Home / Resources / California Guard News
Labor

14,000 officers voted to strike. That number becomes your wage floor.

California Guard News · 5 min read

The story

On September 2, roughly 14,000 union security officers across San Francisco, Silicon Valley and Los Angeles County voted to authorize an unfair-labor-practice strike. They guard the California offices of companies including OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Meta and Salesforce — but none of them work for those companies. They work for the contract agencies that hold the building accounts: Allied Universal, Securitas and GardaWorld.

SEIU United Service Workers West is asking for a $30 minimum wage along with better healthcare and more training. According to reporting on the negotiations, Allied Universal's proposal was a 25-cent-per-hour increase in 2027, with no raises for the three years after that. The vote caps roughly five months of bargaining. Whether an actual walkout follows, and when, is still open.

What actually happened: a strike was authorized, not called. That distinction matters when a client asks you about it. Authorization is leverage at the table. It is not a date.

Why this lands on a small operator who has no union and no tech clients

The instinct is to file this under someone else's problem. Fourteen thousand officers at trillion-dollar campuses, three national agencies, a union local — none of that describes a fifty-guard company running retail and construction accounts in the Central Valley.

Here is why it lands anyway.

A wage number that gets published becomes the number every officer in the state has seen. It does not need to be the number in your market to be the number in your interview. When a candidate has read that officers guarding an office lobby are asking for $30 an hour, your offer is now being measured against that headline whether or not the two jobs have anything in common. That is how wage anchoring works, and it moves faster than any statute.

Second, the national agencies are your competition on bids you will never see them lose. When their labor cost steps up, their pricing steps up with it. That is not bad news for a small operator — it is the rare kind of good news, because it compresses the gap between what they charge and what you charge. The operators who get hurt are the ones who priced a three-year contract off today's wage and have no way to move it.

The counterargument, stated fairly

The agencies are not being unreasonable to point out that they bill what their clients will pay. A contract security company does not set the price of an officer-hour in a vacuum; a building owner does, one renewal at a time. If the client will not fund a raise, the agency absorbing it is not being principled, it is going out of business. That is a real constraint and it is the reason these fights are slow.

What that argument does not survive is the specific number. A 25-cent increase in 2027 and nothing after is not a company squeezed by client budgets. That is a company that has decided the labor market will not make it pay. The strike authorization is the market answering.

My take

California guard pay has been the lowest in the country for years, and I have written before about what that does to the quality of the people who stay in this work. I am not neutral on whether the number should go up. It should.

But there is a difference between wanting wages to rise and being ready for them to. The operator who is ready has an escalation clause that survives contact with reality. The one who is not ready has a fixed rate, a three-year term, and a staffing problem starting in month seven.

A wage increase you saw coming is a pricing conversation. A wage increase you did not is a turnover problem wearing a payroll costume.

What I would do this week

  • Pull your three largest contracts and read the escalation clause out loud. If it indexes to CPI, understand that a bargained wage step does not show up in CPI. Neither does a statutory training mandate. A CPI clause protects you against inflation, not against this.
  • If there is no escalation clause, that is the renewal conversation. Not a rate increase — a mechanism. Clients accept mechanisms far more easily than they accept surprises, and a mechanism you negotiate now costs you nothing today.
  • Know your actual spread. Bill rate minus fully-loaded wage, per post, not company-wide. The average hides the accounts that are already underwater.
  • Have an answer ready for the client who asks. They will read the same headline you did. "Here is what it is, here is what it is not, and here is how our rate works" is a two-minute conversation that makes you look like the professional in the room.
Sources: KQED, “Workers Guarding San Francisco's Wealthiest Companies Vote to Authorize a Strike” (kqed.org); KRON4, “Security guards at major tech companies authorize strike over wages” (kron4.com); Fast Company, “The security workers who guard OpenAI and Anthropic could go on strike” (fastcompany.com). This is an operator's read on public information, not legal advice. Verify current requirements directly with BSIS before acting.

Is your contract priced for the wage market you are actually in?

Escalation clauses, post-level margin, and the renewal conversation. That is the job.

Book a Free Consult →