The State Personnel Board on September 14 heard a significant appeal from AFSCME Local 2620, directly challenging the California Correctional Health Care Services’ (CCHCS) ongoing practice of utilizing personal services contracts for essential prison pharmacy and allied health work. This hearing focused on whether CCHCS has adhered to prior directives regarding the use of external contractors for critical health care staffing within state correctional facilities.
According to the board’s meeting summary and its official entity record, AFSCME Local 2620 presented a compelling argument. The union asserted that an earlier decision made by the board, identified as PSC 19-0015B, had explicitly required the department to discontinue contracting out these specific services by a deadline that passed more than two years prior, on April 30, 2020. The union contended that CCHCS had failed to comply with this established mandate, leading to the continued reliance on external staffing solutions.
Furthermore, AFSCME Local 2620 brought financial concerns to the board’s attention. The union stated that the state had spent more than $10 million on temporary “registry staff” for these positions. This substantial expenditure, the union highlighted, occurred while numerous vacancies within the same critical pharmacy and allied health roles remained unfilled. This point suggested that the state was incurring significant costs for temporary workers rather than investing in the recruitment and retention of permanent employees, which the union implied was a less efficient and more costly approach in the long term.
California Correctional Health Care Services, with representation from its Office of Legal Affairs, defended its continued use of the personal services contracts during the hearing. The department’s position, as outlined in the meeting summary, was that these contracts were still necessary to help maintain prison medical care. CCHCS underscored its commitment to securing and retaining a robust permanent workforce, detailing several initiatives undertaken to address staffing needs.
The department’s defense pointed to its extensive recruitment efforts as evidence of its proactive approach. CCHCS specifically mentioned the establishment of a dedicated workforce unit, designed to strategically address staffing shortages and improve recruitment processes. Additionally, the department highlighted its broad outreach strategies, which included advertising job openings through widely utilized platforms such as CalCareers and LinkedIn, as well as participating actively in various hiring fairs. These measures, CCHCS argued, demonstrated a genuine effort to fill vacant positions through traditional employment channels.
Despite these recruitment and outreach activities, CCHCS maintained that the personal services contracts remained an indispensable tool. The department argued that without these contracts, it would be challenging to ensure consistent and adequate medical care for the incarcerated population, thereby potentially jeopardizing the health and safety within state prisons. The contracts, CCHCS contended, served as a crucial stopgap measure to bridge staffing gaps while permanent recruitment efforts continued.
Following the presentations from both AFSCME Local 2620 and California Correctional Health Care Services, the State Personnel Board took the matter under submission. The board did not announce a decision at the hearing on September 14. This means that a resolution to the contracting dispute, and clarification on CCHCS’s obligations regarding its staffing practices, is pending a future determination by the board.
The Sept. 14 meeting agenda for the State Personnel Board included other personnel and classification items beyond this significant contracting-out appeal. However, the challenge brought by AFSCME Local 2620 was one of only two contested matters that were heard by the board on that particular day, underscoring its importance on the board’s docket. The eventual decision by the State Personnel Board will determine the future of personal services contracts for prison health care in California and could have implications for how state agencies manage staffing for critical services.
