Free Daily Headlines :

  • COVID-19
  • Money
  • Election 2020
  • Politics
  • Education
  • Health
  • Justice
  • More
    • Environment
    • Economic Development
    • Gaming
    • Investigations
    • Social Services
    • TRANSPORTATION
  • Opinion
    • CT Viewpoints
    • CT Artpoints
DONATE
Reflecting Connecticut’s Reality.
    COVID-19
    Money
    Election 2020
    Politics
    Education
    Health
    Justice
    More
    Environment
    Economic Development
    Gaming
    Investigations
    Social Services
    TRANSPORTATION
    Opinion
    CT Viewpoints
    CT Artpoints

LET�S GET SOCIAL

Show your love for great stories and out standing journalism
CT VIEWPOINTS -- opinions from around Connecticut

Three legislative threats to home care in Connecticut

  • CT Viewpoints
  • by Tom Falik
  • May 3, 2019
  • View as "Clean Read" "Exit Clean Read"

Home care agencies could face layoffs, pay cuts for certain staff members if a minimum wage hike is approved without an increase in state funding, advocates say.

There is an increasing shortage of qualified home care providers in Connecticut, and many home care companies are withdrawing from state-funded programs, or curtailing operations, especially in the area of live-in care, due to financial and regulatory challenges. To make matters worse, at this late date in the Connecticut legislative session, there are at least three problematic bills posing additional threats to home care and the home-care industry, which curiously still appear to be viable possibilities for passage.

Tom Falik.

SB-1051.  This bill purports to be “An Act Strengthening Home Care Services.”  Nothing could be farther from the truth. This bill is an amazingly transparent effort by labor unions to grab personal contact information of all caregivers placed by agencies and registries, in an attempt to unionize caregivers.

Under the bill, agencies and registries would have to quarterly submit to the Department of Consumer Protection (“DCP”) information, including the names, addresses, phone numbers and e-mail addresses of all of their caregivers.  DCP would then make this information available to other home care companies and labor unions.

SB-1051 also imposes an absurd requirement that agencies and registries submit annual cost reports and audited financial statements to DCP, for no particular purpose.

At public hearing, this bill was roundly condemned by all segments of the home care industry and opposed by DCP on budgetary grounds. Nevertheless, on March 21, the Human Services Committee approved this bill.  The subsequent Office of Fiscal Analysis fiscal note for this bill estimated potential costs to the State of $579,101 over the next two years (not to mention the additional cost to the industry), which should be way too expensive, even for union supporters.

This Bill has no redeeming qualities, and should be killed, but is labor union influence over this Legislature so great that it still might pass?

HB-6931. Versions of this Domestic Workers Bill of Rights, supported by numerous religious, labor and workers’ rights groups, have been introduced in the Connecticut legislature several times since 2014.  These bills have always had some much-needed provisions and good intent, but have always included some wrong-headed and/or totally over-reaching provisions, and this year is no exception.

This year’s bill was submitted to, and taken to public hearing by, the Labor and Public Employees Committee, as a one-paragraph bill, without setting forth the problematic provisions contained in previous years’ versions of the bill. The public hearing on this one-paragraph bill attracted 27 supporters and no detractors.  After the public hearing, the real bill, which is very similar to the bills from previous years, was introduced.  This bait-and-switch tactic prevented the public from having a meaningful opportunity to raise obvious objections to this bill.

Many in the home care industry totally oppose this bill, but I would suggest that it could be acceptable, but only if the following three changes were made to the bill:

  1. Section 1 of HB-6931, which, among other things, removes the only two remaining federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) overtime exemptions available to CT home care consumers, must be deleted, or revised to retain these FLSA exemptions.

The FLSA “Companionship Exemption” is very narrow, but the FLSA “Live-in Domestic Service Exemption,” is critical to live-in care in Connecticut.  This exemption is the only opportunity for Connecticut individuals and families to obtain reasonably affordable live-in care (unless they rotate three caregivers per week to avoid overtime).  If this overtime exemption is removed, costs to Connecticut families (and state programs for individuals and families) would increase enormously.

While allowing live-in caregivers to earn overtime sounds fair, it is an illusion that would benefit very few caregivers.

Today a seven-day live-in caregiver, being paid minimum wage for 14 hours per day, will earn over $50,000 per year.  When minimum wage goes to $15/hour, this will be over $70,000.  If they also must be paid overtime, this will go to over $90,000 per year for one caregiver.

The obvious problem is that most seniors (and the State of Connecticut in their programs) cannot afford this.

Because so few people could afford this, seven-day live-in assignments would be split among two or three caregivers to minimize overtime.  This is a terrible result for both seniors (who need continuity of care) and caregivers (who would have to live in two or three homes each week to have the same level of employment).

  1. Section 5(f) of HB-6931 requires that, (1) a terminated hourly caregiver (after working for 90 days) must receive seven days’ notice of termination (and live-in caregivers, 14 days’ notice), or (2) the caregiver must be paid seven days or 14 days severance, respectively. This is not a reasonable requirement to impose by statute on seniors in Connecticut.
  2. Section 5 and succeeding Sections of HB-6931 include various protections for caregivers in the area of privacy, retaliation prevention and enforcement, and CHRO discrimination and harassment. However, Section 5 of the bill imposes these obligations only on Connecticut private-pay consumers and businesses, and exempts State-funded programs for seniors. If State-funded programs are exempted from any of these requirements, that requirement should be eliminated from this bill, and not imposed on private-pay consumers and businesses.

Unless these three changes can be made, the damage done by HB-6931 to Connecticut home care outweighs the benefits, and it should again be defeated.

HB-7164.  Buried deep in the Act Implementing the Governor’s Budget Recommendation for Human Services is a provision making all “covenants not to compete”, related to only the home care industry, void and unenforceable.  This Section 12 of the bill would eliminate the right of a home care company to recover reasonable suffered losses from a client and/or a caregiver that conspire to cheat the home care company that placed the caregiver out of its contractual placement revenue.  There are other bills before the Connecticut Legislature that seriously address covenants not to compete, that are not limited to a single industry, and that do not similarly impede proper business relationships (i.e. HB-6913).  This Section 12 should be removed from this implementer.

It is critical that legislators focus on these three threats to home care in Connecticut, and not allow the damages that they would cause.

Tom Falik is the President of Homecare Registry Solutions LLC.

CTViewpoints welcomes rebuttal or opposing views to this and all its commentaries. Read our guidelines and submit your commentary here.

Sign up for CT Mirror's free daily news summary.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

SEE WHAT READERS SAID

RELATED STORIES
Evidence not clear that Trump incited Capitol destruction
by Alan Calandro

Defending President Donald Trump is not popular and I have no interest in writing this other than adherence to truth. Recognizing the truth (if we can find it, which is not always possible of course) should make us be able to come together around that and move on with a common understanding.

Securing our nuclear legacy: An open letter to President-elect Joe Biden
by Erik Assadourian

Dear President-elect Biden: As you noted in a tweet shortly after protestors stormed the Capitol on Wednesday, “Today is a reminder, a painful one, that democracy is fragile.” Indeed it is. And so are nation-states.

Last votes of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and others
by Gary A. Franks

Finally, the election season is over. The historic elections we saw in this cycle were intriguing. The runoff elections for the U.S. Senate in Georgia put a cap on the campaign season. For many people this could be described as a COVID-19 election. I would argue that this was an election influenced by a pandemic but determined by the killing of unarmed Black people with no adequate justice for the Black community.

Not just environmental problem; Killingly plant is a great target
by Joel Gordes

In 1990, I was one of five legislators to introduce the first climate change legislation that became PA 90-219, An Act Considering Climate Change, the most popular bill of that session. Back then I considered climate change a national security issue… and I still do.

The revolution will proceed reclining: the Capitol mob, their past, and the future of democracy
by Chris Doyle

Looking at pictures of Richard “Bigo” Barnett in the U.S. Capitol last week, grinning, his foot resting on a staffer’s desk in Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office and his arms extended, I recognized a jarringly familiar if initially hard to place tableau. Barnett appeared to be acting, according to Saul Loeb, the Agence France Press photographer who snapped the picture, “just sort of like he owned the place.” Where had I seen this before?

Support Our Work

Show your love for great stories and outstanding journalism.

$
Select One
  • Monthly
  • Yearly
  • Once
Artpoint painter
CT ViewpointsCT Artpoints
Opinion Evidence not clear that Trump incited Capitol destruction
by Alan Calandro

Defending President Donald Trump is not popular and I have no interest in writing this other than adherence to truth. Recognizing the truth (if we can find it, which is not always possible of course) should make us be able to come together around that and move on with a common understanding.

Opinion Securing our nuclear legacy: An open letter to President-elect Joe Biden
by Erik Assadourian

Dear President-elect Biden: As you noted in a tweet shortly after protestors stormed the Capitol on Wednesday, “Today is a reminder, a painful one, that democracy is fragile.” Indeed it is. And so are nation-states.

Opinion Last votes of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and others
by Gary A. Franks

Finally, the election season is over. The historic elections we saw in this cycle were intriguing. The runoff elections for the U.S. Senate in Georgia put a cap on the campaign season. For many people this could be described as a COVID-19 election. I would argue that this was an election influenced by a pandemic but determined by the killing of unarmed Black people with no adequate justice for the Black community.

Opinion Not just environmental problem; Killingly plant is a great target
by Joel Gordes

In 1990, I was one of five legislators to introduce the first climate change legislation that became PA 90-219, An Act Considering Climate Change, the most popular bill of that session. Back then I considered climate change a national security issue… and I still do.

Artwork Grand guidance
by Anne:Gogh

In a world of systemic oppression aimed towards those of darker skintones – representation matters. We are more than our equity elusive environments, more than numbers in a prison and much more than victims of societal dispositions. This piece depicts a melanated young man draped in a cape ascending high above multiple forms of oppression. […]

Artwork Shea
by Anthony Valentine

Shea is a story about race and social inequalities that plague America. It is a narrative that prompts the question, “Do you know what it’s like to wake up in new skin?”

Artwork The Declaration of Human Rights
by Andres Chaparro

Through my artwork I strive to create an example of ideas that reflect my desire to raise social consciousness, and cultural awareness. Jazz music is the catalyst to all my work, and plays a major influence in each piece of work.”

Artwork ‘A thing of beauty. Destroy it forever’
by Richard DiCarlo | Derby

During times like these it’s often fun to revisit something familiar and approach things with a different slant. I have been taking some Pop culture and Art masterpieces and applying the vintage 1960’s and 70’s classic figures (Fisher Price, little people) to the make an amusing pieces. Here is my homage to Fisher -Price, Yellow […]

Twitter Feed
A Twitter List by CTMirror

Engage

  • Reflections Tickets & Sponsorships
  • Events
  • Donate
  • Newsletter Sign-Up
  • Submit to Viewpoints
  • Submit to ArtPoints
  • Economic Indicator Dashboard
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Commenting Guidelines
  • Legal Notices
  • Contact Us

About

  • About CT Mirror
  • Announcements
  • Board
  • Staff
  • Sponsors and Funders
  • Donors
  • Friends of CT Mirror
  • History
  • Financial
  • Policies
  • Strategic Plan

Opportunity

  • Advertising and Sponsorship
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Use of Photography
  • Work for Us

Go Deeper

  • Steady Habits Podcast
  • Economic Indicator Dashboard
  • Five Things

The Connecticut News Project, Inc. 1049 Asylum Avenue, Hartford, CT 06105. Phone: 860-218-6380

© Copyright 2021, The Connecticut News Project. All Rights Reserved. Website by Web Publisher PRO