Dear Editor,
Dan Jones’ column, “Whatever happened to public service?”, draws the wrong conclusion from the state’s return-to-office dispute. It frames remote work as a loss of civic commitment when the facts suggest something very different.
Remote employees living out of state are the exception, not the rule. According to data from the Vermont Department of Human Resources, the state workforce is now distributed more broadly across all fourteen counties than it was prior to the pandemic when employment was heavily concentrated in Washington and Chittenden counties. That shift hasn’t weakened public service; it has spread it.
Those employees may not be spending money in Montpelier or Waterbury, but they are spending it in Hardwick, Brattleboro, Rutland and dozens of other communities. The local commitment Jones suggests is missing hasn’t vanished; it has been redistributed. Public sector employees are also more likely than the general population to volunteer in their communities through nonprofits, fire departments and emergency services, according to the latest labor data on volunteerism by occupation.
The Vermont State Employees’ Association, for which I am a trustee, exists to advocate for its members. We believe the governor’s return-to-commute order does the opposite by imposing new housing, childcare and transportation costs on employees who are already meeting job expectations remotely, in a state facing a widely recognized affordability crisis.
We also believe the order violates Vermont’s Flexible Working Arrangements statute (21 V.S.A. § 309) and appears to conflict with employee rights affirmed under National Labor Relations Board rulings governing unilateral changes to working conditions. In raising these concerns, VSEA isn’t just defending its members; it is standing up for workplace protections that benefit all Vermonters.
Public service is measured by outcomes and community impact, not by how many miles someone drives to prove their devotion.
K. Thomas Randall
Winooski
