schedules and remote work have been implemented, there have been no reduction in services provided or productivity and no performance issues have been raised. There are now worker surveys and scientific studies to prove that hybrid work promotes retention of staff, while productivity remains at the same level, if not higher. (Cheering.)

One study was published just this week in Nature, the Scientific Research Journal Giant. We can back up our claims but the City has provided no data to counter ours. (Cheering.)

In the Department of Human Services where I came from years as a social 11 worker and social work supervisor, 12 there are many metrics that workers 13 are held to by the state when it 14 comes to child abuse. When the 15 case of suspected child abuse comes 16 through our intake staff, we must 17 submit a decision on a report 18 within 60 days. We are famously 19 known for hitting this benchmark 20 99.8 percent of the time. 21 (Cheering.) 22

This record 23 number did not move during workers 24 having hybrid work schedules. 25 There are mandates set by the state that we must meet for the safety and well-being of our children. Is 99.8 percent success rate not good enough? If it's not broke, why you going to fix it. Our wonderful library coordinators hit record numbers of materials purchased in 2023 and 2024 by having the hybrid work schedule. They purchased twice the amount of materials purchased in 2018 and 2019 well before the pandemic. Departments are hitting and exceeding performance goals even in the midst of a 20-plus percent vacancy rate citywide. Remote work allows workers to use less leave time, resulting in less -- (Cheering.)

-- resulting in less burden on coworkers. Return to office is not accurate. Most City workers who are working remotely are on a hybrid schedule and coming to the office three days a week. A hybrid schedule allows for collaboration. A hybrid schedule allows for innovation as well -- (Cheering.)

-- as uninterrupted periods of work that increase productivity. This whole issue is about a difference of three days a week to five days a week. We already have time to collaborate and innovate with our coworkers. Allow for remote work a few days a week allows for work to be completed without the usual distractions that happen at the office. The work has not stopped. The work has not stopped. Work relationships have not stopped being formed. We have not stopped increasing efficiency. We are more productive. Again, the work never stopped. People want to work for a City employer that has their best interest at heart. People want a work-home balance that allows them not only to have job security but job sustainability. Again, the work did not stop. (Cheering.)

Thank you for your testimony. I just ask that you wait around a little while. We're going to do the panels to get through and then we'll come back for questions. So in case my colleagues have any questions for you, please try to hang out if you can. Thank you. Mr. Palmer, can you please call the next panel -- (Cheering.)

-- to testify.

April Gigetts and Bobby Davis. (Cheering.)

Good afternoon, Councilman Harrity, members of City Council, my AFSCME family and others who are in attendance of this meeting. My name is Bobby Davis, Senior Advisor to District Council 33. My story is short and to the point. Historically, when labor and management work together, the results are usually cost-effective and productive. We now find ourselves at a crossroad and it's important that we get it right. It does not hurt for us to meet and discuss hybrid work schedules in partnership, labor management. When the Mayor says it's her decision or the City's decision, then I want to bring your attention to Civil Service Regulation 2401, The director, incorporation with other City officers shall be responsible for the development and operation of programs to include the work effectiveness and morale of employees of the City, including safety, health, welfare, recreation and more importantly labor relationships. (Applause.)

And while this passage talks about grievances and hearings, we think that if we work together, we can get this right. The best way to accomplish this relationship is to work together under labor management partnership, declares that it's a public policy -- I'm sorry. If that's not enough, I bring your attention to Act 195, Article I, Subsection 101, The General Assembly of the Commonwealth -- this is the State talking -- declares that it's the public policy of this Commonwealth and the purpose of this Act to promote orderly and constructive relationships between all public employers, all public employers, and their employees subject to however the paramount rights of the citizens of this Commonwealth to keep and validate the guarantees for the health, safety and welfare. Unresolved disputes between the public employer and its employees are ingenuous to the public and the General Assembly and, therefore, aware that adequate means must be established for minimizing them and providing their resolution. That's why we're here today. Within the limitations imposed upon the government, processes by these rights of the public-at-large and recognizing their harmonious relationship are required between the public employer and its employees. Once again that's why we're here today. (Cheering.)

These relationships -- these regulations provide the perfect starting point and the reason why we should delay bringing everyone back to work without further discussions. The State required it in Act 195. The City requires it in the Civil Service Regulation 2401, and it has taken us four years to get to this point. Delaying re-entry and working together to get it right would only benefit us all. I want to go off script for a minute because I heard a couple of things. The first thing is when I hear that there's money -- before you bring people back to work, you should look at that MSB Building and consider how do you want all them people to come back to work as nasty as that building is. (Cheering.)

No one, no one should have to come to work with birds flying all around them. (Cheering.)

I want to really say the other word, but I'll just tell you it begins with an S and ends with a T, dropping all over you during the course of a day. I remember one time when a rodent ran across a lady and got caught up in her Muslim gear. Do you know how frightening that could be? So if you got money, spend it now before we come back to work and clean up this place. (Cheering.)

The other thing, I've been fighting with a department, I'm not ousting them because I don't think that's the way we should start, but I do know this, that they were spending or saving countless dollars on our young females of color because they couldn't get to work on time because of the fact that they had kids and they needed to do some things. Now, this picture has been here before for me when promises are made. People make promises and they tell you they're going to do all kind of things. But yet when you heard that panel sit here, none of the things they said they was going to do is in place yet and you're already telling us to come back to work. They're not in place. You could do the walkthrough yourself because I have so I know we're not ready. And then for someone to say that you don't come to labor to negotiate, and I already gave you two passes, you heard some of my colleagues already tell you some of the stats and things of that nature, but this is déjà vu for me when promises are made and not kept. Because when the last time y'all asked us all to come back to work in one mass drove, the promise was that you would have certain things for us. You would have masks. You would have sanitizer. And they came back to work and none of that stuff wasn't provided. Most of the leadership from AFSCME -- (Cheering.)

-- went in their pocket to make sure that our members were safe and had the things that they needed. That's what we did out of our own pocket because we knew we had to do something. Councilman Driscoll called for a Joint Task Force on Regulatory Reform. Labor was a big part of the success of that committee. I think we should commit to a joint task force on hybrid work schedules. This would be the best way into looking into creating a pilot program about hybrid schedules that would be benefit to the City, the employees, the taxpayers and Philadelphia while providing the best service leadership for other cities to follow. Once again, thank you for your time and your consideration. (Applause.)

Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Councilmembers and to all that's here today. My name is Gary Hawkins. I am an AFSCME District Council 33 member. I am President of Local 1971, and I am before you today to humbly request for the City Council and for Mayor Cherelle Parker to consider allowing District Council 33 members and Local 1971 Union members the ability to maintain a hybrid working schedule. Over the last four years, Local 1971 Union members, which consist of PHDC employees, have been able to maintain a high level in quality of work while working in a hybrid-working environment. Over the last four years Local 1971 members as PHDC employees have assisted over 5,000 households with heater repairs in the City of Philadelphia. We have provided an aggregate of almost 6,500 free repairs to electrical, plumbing, structural and roofing problems for owner-occupied constituents in the City of Philadelphia touching all Councilmanic districts. Over the last four years, Local 1971 members as PHDC employees have monitored the development of more than 20 affordable housing projects, adding 21 over 2100 affordable rental units 22 for aging and low-income 23 constituents in this great city of 24 Philadelphia. 25 Through the Restore Repair Renew program, Local 1971 members have processed and issued over $8 million in low-income low-interest loans to the citizens of Philadelphia. Some of these loans would not have been available to Philadelphia constituents if it were not for the Restore Repair Renew program. Larger financial institutions would not have improved most of these low-interest loans. PHDC has also partnered with DPD's Division of Housing and Community Development to help over 3,900 philadelphians become homeowners by providing first-time homebuyers with up to $10,000 in grant money to help reduce mortgage principals and/or cover down payment and loan closing costs. Over the last three years, PHDC employees have helped in the rebuild efforts at Belfield, Cobbs Creek, Martin Luther King recreation centers as well as others at 8th and Diamond, East Poplar, Moss Playgrounds as well as others and at the Nicetown, West Oak Lane and Wynnefield libraries as well as others totaling in a cost of $15 million. The list goes on and on when you consider the production rate of City employees and of PHDC employees while working a hybrid work schedule. The increased yearly level of productivity during and after the COVID-19 pandemic cannot be matched by the previous years as evidenced in part by the new responsibilities taken on by the agency due in part to the pandemic. Over the last four years and during this hybrid work environment, PHDC has helped over 46,000 renters receive over 290 million in rental assistance. (Cheering.)

PHDC members also helped 3,240 households to avoid eviction through the Eviction Diversion Program. PHDC union members also helped almost 80 people settle or sign agreements on Turn Key properties. 200 Turn Key homes are under construction. 700 homes have been approved for development. PHDC employees and City employees have been able to accomplish much during the hybrid work schedule because we love the work we do for the City of Philadelphia. We love the work that we do for its constituents. We love the work that we do for City Council which come up with these great ideas that lead us. And we also love the work we do for the Mayor who approves the funding that allows the City and its agencies to do what we need to do. We understand the work that we do is in invaluable. PHDC has done a lot of work for the City over the last 60 years. We have done a great amount of work over the last four years while working a hybrid schedule. Our only request is that we are allowed to continue working in some semblance of a hybrid schedule. We make this request for the sake of our mental health. (Applause.)

We want to support the restaurants and businesses in Downtown Philadelphia. But on some days we want to not have to worry about whether or not our commute to work will be safe. On some days we want to know -- on some days we want to not have to worry whether or not we can afford to pay for breakfast or lunch outside of our home since the rising cost of food is causing elevated prices at the stores and restaurants we like to patronize in Center City, Philadelphia. On some days we would like to not have to worry about whether or not we will contact COVID-19 while working in a fully-staffed office or riding on a crowded bus or train as we commute to work because of the five-day in-office work mandate. COVID-19 is still active. (Applause.)

Local 1971 understands that we are at your mercy. Even so, we ask again that you consider allowing the hybrid work environment to continue, to be maintained in some semblance at least. Local 1971 considers this to be a reasonable request. City employees consider this request to be a reasonable request. We thank you for your time and consideration regarding this matter and look forward to a reasonable response. (Cheering.)

Thank you for your testimony. Mr. Palmer --

I'm sorry. I'm sorry. In conclusion, One Philly, a united city, AFSCME District Council 33, Local 1971 in solidarity. (Applause.)

Thank you for that. Thank you for your testimony. Mr. Palmer, can you call the next panel to testify.

April Gigetts and Greg Boulware. (Applause.) (Witnesses approached Witness table.)

Thank you. Please state your name and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Councilman Harrity and esteemed colleagues of City Council. Brothers and sisters from District Council 33 and 47 -- (Applause.)

My name is Greg Boulware. I'm the newly- elected President of District Council 33. (Applause.)

My brother Gary Hawkins just laid out a lot of statistics for you and some suggestions that we think should be followed and continued along and going on with the hybrid work schedule. There are many number of compelling reasons as why to continue the performance of the City remote work benefits employees and the City of Philadelphia, by enhancing their ability to serve the citizens in the City of Philadelphia. I do not need to repeat the excellent explanation that Brother Hawkins has provided. I respectfully ask that Council follow those suggestions and make a great deal of sense in the matter of policy and fairness to the workers our Union represents. District Council 33 approaches this issue with a view towards reaching an agreement through full discussion of all competing considerations between labor and management of the City. Both Mayor Parker and I are newly elected to our position. I view our relationship as a partnership that should benefit the City the Mayor represents and the employees that my Union represents. I'm eager to work in partnership with the Mayor to develop ways to improve the relationship and strive to make things better for the workers and the public they serve. The Mayor and I share a common goal in a very real sense and I respect the work the Mayor has done throughout her political career that demonstrates her commitment to workers' rights. I regard as both my obligation to work with the Mayor and fulfill the common interest we share bettering the lives of both the City workers and the members of the public, and I intend to carry out that task to the fullest extent I can. With that in mind, I know we can reach an agreement on important issues that the Mayor has raised regarding this particular proposal. Like all issues involving our members, worker conditions, remote work is one subject to collective bargaining. Gone are the days of worker conditions of employment where dedicated unilaterally by management without employees having to say in the matter. Our state law establishes -- (Applause.)

Our state law establishes that altering work conditions of the City workforce cannot be done unilaterally but as a matter for agreement by means of good faith collective bargaining between the Union and the City. There are many examples of this. One recent being the former Mayor Nutter's attempt to change the DROP program in 2011. Our Union challenged that action in the unfair labor practice proceeding brought forth before the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, and the Board upheld the position that even though the DROP was originally created by the means of a City ordinance, not through collective bargaining negotiations with the City unions, that the benefit of significant value to the workers could not be changed absent the City negotiating reaching an agreement with the Union over that issue. That is, because the Board ruled issues related that working conditions are exclusively matters for resolutions through means of legislation has been chosen to collective bargaining and the Union. The Board quoted, "Rulings of our State Supreme Court Pennsylvania Labor Board expressly and broadly requires the parties must bargain over legally mandatory subjects of bargaining before a party may unilaterally change benefits. The fundamental mandate of this labor law is applicable regardless of whether the collective bargaining agreement expressly mentions such benefits, whether they have been incorporated into the agreement by reference or whether the agreement is silent on that mandatory subject of bargaining." I'm going to go off script just a little bit. You all have mentioned a lot of things as far as single parents. You have mentioned ADA accommodations. You have mentioned mental health. These are all things that are enhanced by the ability to do remote work. Clearly all of our people cannot do that. However, some of our body does and can and they should be able to. This allows them to -- some of the things that we would bring up during the course of collective bargaining would be child care services, would be some of the remote schedules that non-representative or exempt employees would have that we would ask to have allowances for our members to be able to have. And so, you're actually encompassing all these things in here by allowing for this remote schedule to allow to happen. We believe that if you make this mandate and push it through the way it is, you're going to lose a lot of valuable, institutional knowledge as the days move forward. We have good people here that do good work, they do excellent work. They're more productive in the workplace when they're allowed to work these productive schedules that they are. And we're asking for sensible conversation and negotiation with our ability to meet and discuss, as we have any changes to any practice that comes before us. This practice has been established now for the better part of four years. And with anything that we ask for, we ask to meet and discuss with the Union. We're asking for that. (Applause.)

We understand the City's role in the situation, but we believe we have a role as well. And we need to advocate as best we can when it concerns the interest of our membership, that we go out and put forward a good front. We talked about moving into a new era of work in this country, in this world, and this is one of those things. It was an invention of necessity. And so, we're asking why would we go backwards in that capacity. We're asking to continue to go forward and keep a partnership that's strong and healthy between District Council 33, District Council 47 and the City's Administration. So we are asking for you to consider this, take survey and inventory of information that's necessary to make this decision, to find out what the production and productivity levels have been over the core of this time. My perspective is that productivity has gone up. There's also conversation about the amount of people that work for District Council 33 and 47 about where their personal leave time is at because we know, we believe that those numbers are up as well by allowing for these hybrid schedules. We are asking for sensible conversation and facts to go along with this to go in place before we move forward with any practice that will eliminate this hybrid schedule. Thank you so much for your opportunity to speak in front of you all. D.C. 33. (Cheering.)

Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and begin with your testimony, April.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Good afternoon, Chairman Harrity and the Committee and all my siblings. (Applause.)

My name is April Gigetts and I'm President of District Council 47. I just want to talk a little bit about 21st century services with a 21st century workforce. What does that look like and what does that mean? You've already heard how District Council 47 has always pushed an alternative work schedule. We've always been having conversations about expanding the way the City does business. Some of our departments have already even pre-COVID did some kind of alternative work schedule or a hybrid mobile work pre-COVID. But COVID when it hit, it opened up all kinds of possibility. Remote work is now the normal. (Applause.)

We are now able to work in a new way that we could not imagine. It is the new normal. This new normal expands how we think about work and how we think about services we provide to the City. We expand, not regress. New, innovative, not old and restrictive. This is not a 9-to-5 world, and the services we provide are not 9-to-5 services. (Applause.)

We have to bring this new model into the conversation. When Mayor Parker announced this unilateral action, she had companies sign off in support of it. There was real estate companies, Center City real estate companies and Center City restaurant associations, all kind of not really supportive of what we do in our communities. It's not just about Center City. It's about the businesses and the restaurants and our communities that we support working remotely, and that's important. There were also all kinds of companies and contractors, and I want to call out Comcast as an example. Let's look at Comcast. They supported these workers to come five days a week. But if you look on their apply for a job, they offer remote work to their workers and to their employees. I want that to hang out there a little bit. If we really looked at that list of people and companies, I would bet half of them offer some kind of hybrid work for their employees. And why is that? Because they want to be competitive. You have to be competitive when it comes to retention and recruitment. (Applause.)

Right now we have a 20 percent vacancy, and we have to have a conversation, a real conversation, about how we retain the best and the brightest and how we recruit the best and the brightest. And remote work is the new normal. This is what we offer. When Mayor Parker announced this, Montgomery County posted Come work for us. (Cheering.)

They were offering working remote with more pay and you don't have to live in the City. (Cheering.)

We are not just being competitive with the private sector that pays more. We're competitive with the public sector as well, Montgomery County as an example. When you really take a look at it, municipalities across the nation are bargaining with unions codifying contracts of remote work in their contract. We're talking about Austin, San Diego, New York, Boston, all are negotiating with unions for remote work. We are competing with not just the private sector, but the public sector. And we have to be forward-thinkers. We have to be the trendsetters. We have to be the leaders of the 21st century services and the 21st century workplace. Thank you. Thank you for your time. (Cheering.)

Sorry about that. Thank you for your testimony. We're going to move into questions now. My colleague, our Majority Leader, my Leader Katherine Gilmore Richardson.

Thank you. Thank you so much, Chairman Harrity. And again, thank you for this hearing and for your work on this. Thank you both to President Boulware, congratulations, and also President Gigetts. I wanted to thank all of you for your work and say thank you for all the advocacy that I know is happening behind the scenes. I was able to get a majority of my questions on the record and also will submit additional questions when I have them for written submission. But I wanted to ask both of you based on what to be true, because I'm back to this numbers question, right, what is your understanding of how many individuals in your Unions will be impacted by this policy? That's number one. And then number two, how many individuals have already had an alternate work schedule? I'm not going to say work from home, hybrid. But I'm just going to say an alternate work schedule prior to this time.

So pre-COVID we had in the contract flextime or core less flextime four-day workweek. And historically, we worked with the department heads. They determine their operational needs. And so, pre-COVID it was all over the place with the departments depending on what they needed. We had people that were doing out in the field. We had people doing remote work. We had people working like our suicide counselors, they would work from home. So we had all of these variations pre-COVID. Post-COVID, it just opened up the world. I mean, being able to do remote work, to work on Teams really kind of set us on a new track and through the nation every industry. I want to say -- I'm going to look back at Dave and say, what you think, Dave, about 60 percent?

Yeah. I would say probably about 1,800 2187 members have been working in a hybrid capacity (inaudible) --

Unh-uh. (Witness approached Witness table.)

Yeah.

Yes. I'd probably say bout 1800 members of 2187 have been working in a hybrid capacity and about 2,000, a little over 2,000 of our members have worked in an alternative work schedule capacity.

And I think, Gennifer, I think your number is similar, right?

(Nodded affirmatively).

So I mean, we have a very high rate of people that are able now -- not all of our members, but some people are working flex schedules, but a lot of our members too are working these hybrid schedules. And it varies. In 2023 David worked with Department heads in -- he just made his testimony, we really historically worked with the Department heads. They had the ability to make decisions based on our operational need. And so, we might have right now people working three days a week in the office. You might have people working two days a week in the office. I think we have a very small percentage working one day. But the return to work, I mean what we're really talking about is three days to five days. It just doesn't make any sense. The economic piece that she was pushing in the beginning just doesn't make any sense from three days to five days. And to be able to work in a collaborative way, innovative way, that is happening. They cannot determine to give any data to say that it's not. It's a management right to make an environment that is conducive to people being able to be the best that they can be, and you can do that in three days. I don't know what the difference is from three days to five days. You can quantify that work because it's reflected on services that are being provided to the City. (Applause.)

So I will say I was actually pleased to hear some of the testimonial. By our estimation, we believe we had about 1,000 to 1200 people that were affected. From what I understand from the testimony it was over 1,600 people that were affected by the remote work situation. Prior to COVID-19, very little, if any, of our membership had remote situation. It was really an invention of necessity due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but we've seen that a lot more of our people have flourished during this situation, have worked longer hours, have been able to secure more leave time for themselves. We had an array of people that were ill throughout the pandemic that have long-term effects that still have gone unresolved three-plus years later and still will need additional time in the future because this, you know, while we may not acknowledge COVID-19 anymore, it hasn't gone anywhere, so people are still affected by it on a daily basis. So it was a need of, like I said, a necessity of invention that we needed to use to move forward into the future. And so, once you have it and it's established, you can then take it and tweak it, refine it how you need to utilize it, but we should not go backwards. We should go forward and expand on the policy and figure out what works for whatever it is. Managerial rights have the ability to utilize the workers in the best formation they have to be productive. Productivity is what we're talking about. We should be concerned about that as the benchmark for what we're do moving forward. And I would be very interested because we don't have any numbers to verify anything about what those productivity levels are. I can tell you my members of District Council 33, and I'm quite sure April can say the same, that our members bust their hump to make sure they're productive, if not more, than they were -- (Applause.)

I want to piggyback on what my brother is saying. If you look at the budget, we had -- Brother Bessler, where is he. He did a deep dive into the budget and looking at the performance goals that the departments were reporting, and they were meeting their performance goals with deficits, with vacancies and working remotely. To say that you want to go to five days a week for a philosophy just doesn't make any sense, you know. (Cheering.)

I just want to thank you all again for your leadership and for your work. And I stated at the outset of this hearing how I come to this issue, so it is deeply personal for me. I want to apologize in advance because I must depart because I'm helping to care for my sister's children that I had since yesterday. And so, I do have to depart. But you all have my full support. I hope you know that. (Cheering.)

Thank you. Thank you.

You all have my full support and the Chairman of this Committee has my full support and I'm committed to working together with all of you and with the Administration to ensure that we are able to get to a space and place that is amenable for those of you who are doing the work to keep our city moving each and every day and I appreciate it. We work with so many of you. We traveled with you all during COVID. And I'll never forget going with the sanitation workers even in Kensington during the pandemic. But just everything that you all do to help our city run and work, I thank you. I appreciate you. And you do have my full support. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Councilwoman. (Applause.)

Before I turn it over to my colleagues, since it was touched on, overtime. Besides the departments that we know like sanitation where there's a lot of overtime that has to be worked in order to keep up with what's going on, has overtime hours gone up, down? Have they stayed the same? How is that working out?

Okay. Well, I'll touch on that. What I would say is if you look across the city of Philadelphia, the staffing levels are low in every department across the city so you've had to do more with less. So overtime by that mathematics was going to go up a little bit. The sanitation workers absolutely work a lot of overtime and they deserve to do it because we need to be able to provide and service to the city of Philadelphia. The employees of the Water Department out there as well making sure their water is out there serviceable and ready and available, do the exact same thing as so many across the city of Philadelphia. So, yeah, overtime numbers I would say -- again, I don't have statistics in front of me. I could say they probably have gone up, but our staffing issues have gone down. And when you're talking about hybrid situations, you may very well look at those numbers going up even higher as far as unoccupied positions. It's very little benefit to being a City employee. Some of these folks that were hired were hired, as you guys have mentioned, under the auspices that they had the hybrid work condition to be able to utilize, and now you're taking that and pulling the carpet up from under them. That's not the way we should be working inside of Philadelphia. We should be adding incentive-based situations to increase the membership and the employee rate in Philadelphia, and that's something that we should utilize and maintain and continue to keep moving forward on that, not just for our remote workers, but for our workers that have to work in person. We need to be able to incentivize those workers to be able to continue to keep working and doing what they're doing and to be productive for the City. So there's an array of things that need to be addressed and issues. But, yes, I would say overtime is probably one that's gone up.

Yeah. I mean and I've said that. I understand, especially like Sanitation, them guys are working their butts off, very short-handed and therefore are able to work a lot of overtime if they want. My thing is overtime is not supposed to be mandatory so that you can raise your family. It's supposed to be if you need to make a couple extra bucks, you need new sneakers for the kids or whatever, then you work a few hours overtime. But right now with our shortage it's kind of mandatory that they actually work the overtime; is that correct? I mean, I don't want to say mandatory, but --

Our employees across the board, because of the low wages that they provide, are put in a position where they feel like they need to work overtime in order to make ends meet. We're the sixth largest city in the country and pay across the border the lowest across the public sector workers, so that needs to change. (Applause.)

Thank you for that. I'm going to turn it over to my colleagues Rue Landau, then Anthony.

Thank you all so much for your testimony. It was super helpful, especially for me to hear from you, President April, about making sure that we're competitive, that if other places have hybrid work and our City workforce isn't hybrid, then we will not be competitive. There's no way -- there's folks who are looking for that type of workforce who are not going to come and work for the City of Philadelphia, so it's always helpful to be reminded of that. I have a question for Presidents Wilson, Reed, Gigetts, Senior Advisor Davis, President Hawkins or President Boulware. Did the Administration talk to any of you in detail about what this child care or elder care package is going to be and it could possibly start within about 30 days?

Well, yes, they gave us like the skeleton but none of the meat. We don't know details on how it's going to roll out, who it's going to affect, is it capped. I mean, we really don't know much about it. We don't know how it's going to be paid for. If the members have to pay or if they have to have a co-pay, we really don't know. And we ask the questions, but they don't have the details for us yet.

Okay. To me that's you do not have the details. I understand.

Right.

I get you. I just wanted to make sure and to be clear because everyone I've asked doesn't know enough about this. And this is supposed to be the thing that's supposed to help you even inch towards any kind of return to work and we don't know anything about it, so that's very concerning to me. Thank you all so much for your testimony. I really appreciate it.

Thank you. (Applause.)

Councilman Phillips.

Afternoon.

Afternoon.

I just wanted to quickly say thank you so much for your testimony. This has been very enlightening and also inspiring in some capacity. I just want to get a better sense of what I said to the panel before you all. If there was an ability to build some level of consensus on this issue, what are some of the things that you're hoping to get from a conversation with the Administration around how do we get to some sort of a middle ground on this for all of our members.

Well, thank you for the question. I mean, at the end of the day we believe that remote work is the 21st century and we believe that we have to move forward and not backwards. Providing remote work or some kind of alternative work schedule is good for the City and it's good for the services that we provide. That's just the bottom line. It is the wave of the future. It's the new normal, and we have to be competitive. We see across the nation remote work being offered. We know that companies are being competitive by offering it. Now, we have public sector doing the same thing and I think we should be on the cutting edge and leaders around what that would look like. I think it's important to understand that we do believe that this is a mandatory subject of bargaining, so we should be having that conversation. We should be bargaining. We should be talking about what's best for our members and what's best for the City. (Applause.)

Yeah. I just want to emphasize, like many of the members up here, I'm also very interested in seeing how we can make some of the things that you have mentioned a real possibility here in the City from the child care to the building maintenance, to all that and more and also, just even how remote work works in some capacity. So I just want to say thank you all so much for. This has been great.

Yeah. Thank you. (Applause.)

Councilwoman Kendra Brooks.

Thank you so much. So I wanted to begin when you seen me and Majority Leader over here questioning before the question came up, we talked about the building conditions in some of our buildings, and as advocates for school buildings, we're advocates for City buildings as well. So I know my line of questioning was around disabilities primarily, but I'm also concerned with the health and welfare and just safety and air quality in buildings that we own here in the City. So I just wanted to lift that up. So my question is who are the workers that are predominantly working from home and why do they work from home?

You know, that's a variation. When you're talking about job titles, you want to know who's working from home --

Yeah, like --

-- what type of jobs. You know, we have a ton of people that they're going to give testimony and they could tell you what their job titles are. I mean, we have people that are engineers, our architects. We have planning and development, our City planners, people that work administrative type of jobs. We have accountants with their various job titles. I mean, it runs the gamut. I'm sure that you could run it down, David. But we have quite a few different job titles that are able to work remotely, just to name a few.

So I ask that question because how does the work from home offer flexibility, how does it impact women and people of color in the workplace?

Ool, that's good stuff. So we had taken a look at one study by the International Workplace Group, the IWG, and we've done a lot of research around how working from home benefits people, working people, women in particular and women of color, lifted them up in particular, right. In this study, we had 53 percent of women say hybrid work has empowered them to apply for a promotion. 66 percent of women say hybrid model has opened up new opportunities to work. 75 percent of women from minority groups say hybrid has brought them great opportunities. And so, this is like -- because it's the new normal it's also opened up empowering, right, because you can have that work-life balance, you can push the agenda around what you think you feel like you can be empowered to do. And so, what we're looking at are all of these studies that support working from home and remote work. And I can provide that to you because we have a ton of them.

No, but thank you. Thank you for that. And my other question is how has the rate of discipline changed since the Work From Home Policy? Are more people being disciplined or less since you guys been working from home?

That's good stuff, because it's less. I mean, the interaction, people are working better. They're working in a collaborative way and discipline is less, yeah. (Applause.)

I think that would probably be true for you as well.

Unless it's someone that comes across a situation when they're having adverse conditions at home, whether it be child care or their own personal medical conditions or a personal situation they've got where they've exhausted all their time, and then you've seen some of those rates have spiked during the course of COVID. As you know, if you remember when the COVID pandemic jumped off, you had federal aid money that provided two weeks of leave time for people. Well, a lot of people used that and exhausted that. And then once that was over there, was conditional COVID-19 policies that went forward that allowed people to utilize their sick time. But once that sick time was exhausted or you utilized that window up of it, it was no longer available. And so, people were going into the red into the negative. We still have people today that are still working off time that they used that they do not have. So there's two spectrums of that. It's enabled people to allow them to save time, be more productive. And then on the flip side if people have had serious situations in the home, it's adversely affected them. So it's been both ends of the spectrum on that one.

And I can say when we look at people being able to work from home and using less leave time, I mean you could get an operation and you could be recovering home because you can work remotely, you can do the work. There's all kinds of situations, and people will speak to that today, where they're able to work remotely and that relieves the burden of their coworkers so that they don't have to use leave time while they're recovering.

Absolutely. So I just want you guys to know that I 100 percent support this. And I just want to say to you, Greg -- (Cheering.)

-- thank you yesterday at the (inaudible) parade. I think the team that was out working, they're probably like who is this crazy lady that kept saying, thank you so much for your service, thank you so much for your service, working diligently out there on 52nd Street keeping the streets clean and safe. So I want them to know publicly that I really do appreciate the effort because they could have been home on Father's Day, but they were out there keeping our city beautiful for us to have such an amazing event. And any other Unions that were represented in the planning of our Juneteenth Festival I really appreciate your service.

Thank you. Thank you so much for your support. (Applause.)

So real quick before I pass it over to Councilwoman Ahmad, I need to get this straight. So we have employees that are still working off time that they had to take during COVID that came out of their personal leave time and sick time? (Yes.)

Okay. I just don't understand that part of it. We gave a lot of breaks to a lot of people when it came to work and the fact that these people had to use their time because of no 6 fault of their own because they couldn't come to work because the City was shut down, I really do not think it's right that they had to use their time and now we're running into problems like you're saying where they don't have the time to use and that just keeps on putting them back into a donut hole. That's not good for anybody. Councilwoman Nina Ahmad.

Thank you, Chairman. I just wanted to once again have you underscore what it means to be a 21st century workforce and to be competitive on a national platform. If we are going to get back our population to the 2 million we used to be, to not have to tax people any further but have new revenue coming in, we need a place where people want to work, right. Could you -- (Applause.)

That's right. And this is really if you look at it, if you look at the bottom line only, it makes sense, right. I think what we would love to see is some kind of data around what it would look like in 10 years, 20 years, some actual real projection to say what this kind of workforce would do, what this kind of workforce would do. And I think the people of Philadelphia will come along with understanding why we are understanding the reality of this world, right. And I think all of us want that, all of us want that. So if you can just speak to -- I know you already said something about this, that being a 21st century workforce means what and what does it do to the future of Philadelphia. That is really what we need to keep in mind, that it's just not today in the short term, but we're looking at a city that is welcoming, that is growing, that is having revenue, not having regressive ways of taxing people but having new revenue coming in. So if you could just speak to that to underscore why we need commonsense policy to be operating in our workforce.

I think at the end of the day it's about being competitive with the private sector. Our people are not paid what the private sector is paid. And so, the benefits -- (Applause.)

So we have to use every tool in the toolbox to be competitive. If the private sector is offering remote work and now it's expanding with public sector, in order for us to fill those vacancies and be competitive, we have to think outside the box. And working in a remote capacity helps not even just to provide services, but it creates all kinds of benefits for not just the individual, but the community that they live in because they're going to be going to those restaurants, picking up their coffee, they'll bolster their own community, but they also are able to balance their work, right. And so, you can work at home in solitude. You can focus. You can do your Teams meeting and then you can do the collaborative stuff that you do three days a week, two days a week when you're in the office. I mean, there's opportunities to really be innovative around what that looks like in the workplace and what that looks like when you work from home. We have situations that just don't make any sense, right. So you bring people back and we have officers, probation officers, that come in and meet their clients by Teams in a cubicle. What in the world is happening, right. What in the world is that. (Applause.)

It just doesn't, you know. So we can expand the ability to have these interactions and to touch our people in an innovative way to be competitive with the private sector, to be competitive with Montgomery County and to attract and to retain. People right now -- and this is one of the things we've been talking about as we see people getting poached, you know, I want to track that. We need to have that data. So we need to do exit interviews. Why are you leaving, why won't you come and work for the City of Philadelphia, because there is a problem here. (Applause.)

That's right.

I think this is one of those things that could attract good talent.

Yes, that would be really useful going forward. And just another point about the private sector. There are multiple law firms right around us that is shrinking their footprint. People are now working from Florida but their office is here, so we are actually left holding the bag to actually live here, right. So if we're doing that, then we need to be treated well, right. (Applause.)

And so, if we are the population that is people in Philadelphia, then let's get treated well. So I thank you all for your advocacy and strong evidence that you've shown. And I'm all for a commonsense, balanced way of having people be their best selves, bring their best selves to work and let Philadelphia prosper. Thank you. (Applause.)

Okay. Any other comments from my colleagues? (No response.)

Thank you for your testimony.

Thank you. (Applause.)

Before we move on to public comment though, I have actually a couple of questions. I promised I'd ask the Administration if they would come back up. (Witnesses approached Witness table.)

Thank you again for coming back and thank you for sticking around. I just have a couple questions that were actually given to me from some of the exempt staffers that are here in City Hall working in different positions. How does the Administration assess which current exempt positions could or should be a Union position? If an exempt employee wants to be a Union employee, what are their options? And is the Administration for or against exempt positions joining District Council 47?

So the decision of whether a position is eligible to be included in a bargaining unit, that's defined by Pa state law. That is not an Administration decision.

Okay. How about if an exempt employee wants to be a Union employee, what are their options? Could they apply for another job? Is that the only option that exists?

So in terms of an existing union, yes, an existing bargaining unit. If an employee wants to be represented by D.C. 47, D.C. 33, they would apply for a position that is included in that bargaining unit, yes.

Right, and is the Administration for or against exempt employees joining a union, any union?

Let me say unequivocally we offer no 19 resistance pursuant to state law to an employees's ability to unionize, to follow the stipulations, the rules that are established within Pa state labor law to do so.

Okay. All right. Thank you. I have no more questions for you. Does anybody else have any questions for this panel? (No response.)

All 6 right. We're going to move on to 7 public comment. I know there's a 8 lot of people who are anxious to 9 get some statements out there. We 10 are going to stay strict to the 11 two-minute time limit. Please try 12 to state your peace in the two 13 minutes so that we can move this 14 along. We have a lot of people 15 that, as you could tell, are 16 anxious to testify. 17 So, Mr. Palmer, can we 18 please call the first group of 19 public comment? 20

Cheryl Grandy, 21 Nikita Weaver, Amira Shepard , Will 22 Carter. 23 (Applause.) 24 (Witnesses approached 25 Witness table.)

Good afternoon, ladies. Please state your name and then proceed with your testimony. Remember to keep it to two minutes. Thank you.

(Inaudible).

It doesn't matter. Whatever way you guys think is -- come on up. We got room for three chairs. If you just state your name first and then proceed.

Good afternoon, Councilmembers. My name is Cheryl Grandy. I'm a Collection Representative Supervisor in the Department of Revenue. Thank you for your time today. (Applause.)

Mayor Parker states, I look forward to the day when Philadelphia government and all its agencies are a government that our residents can see, touch and feel. As City employees, we have seen, touched and felt taxpayers for many years as well as been subjected to many different types of behaviors, some unforgettable, all while remaining relentless in our effort to do a great job for the City. We work tirelessly for wages that are below private industry, yet work steadily to provide high-level services to the public. The Mayor believes that bringing back employees in the office delivers on her promise. Taxpayers have been aligned with accessibility since 2020 and before. When the pandemic forced them to step into the 21st century, we are now utilizing online services and telephone services for our taxpayers. The Mayor's mandate set City operations backwards instead of forward. Mayor Parker states, I will continue to demand tangible and intangible investments in our workforce. Removing worker flexibility and efficiency is not an investment. Her decision hurts City services. Mayor Parker's statement, because you are the only way Philadelphia becomes the safest, cleanest, greenest big city in America with access to economic opportunity for all puts the burden of her campaign promises on the backs of employees. (Applause.)

It takes away workers economic opportunity and growth. It adds traveling time and expenses caused by commuting five days a week. It takes away time from our families. It increases unnecessary safety risk. We all know living in Philadelphia is a risk right now. Having the flexibility to work from home has relieved a tremendous amount of stress that I carried around on a daily basis when working in the office. (Applause.)

Stress that I carried home to my family that certainly did not deserve it. I have seen my family life turn around tremendously and the job-related stress that I suffered since I have been working from home. We are losing our children on a daily basis. Having the ability to be home when they come home and you know they're home safe and you see them coming through that door relieves the stress. (Applause.)

Although my children are adults now, I look back to the times when I had to do homework at 6:00 and 7 o'clock at night because I got home late. Then my children were saying that they were hungry. I had to feed them first. We're up doing homework until 8:00 and o'clock 4 at night. Being able to sign off 5 now at o'clock for some parents is a wonderful thing because they can jump right in, do homework, do cooking and get it out the way and make an ability for your children to succeed in this life, this troubled life, you understand. So I ask you to stand with us in support of alternative work schedules so that our parents, our children, our workers can have a chance at this life. Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and begin your testimony. Keep an ear out for the bell. When it hits the -- or rings, please start to wrap up.

Hello. I'm Nikita Weaver from DBHIDS, the Department of Behavioral Health and Intellectual Disability Services. And I've been working with the department since 2017. I'm also a mother and have a chronic health condition that causes severe migraines. Hybrid work has been a gamechanger both for my professional performance and personal well-being. When I began my career at DBHIDS, the department was piloting a one- to two-day per week telework program. This initiative offered greater flexibility to employees and made completing administrative tasks more efficient. Thanks to the telework pilot program, DBHIDS was better prepared to seamlessly transition into providing telehealth, intake appointments during the pandemic, and we continue to offer them now as standard. The introduction of the telehealth intake option significantly improves the services we can provide. Telehealth appointments often are more accessible for individuals, eliminating travel time, time away from work and are more accessible for individuals who have issues with sensory sensitivities or low frustration tolerance, which we have very prevalent within those individuals we are serving. Remote options such as virtual mental health court have also improved care coordination throughout the City and have enhanced our service delivery. Today my department is affected by that percent vacancy rate in 20 City jobs. Access to remote work allows me to put in extra hours on the weekend to help support other teams within my division. (Applause.)

For DBHIDS, hybrid and flexible work schedules have resulted in improved, not decreased, access and service delivery. Due to my chronic condition, working from home a couple of days a week has significantly improved my focus and performance. The ability to control lighting and noise in my workspace, imagine being here today, means fewer migraine-related interruptions to work. I'm more present, productive and healthier. I'm also a working parent who during the infant formula shortage had to breastfeed. Whenever I was in the office, I ended up pumping one full bottle milk less than when I was at home. I would also need to take that time away to pump, sterilize equipment and wash it while I'm at the office versus putting it in a sterilized fridge at my home where I could just pack up and get back to work. I could also answer emails and do other work at the same time. Working from home -- (Applause.)

-- allows mothers like me to stay in the workforce more efficiently. Remote from home work has vastly improved productivity across the board. Thank you.

Thank you. Please state your name and start with your testimony.

Hi. My name is Amira Shepard and I'm an Administrative Technician at the Philadelphia Department of Health. In my years of public service at the department, we work to keep Philadelphians at their best. We touch a lot of lives and put them on the path to a better, longer and healthier life. Alternative work schedules in hybrid work at the City of Philadelphia have allowed me to do this work while obtaining a healthier life psychologically, medically, financially and professionally. By not commuting to work three days a week, I have found over an extra hour of time in my day to help care for my elderly father. This time is priceless. As we all know, our time on this planet is limited. I have found extra money in my savings by paying for less gas, putting less miles on my car and saving on high parking fees. I burn 40 percent less CO2 into the air each week that I work my two days in-office hybrid schedule. I have found my productivity on the rise as I focus on computer projects much better from the peace and quiet of my office home that has a door that I can shut. The pandemic in 2020 was hard for us all, but we pulled through and the City workforce adapted. We had to, because the services we provide to Philadelphia don't stop. Workers learned how to utilize technology in our lives that most of us didn't even know existed. A late night emergency staff meeting on Microsoft Teams, who knew that could even be done. With technology like this, there is no need for the Mayor to look for office space that only her wealthy investors would benefit from. (Applause.)

When do we, us the City workforce, get a benefit? When do we benefit from our hard work? We must evolve and grow from this experience, not ignore it. This is how we rise professionally. Mayor Parker's five-day in-office mandate takes us back to the 1990s. Unfortunately, I and many of my fellow coworkers will have to look for employment elsewhere because of this threat of alternative work schedules going the way at the City government. We deserve a 21st century City service, not 1990 cubicles. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you so much for your testimony. Mr. Palmer, please call the next people to testify.

Will Carter, Melanie Murphy, Flan Park, Kim Bravo. (Witnesses approached Witness table.)

Good afternoon. My name is William Carter. I am Vice-president of Local Government Affairs for the Chamber of Commerce for Greater Philadelphia. And prior to working here -- I mean, working at the Chamber, I worked in City Council for years so I've seen both sides of this. I'm just going to offer a slightly different view, but not all together different. I started years ago 7 working in City government. The 8 Mayor then was Mayor John Street 9 and have seen a lot of Mayors since 10 then. I really have to say that we 11 know Mayor Parker has a tough job, 12 the toughest job in the City. And 13 she campaigned for that job and 14 willingly, obviously accepted the 15 nomination and the actual role, but 16 I'm certain, I'm absolutely certain she does so with an immense amount of consideration for all Philadelphians. I've seen several Mayors as I indicated, and probably hands down the most considerate Mayor that this City has, and she's only been in office for six months. And so, we know she has the toughest job in the world, and also has to understand to balance a lot of considerations. The Chamber of Commerce for Greater Philadelphia encompasses over 600,000 employees across the 11-county Greater Philadelphia region. We are currently holding ongoing conversations with member employers to gain an understanding of how they are addressing in-person work. We understand that bringing employees back plays an important role of the revitalization of our city post-pandemic. And I'm just going to provide a couple of examples of why, and a lot of this has already kind of been discussed, but I just want to touch on a couple of things. Currently, major employers like Comcast, Independence Blue Cross and FMC have asked employees to return to the office, and more and more are doing so every week. However, the businesses who really depend on this are the small ones on our commercial corridors and in the City. They're the ones whose survival depend upon the foot traffic from people who work in the City. And once again, I continue to work here in the City although I'm in the private sector now. So why do we support them? Because in addition to providing amenities that make our city a great place to live, work and visit, when they thrive, they hire locally and we need jobs in the City more than anything in the City. We have a huge blight, crime, other quality-of-life issues and everybody from heads of households to heads of companies can agree that -- (Audience interruption.)

No, time --

Please keep it down, keep it down. I'm keeping time. I let everybody go over.

See, I just was talking about consideration, right. Let's be considerate. And so, at the end of the day we want to make sure that we have businesses here that are providing jobs to our residents. Also, a number of thousands of people in the City depend upon SEPTA, and SEPTA's ridership is way down. And in order to get to the jobs that we need to have here and to a lot of the amenities that the City offers, I take SEPTA and others do too. So once again, offering an alternative point of view. Hopefully I get a safe passage out of here, but at the end of the day we can have competing views and understand the need for our city to be thriving once again. And so, I'm certain that the Mayor is taking every consideration and will continue to take every consideration with those who work for the City, as I used to do, and ensuring that whatever the return- to-work is, that it's something that works out for everybody. Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony.

This lady (inaudible).

She'll be able to speak. That's fine. Will was on the -- he was called from the last time and this time, so don't worry. I got you. Don't worry, sis. I got you. (Audience interruption.)

All right. Let's move on. We got your guys testifying now so we get to hear from both sides. Please state your name and continue with your testimony. And, ma'am, you'll be able to move up. Will, you can -- and there we go. We'll move you right on over there and that way we're back in order.

Okay. Good afternoon. My name is Flan Park and I work at the Free Library as a Community Initiative Specialist. I'm here to advocate for retaining hybrid and flex work options for all my City coworkers. Personally, my flex and hybrid work schedule has enabled me to set up my life to pursue the education that I need in order to build a career within the Free Library of Philadelphia as a librarian working, adding value to my city. Shifting back to a five-day full-time, in-office schedule in the middle of my degree program would be a major disruption and setback to my ability to enhance my value to my department and to my city. I would be extremely disappointed to lose so much progress because of a lack of political imagination that thrusts my job expectations back into the 1990s. Hybrid and flex work options have also been important to maintaining my health and ensuring I can continue to work. As a transgender person who needs to routinely and regularly see a physician for my endocrine health, working with regular work-from-home days has given me the ability to set those appointments confidently. On a flexible schedule I can travel to those appointments easily from my home. After my appointments, I can resume my work right away when I get home. This saves me hours of time rather than adding additional travel time commuting first to the office, then to the doctor, then back to the office. My alternative work schedule keeps me healthy and enhances my ability to perform services during regular hours, even if I have a doctor's visit or mental health therapy appointment during the workweek. You've asked a lot of questions today about hard numbers. Let me digress for one moment to hammer home on an economic reality for my transgender family here in the United States. In 2021, the University of Wisconsin Madison Institute for Research on Poverty demonstrated the following poverty rates for transgender people: 33.7 percent for trans men; 29.6 percent for trans women and 23.8 percent for other gender non-conforming people. These disparities rise when you incorporate analysis of race, ethnicity, age and disability. I made the decision to work for my city to escape this reality and now I find myself confronting a choice no one in civil service should have to make, a choice between effective, compassionate health care and responsive delivery of public services I pursued my employment to provide. Mayor Parker's five-day in-office mandate will have similar impacts on employee education and health across the entire workforce, especially my transgender siblings seeking the stable economic future that civil service has historically promised. Issuing a universal mandate without seeking employee feedback or negotiating with our Union shows a callous disregard for the real consequences of her actions. This will hurt City services. Philadelphians deserve better. Trans people deserve better. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and resume with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Councilmember Harrity and members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today. I am Melanie Murphy and I am a member of AFSCME D.C. 47, Local 2186. (Applause.)

I am an Environmental Scientist Supervisor with the Philadelphia Water Department and I love my job. I love going to work every day solving interesting and complex problems and helping to make a difference for the citizens of Philadelphia. It's fulfilling and meaningful work, but it's not without its challenges, such as a staggering vacancy rate that exacerbates understaffing, overworking and burn-out. One thing that's actively helping to combat these challenges, remote work, and we're here today to discuss our Mayor's intention to remove this completely free commonsense 21st century boom to recruitment and retention of City- employed office workers. The Parker Administration's first and foremost priority must be serving the citizens of Philadelphia, which includes ensuring all municipal departments are properly equipped to achieve their respective missions and function highly. So what makes departments run? Is it Center City office buildings filled at taxpayer expense or is it the employees? Will removing remote work benefits for all City-employed office workers make City departments run better or will it drive away existing talent and deter new talent from applying, further undermining already understaffed City departments as they attempt to deliver essential services to Philadelphians? Alternative work schedules have cost the City nothing and offer so many tangible benefits, but forcing thousands of workers back to the office five days a week will have enormous costs. There will be environmental costs with a non-essential increase in rush hour traffic. There will be costs to the well-being -- sorry. There will be costs to the taxpayers with renting, heating and cooling giant office buildings. There will be costs to the well-being and work-life balance of City workers whose lives have been organized around flexible schedules and will all have to be reorganized, with the potential financial burden of changing child or elder care arrangements, as we've discussed today. And there will be costs to the level of service the City can provide when its citizens who are experienced, dedicated civil servants, they leave to find other jobs that aren't so stuck in outmoded ways of working. If we as a city truly care about equity among City employees, let's redirect this conversation from revoking the benefits held by one group of employees and making the City a considerably less friendly place to work, to expanding flexible scheduling benefits to all employees which will certainly enable us to recruit and retain the strongest City workforce to fulfill our core mission serving the citizens of Philadelphia. Thank you again for your time. (Applause.)

Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and resume with your testimony.

Good afternoon -- hello. Okay. Good afternoon. I'm Kim Bravo and I'm a Library Coordinator. I worked for the Free Library Philadelphia for years, 10 years as a reference 10 librarian and eight years in my 11 current position as the materials 12 selector in the Collection 13 Development Office. 14 In mid-April 2020 with our 15 city in lockdown, my colleagues and 16 I quickly adapted to full-time 17 remote work. We supplied digital 18 reading materials to our patrons who were stuck at home and print books when pickup services resumed. Fast-forward to today, the ability to work a hybrid schedule continues to be an asset to our work. While it certainly is nice for our collection development team to have in-person time the reality in our 21st century office is that even when we're all on site, our meetings still take place virtually as this allows us to be far more productive and efficient. It makes no sense for us to gather in a conference room 9 scribbling notes on paper with promises to get back to each other about information that's in our data clouds when we could be sharing that information and even our computer screens with each other in realtime. The nature of our work in collection development is largely solitary and requires a great deal of concentration in order to work as accurately and efficiently as possible. Unfortunately, our cubicle farm office environment is rarely conducive to achieving the required level of focus. The opportunity to work remotely is critical to our success and the numbers prove it. During Fiscal Year '17-'20 while in the office five days a week, the average number of items purchased annually by our team was just over 126,000. However, in Fiscal '23 and '24, during which we all worked hybrid schedules, the numbers surged upwards. In Fiscal '23, we purchased nearly 225,000 items and in Fiscal '24 nearly 229,000. This productivity will be dramatically impacted by the elimination of hybrid work in part due to the effects on recruitment and retention. At the moment, the Free Library has 96 vacancies. Filling these vacancies is essential in our efforts to ensure that the people of Philadelphia have a library that delivers the best possible service. A recent survey about remote work availability showed that nine major urban library systems offer the same hybrid work schedule as the Free Library, two days remote, three days in the office per week. Other systems offer even more. If remote work is eliminated in Philadelphia, vacancies at the Free Library will increase as staff leave to seek positions in libraries that still offer this benefit and it will be even more difficult for us to hire top talent. Finally, I'd like to emphasize the positive impact hybrid work has had on our communities. I was born and raised in Northwest Philadelphia. I have traveled far and wide and I married an ex-pat from South America and we settled in Northwest Philly because nowhere else on earth feels so much like home to me. When I work remotely two days a week and walk to my pharmacy or my gym or my favorite restaurant on my lunch break, I am getting exercise. I am not burning fossil fuels and I am supporting my neighborhood. I'm a pair of eyes and feet on the streets of a place that I love and that matters equally as much as Center City and every other neighborhood in our city, eliminating -- (Applause.)

Please wrap up your testimony.

Eliminating hybrid work schedules would take our city in the wrong direction. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Mr. Palmer, please call the next witnesses to testify.

Ben Fileccia, Andrew DiDonato, Kellie Warner. (Applause.) (Witnesses approached Witness table.)

Please state your name and do your testimony. MR. DiDANOTO: Good afternoon, Councilmembers. My name is Andrew DiDanoto. I am a Construction Plan Review Specialist for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. I'm the one your constituents complain about the most when their permits don't get issued. I've been working for L&I for over seven years. To be completely honest when the City went completely remote on March 18, 2018, almost everybody in my department hated it. It was a nightmare. There were no policies or systems established. But once we started getting the kinks worked out and everything, we started to realize the benefits that we have for remote work. Most notably for me, my relationship with my children changed dramatically because first and foremost with any of my other titles, I'm a devoted father and husband. Before this, dad went to work. And if I wasn't too tired, I would have a little bit of time after dinner to play with my kids before the nighttime routine started. My job was I fix the broken things when I get home. I work to pay for everything and mom took care of everything else. Now that the past three years since the lockdowns have gone away, my kids want me involved for everything and I'm here for all of it. I help out with their sports teams, their afterschool activities and their therapy sessions. This last one is especially important because two of my three children are on the autism spectrum. The child care as a side note that's going to be offered, anything from the Mayor's office is not going to be able to meet the needs of anybody in the City who work the City workforce who have children with special needs. To be actually involved in my children's therapy sessions, instead of just hearing about it after the fact from my wife not only just benefits my kids, it makes me a better father and it helps our family as a whole because we get to work together as a team. Removing this hybrid work schedule away from us is going to take all of that away from our family. The time travel in the afternoons keeps me available for my children's appointments and the change in schedule is also going to -- it's just from a financial standpoint going to cost us about we figured about $15,000, $20,000 annually. It's going to remove my wife from the workforce. Since we went hybrid, she's been able to re-enter the workforce because I'm available to help her. It shouldn't be the woman's sole responsibility to take care of our families. Fathers need to be involved too. (Applause.)

Thank you. Thank you. Time's up. MR. DiDANOTO: I think everything else I was going to say has been already repeated by everybody else.

Thank you.

Thank you for that. (Applause.)

Please state your name and begin with your testimony and remember to try to keep it to two minutes. (Witnesses approached Witness table.)

Hi, everyone. My name is Kellie Warner and I work for the City of Philadelphia in 1996 beginning as a student employee and after graduating in June of '97 I left the City of Philadelphia. Since that time, I've rejoined the City of Philadelphia workforce in October of 2016 initially working for the Philadelphia Water Department and various departments in between. Now, I'm an employee of the Department of Labor as a Labor Investigator. In addition to being a 10-year City employee, I am also a mother of a special needs child who was diagnosed in January of 2023. My position with Department of Labor currently allows me to work remotely three days a week Wednesday through Thursday -- Wednesday through Friday I am home. I accepted the position in 2023 expressively because it offered me the flexibility of an alternative and hybrid work schedule. Working from home has in many ways afforded me to become a better parent and actually partake in all of my daughter's needs. Also, working from home has not affected my job performance in any way or reduced my level of service to the City that I provide or affected or impacted any of my quality of work. I've actually had great reviews. However, my work would suffer immensely if my remote days would be provoked -- I'm sorry. I'm so nervous. My ability to care for my special needs child would suffer as well. I live in Northeast Philadelphia and my commute into the City with rush- hour traffic is an hour and 15 minutes to get into Center City after dropping off my daughter to daycare. My daughter receives behavioral speech as well as occupational therapy at day care. She also regularly has an appointment at CHOP Abington Specialty Care two days a week, which is on Thursday and Friday nights at 5:45 p.m. In addition to that, my daughter goes to Solis, which is in Jenkintown on Old York Road and County Line Road, at 6:15 on Wednesday evenings for speech as well for an accelerated speech program. My daughter requires these services for her growth and development. And thankfully, a hybrid schedule has allowed me to be able to take her to these. It is imperative that my daughter receive these special services. And if not, it's going to be hard for me to find alternatives for her. It has been virtually impossible for me to find family or friends to take her to these appointments due to the late time in the evening that they are. I want to say that I am proud of the work that I do for the City of Philadelphia and I do not wish to leave my job or as for reduced schedule. I actually want to continue to work the schedule that I'm presently working. And the only thing that I'm asking for you guys is that you help me maintain my dignity as a worker and a parent. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you very much for your testimony. Please state your name and begin your testimony.

Good afternoon, Chairperson Harrity and esteemed Councilmembers. My name is Ben Fileccia and I'm the Senior Vice-president of Strategy and Engagement at the Pennsylvania Restaurant and Lodging Association. Today I am here on behalf of Pennsylvania's hospitality industry to speak on Resolution 240514. The PRLA and our members support Mayor Parker's initiative to have employees return to the office. We proudly serve over 6,000 restaurants in the City equating to nearly four restaurants for every 1,000 residents. Center City, Philadelphia is also home to more than 100 lodging properties. In March 2020, Philadelphia like many places across the country shut down due to the COVID-19 crisis. This period is crucial for our industries. Hotels were preparing to host millions of guests; restaurants and caters were planning large events and the broader tourism industry was gearing up for the busy season. The shutdown was devastating. Rising costs, supply chain issues and inflationary pressures continue to plague our industries. In the lodging sector, leisure travel has rebounded more quickly than business and corporate travel, which has not yet returned to prepandemic levels. Philadelphia's Center City restaurants and hotels heavily depend on business and corporate travel, which is part of the reason we were eager to participate in this important discussion. Philadelphia's workforce of nearly 30,000 people play a critical role in sustaining our hospitality sector. A return to more regular in-person business activity will undoubtedly rejuvenate Philadelphia's hospitality scene and create newfound momentum in the City's economy. To illustrate the current challenges, I submitted metrics from a very popular downtown restaurant comparing prepandemic and current guest counts. Ultimately, you'll see lunch volume is down by about 5 percent since 2019 and dinner 6 volume at this location has 7 increased by approximately 30 8 percent. While this is just one 9 location, we see similar trends 10 elsewhere. Although I have been 11 highlighting lunch and dinner 12 numbers, many restaurants have seen 13 an incredible sharp decrease in 14 their happy hour revenue as well. 15 Admittedly, we cannot 16 attribute this entirely to more 17 people working remotely. However, 18 that reality is undoubtedly a very 19 large factor. We're also seeing 20 less employees being hired. We're seeing lunches cut. We're seeing dinner services cut. We're seeing places closed earlier --

Thank you for your testimony. (Applause.)

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Mr. Palmer, will you please call the next witnesses to testify.

Theresa Pilla, Dan Walls, Tori Rodgers, Janice Gaillard. (Witnesses approached Witness table.)

Please state your name and begin your testimony.

Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Theresa Pilla. I'm a Procurement Specialist Supervisor overseeing the Public Works Unit of the Procurement Department. I not only am a City worker, but I also hire City workers. We currently have several vacancies in our unit. I have interviewed dozens of candidates for these positions and offer jobs to many people, most of whom decline the offer. Some of these candidates are employed in the private sector in fully remote positions and do not want to lose the benefit of working remotely. I can't blame them. The Parker Administration's plan to revoke alternative work schedules risks the loss of many current exceptional employees too. I went through the COVID pandemic with my team. Like everyone else, we had to adapt to working remotely. Once we did my team flourished. But now it seems that all of the hard work that we did to learn a new 21st century way of doing business doesn't matter. I often see members of my team online at home later than I expect them to be because they are dedicated and conscientious. They want to get their work done and they can get their work done outside of the office in 9-to-5 hours. I've noticed the difference telework makes in easing the stress of everyday emergencies, like a sick child needing to be picked up from school or a leaking kitchen sink. Life happens. We can all relate to these scenarios and know how disruptive they can be to a workday. But when an employee does not have to take hours of PTO and commute home from an office to deal with the emergency or has the option of making up hours later in the day, the disruption is minimized. This all may not seem like my employer's problem, but what it translates into is the more paid time off of various sorts workers need to take, the less work gets done for the people of our city. I have worked in Center City, Philadelphia for the majority of my adult life, but I don't live in Center City. Are these small businesses in my neighborhood any less important to our economy than those in Center City? (Applause.)

My dollars spent in my neighborhood when I work from home contribute to our city economy just as much as those spent in Center City. Additionally, the days I don't commute to work are also days I'm reducing my environmental impact, something the Mayor claims to care about with her clean and green initiatives. We all hear and understand the statement, when you know better do better. We now know better. We don't have to persist in outdated, inefficient, inflexible ways of working. The City needs to do better by us, the workers who keep it running. I urge the Parker Administration to honor our collective bargaining rights and negotiate a practical, smart resolution allowing continued access to alternate work schedules. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and begin your testimony.

Hello. My name is Dan Walls like the walls in the building. I am an Engineering Specialist in the Water Department. I work with schools and child cares throughout the City to keep lead out of drinking water. Most days I'm visiting these facilities or working at our central lab. However, I value the flexibility of alternative work schedules. In March my partner donated her kidney to save someone's life, and the Water Department's alternative work schedule policy allowed me to work remotely and effectively while I cared for her at a vital time. From the hospital waiting room while she was in surgery, I strategized our lead program roll-out with my coworkers in the Water Department based at various locations throughout the city using my Microsoft Teams. During her first days of recovery at home, our review draft communication materials and called facilities about lead sampling. With an alternative work schedule, I was able to support my partner, collaborate with my coworkers and continue serving the schools and child cares of Philadelphia. I want to hear Mayor Parker say that alternative work schedules are bad for collaboration and innovation. I'm honestly confused. My hybrid work schedule allowed me to continue collaborating and innovating with my colleagues on an urgently needed program at a time when I would otherwise have been unavailable to provide City services. Right now about percent 7 of City jobs are vacant. It 8 doesn't make sense to eliminate the 9 kind of policies that attract and 10 maintain dedicated workers. 11 Because my job duties fulfill an 12 EPA regulation, a vacancy in my 13 position would mean that the Water 14 Department would need to hire a 15 consultant to do my duties at a 16 higher cost to the people of 17 Philadelphia. 18 (Applause.) 19

Some of my 20 coworkers have recently left for consulting jobs that allow hybrid work and I don't blame them. If the goal is providing full City services, invest in workers and commit to increased staffing levels across Philadelphia rather than spending taxpayer money on expensive consultants and unnecessary commercial office space in Center City. Eliminating alternative work schedules does not achieve equity for City workers. Not all workers have the same needs and many studies show that accessible and flexible alternative schedules help recruit and retain women and minorities in the workplace. Real equity would involve increasing the flexibility of our work and paying more competitive wages. So I encourage you all to support City workers in our fight to protect the collective bargaining of Philadelphia, to protect and enhance alternative work schedules and keep dignity in the workplace. We serve your constituents and we are your constituents. Thank you for listening to my testimony. (Applause.)

Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and resume your testimony.

Good afternoon. My name is Janice Gaillard. I am a Collection Customer Representative in Department of Revenue's Electronic Mail Unit. (Applause.)

I would just like to say I don't want to belabor the points, we've had a lot of discussion here today, but we found I would say our unit disconcerting and very, very disappointed after Mayor Parker rendered her return- to-work verdict. Basically we found that as we begin to have a lot of discussion amongst ourselves we have discovered that this verdict does not apply to a one size fits all. It simply does not. Her decision has greatly affected the work-life balance of not only my unit, but for many of us because it simply does not align with the 21st century business practices nor does it suit each department as she surmised. We all function differently. After many discussions amongst ourselves, we have found and we believe that it's ultimately going to affect the morale of all of us, causing it to plunge and it will begin to affect our productivity. I'd like to succinctly just address a few of the points without belaboring them. In our unit I could say data substantiates that despite the direst of circumstances surrounding the international pandemic of COVID, our unit pivoted, we readjusted and we began to bring in revenue to keep our City open and functioning as we electronically addressed and as we addressed -- (Applause.)

-- And met customer needs. In the course of this, we did this 100 percent remotely. Okay. There were two departments folded into our unit during this time, Agency receivables and the City Council email box. We took on that additional responsibility and we managed it with efficiency even with the increased responsibility, while working remotely I will add. We assisted the Refund Department in lowering and managing their voluminous backlog because everyone was working from home due to COVID almost for an entire year while working completely remotely. We were able to manage mental acuity in handling both work and home matters. As many of us contracted COVID, some of us watch family members die and yet we remained productive. All of us are cross- sections. We represent them. Some of the employees had to adapt to homeschooling school-aged children, some had to adjust their schedules to be more readily available to attend to their needs. Other employees had to adjust schedules to attend ailing partners, aging parents, recently-widowed parents. All of these are priceless. We were able to provide priceless care and accommodate them in various appointments. Healthwise, many have been able to avoid contracting COVID. Why? Because we were not all over each other with poor ventilation and crowded work conditions. Compensation --

Ms. Gaillard, can you please conclude your testimony?

Okay. I will. Compensation-wise, we would like you to consider the fact that we were able to minimize the higher cost of food, gas, other expenses, as others have said, which contributes to our household budget. This compensation has been greatly enhanced by our hybrid schedule. And as someone previously mentioned, we're able to pour back into our community businesses. So having said that in consideration of all of these things, we're asking that Mayor Parker completely reconsider her blanket approach to the City's return-to-work policy, allow each department the autonomy to determine its practice and how best to provide continued, efficient and invaluable customer care by maintaining a current hybrid schedule, where applicable, which is consistent with evolving 21st century business practices. Thank you for hearing. (Applause.)

Thank you for your testimony. Mr. Palmer, are there any other witnesses to testify on this Janice Gaillard and Brett Bessler. (Witnesses approached Witness table.)

Okay. Our last three rather. All right. Please state your name and proceed with your testimony. Please keep it to two minutes.

Sounds good. Hello. My name is Henry Brown. I'm an engineer with the Water Department, a proud AFSCME worker and I am fed up with the constant sabotage and lying from the City Council and Mayor Parker. I'm here to set the record straight. Hey, hold y'all applause guys. Wait until the end. Working in the Water Department, I have some experience with the exact kinds of clean, green initiatives that Mayor Parker claims she's prioritizing. I also have all too much experience with the understaffing crisis that's affecting every City department, whereas much as in City jobs are now vacant. In my 18 months of service to the City of Philadelphia, I've only been forced to do more work for less pay. Coworkers leave almost every month for greener pastures pushing even more work on to me. Frankly, I can't blame them. The Mayor appears to have no 21 serious plan for the City beyond kind words, but kind words won't pay off my rising rent bill or inflating grocery bill. Forcing me back into the office two more days a week will only help Center City executives. By constantly attacking City workers, City Hall also attacks the people of Philadelphia who they claim to serve. They undermine workers' ability to provide the highest quality services possible to the Philadelphians that need them. Forcing a return to onsite work, violating our collective bargaining rights and offering zero cost of living adjustments is setting this city on a collision course with a municipal meltdown. AFSCME is here to make our city genuinely cleaner and greener by fighting back against City Hall. Local 2187 President David Wilson has explained clearly how some AFSCME jobs require a four-year degree for a starting salary of only $40,000 a year. These conditions are outrageous. And I think every AFSCME member that I have ever met is more than willing to fight to change. We, AFSCME members, refuse to be used as pawns to fill the pockets of wealthy executives and real estate developers who suck profits out of Center City like vampires. We are dedicated hard- working Philadelphians without whom even our short-sighted Mayor recognizes the City would not function. And I urge City Council to -- I would urge City Council to support us, but I refuse to beg from the people that at the end of the day are loyal servants to the rich and powerful over the ordinary people in Philadelphia. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and begin with your testimony.

My name is Tori Rodgers. Good afternoon -- well, yes, good afternoon to City Council and my fellow employees. My name is Tori Rodgers, Secretary of District Council 33, Local 696. I work for the Office of Human Resources and have been doing so since 2007. Since the pandemic, I've been coming into the office as mandated by my department first three days and then two. I am also an employee that is immune- compromised as I have Lupus. I and other employees like me have a safety concern when it comes to being mandated to come in the office for five days. As COVID has not gone away, we are at a greater risk to getting infected. Recently my department conducted a mandatory in-person meeting to talk about the return- to-work mandate. After the meeting I found out that one of my coworkers have been exposed to COVID and came into the office for the meeting. I found out that she had tested positive and I was in fear that I was going to be at risk of doing the same. This could potentially happen to others like me if the hybrid situation is no 10 longer in effect. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and begin your testimony.

All right. My name is Brett Bessler. I'm the Vice-president Business Agent for AFSCME D.C. 47, Local 2186. If you support Philadelphia municipal workers and their unions, let me get a hell yeah. (Hell yeah.)

All right. I want to take a second -- mine is very short. I want to take a second to thank each and every member, everybody in the district, both District Councils that made today happen. This is truly one of the largest and I think most impactful Union actions that I have ever been a part of. And I do also want to thank management here. You know, they kind of prove that they don't have a case. So if Philadelphia is a union town, it needs to act like it. This unilateral change is an attack on labor and our rights to collectively bargain. It's a slap in the face to the idea of labor relations. It is amazing to me that the Mayor wants to make this move to increase collaboration, but simultaneously wants to shut unions out of their most collaborative process. It's a directive that will only harm our members and the communities that we serve. We must stand up. We must fight back against this decree. If we don't, we're going to give the City an inch and we all know, all the Union members in here know, give them an inch, they're going to run a mile. If the City of Philadelphia wants to be the premier employer in the region, it needs to act like it. The City is becoming less and less attractive as an employer and it can't bring in and retain new talent, constant issues with hiring and retention spinning a revolving door that only leads to an exit. And this is one of the answers: To make hard-to-fill positions even less attractive and ignore their unions. With a 20 percent-plus vacancy rate citywide, it is absurd that the City would make such a unilateral change that will only prolong our city's vacancy crisis. If this is the fashion in which the City of Philadelphia wants to move, our members and our unions are here to ensure that that style will go out of style real quick. Do not forget who runs this City. Let's all remind them. Who runs this City? (We do.)

Thank you. Thank you for having us here.

Thank you everyone for your testimony. That concludes, ma'am. We've heard from a lot of people. It's repetitive now. You're preaching to the choir here too. We're all with you. Okay, come on. One more. You're who we want to hear from anyway because that's part of the issue.

Thank you. My name is Shaheedah Tinsley- Cobbs. I'm a Housing and Development Officer for PHDC and a member of AFSCME D.C. 33, Local 1971. There was an article 4 published by CNN this month, Women in the Workforce Hit an All-time High at 77 percent. Homebased work allow for more flexibility in hours, help improve access to child here with schedules that allow for easier drop-offs and pick-ups, and that includes myself. My husband and I are committed to creating a home for our children that consist of us both being present and at the greatest extent possible. I've made a conscious decision to earn less money in the real estate consultant industry by working as an independent contractor over the years in exchange for more flexibility. At that point, I've been able to attend all of my children's events for that purpose. In my view, my four sons ranging from ages to and my daughter who was 9 years old have never appeared in any negative news reports or in the principal's office for any behavioral issues because of the consistent presence and investment in their lives. After the onset of COVID-19 pandemic. I saw firsthand how affordable housing became beyond reach for a lot of Philadelphians. I wanted to lend my expertise and experience in real estate professionalism to focus on providing affordable housing. So when a friend sent me a posting for a hybrid position as a Housing and Development Officer, I was quick to apply. I took on this position for two reasons. The first reason was because it was advertised as a hybrid position. The second reason is because it aligned with the passion for making housing affordable and accessible to low- to medium-income families. As far as productivity in the PHDC Housing Finance Department goes, our team of four Housing Development Officers have been able to increase productivity at 35 percent since COVID has started. Therefore, it's in the best interest of the City and the taxpaying constituents to help alleviate challenges for commute, managing an increasing cost of child care and before and after care. And professionals like myself can devote more time, energy and effort to ensure that the City has increased access to affordable housing for everyone. In closing, I am grateful for the opportunity to be able to do the kind of work that I'm passionate about. And I'm hoping that you will preserve the remote hybrid work arrangement so that my colleagues and I can efficiently meet the demand for increased access to affordable housing in the city of Philadelphia where I was born and raised. And if you didn't hear me, I have five children. (Applause.)

Okay. Before you go anywhere, just because you're actually getting to the core of what we wanted to know, so you were hired how long ago?