A union leader threatened SLO with a coronavirus protest. He should be fired — and charged

A union president representing thousands of SoCalGas employees threatened to stage a massive protest in San Luis Obispo — coronavirus be damned — unless the city postponed an April 7 vote on a controversial ordinance encouraging new buildings to be all-electric.

The city delayed the vote and has yet to reschedule it.

Normally, a protest would be an exercise in free speech, but during the coronavirus pandemic, it takes on a new meaning, and it should be treated as a threat to public health.

Just look at the language in the email sent to city officials:

“I strongly urge the the city council to kick this can down the road to adhere to public health safety measures,” Eric Hoffmann, president of Utility Workers Union of America Local 132, wrote in the March 16 email. “Please don’t force my hand in bussing in hundreds and hundreds of pissed off people potentially adding to this pandemic.”

Potentially adding to this pandemic?

That’s a blatant attempt to coerce elected officials, and it appears to fall within California’s definition of a criminal threat, which includes threats to hurt, injure or kill others, with the intent of causing the victims to be in “sustained fear” for their safety.

If law enforcement hasn’t already investigated, it should, because this isn’t just garden-variety grandstanding.

It’s a threat aimed at SLO residents, but one that also would have risked SoCalGas employees taking part in the protest.

They deserve much better.

Utility workers are among the front line workers in this pandemic. They’ve earned thanks and appreciation, yet their union leadership is treating them like pawns.

And where are SoCalGas executives in all this?

Do they allow employees to threaten customers?

According to the Los Angeles Times, which first reported on Hoffmann’s email, SoCalGas said company executives were not aware of the threatened protest, and declined to comment any further on the incident.

That’s not good enough. At the very least, SoCalGas owes the community an apology.

The L.A. Times also reported that Hoffmann is on a three-year leave of absence from the gas company on account of his union position.

Even so, he’s still an employee. SoCalGas should sever all ties with him.

For the record, the proposed ordinance Hoffmann is opposing would not ban natural gas in new buildings, though the city would charge a retrofit fee if builders installed gas appliances.

Several cities are considering similar rules in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Are union bullies going to threaten them all?

It’s telling that Hoffman attempted to recast his threatening statement in less dramatic language, in a response he gave to the LA Times: “When the City Council announced that it would re-start its anti-gas effort at the April 7th meeting, we thought it best to both organize our members’ attendance in an orderly way, and at the same time try to persuade the City Council to postpone its anti-gas effort to a more prudent time.”

An “orderly way”? Please. Busing in “hundreds and hundreds of pissed off people” is the opposite of orderly.

Hoffmann also noted that the March 16 email “predated” the governor’s statewide shut-down order aimed at preventing the spread of COVID-19.

So what? The governor had issued a warning that public events could only happen with adequate social distancing — something not possible at a City Hall packed with people.

Hoffman knew exactly what he was doing.

He not only threatened the city of San Luis Obispo, he also damaged the reputation of SoCalGas.

He may even have alienated gas customers. Anyone who was on the fence about SLO’s ordinance before may reevaluate in light of this ugly attempt at coercion.

That raises the question: Should the city have gone ahead with its April 7 vote?

Had it done so, that would have sent a strong message that the city will not be intimidated by bullies.

Under the circumstances, though, it’s understandable that the city would postpone a controversial item until all members of the public can weigh in, without jeopardizing public health.

Decision-making can’t be put off indefinitely, however.

We strongly urge the San Luis Obispo City Council to schedule a vote on this energy ordinance as soon as possible, within the confines of coronavirus restrictions.

At that point, we’ll see what Hoffman’s next move is.

If he picks up the intimidation playbook again and tries to revive this loathsome strategy, we’ll know he’s indeed everything he appears to be: a manipulative bully willing to put our lives at risk to elevate his own agenda.

This story was originally published May 7, 2020 at 5:00 AM.