Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJudge Rules That Home Care Workers Are Really Just ‘Companions’
http://www.thenation.com/blog/195273/judge-rules-home-care-workers-are-really-just-companionsLabor advocates expected 2015 to be the year that some long-overdue respect finally comes to workers who provide home-based care for seniors and people with disabilities. But just as a federal reform granting those workers minimum wage and overtime pay was to be enacted this month, a district court judge has ruled in favor of the industrys objections to giving home care workers equal rights. With the revisions blocked for now, the new year brings more hardship and uncertainty to a workforce on which hundreds of thousands of vulnerable people depend.
Although twenty-one states and the District of Columbia currently mandate some overtime or minimum wages for home care workers, the rule change would have guaranteed a national baseline for decent labor conditions under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). But industry groups have long resisted expanding the rights of historically marginalized care workers and last year sued to preserve the current system for roughly 2 million workers, the vast majority of them women, disproportionately poor, immigrants and of color. The regulation, issued by the administration in October 2013 after months of political wrangling, reinterprets a forty-year-old exemption for companionship workers that excluded home care workers when lawmakers extended labor protections for domestic workers.
But Judge Richard Leon of the US District Court for Washington, DC, just issued the second of two decisions vacating the rule, siding with the Home Care Association and other business groups by declaring that the Labor Departments rule was inconsistent with the intent of Congress, and that the rule threatened to undermine services. An earlier ruling in December partially vacated the new rules for third party employers who provide in-home service to private households. The latest opinion targets the Labor Departments definition of companionship in the FLSA, contending that the Obama administration was trying to do through regulation what must be done through legislation. The decision might be challenged in further litigation, so the rule is not dead. But workers and consumers are for now still stuck with a Depression-era labor law that hasnt caught up to the realities of the industrya sector thats supposed to be at the cutting edge of healthcare.
Judge Leon found that the Labor Department overreached by defining companionship narrowly. In the Labor Departments understanding, Congress meant only to exclude casual workers performing elder sitter services, as opposed to the skilled, often physically and mentally demanding labor that home care workers typically perform today. The court countered that Congress wrote the exemption with a broader view of companionship services in mind, but were motivated by concern with the ability of their constituents to pay for in-home care on a regular basis. Thus, the judge argued, lawmakers understood the value of these workers when contemplating sitting services, but still wanted to keep wages low.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 850 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (9)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Judge Rules That Home Care Workers Are Really Just ‘Companions’ (Original Post)
xchrom
Jan 2015
OP
Um, companions wear license tags and get rabies shots. Not the same thing at all. nt
eppur_se_muova
Jan 2015
#2
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)1. women....again, fit for the lowest paid jobs.
Hope this continues in legislation....but with the teapuke congress, now, women aren't full persons.
eppur_se_muova
(36,289 posts)2. Um, companions wear license tags and get rabies shots. Not the same thing at all. nt
G_j
(40,370 posts)3. another member of the RW Federalist Society
of course