Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Long Term Care topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill to shift IHSS collective bargaining from counties to state level
Summary
AB 283 would centralize collective bargaining for in-home supportive services (IHSS) providers at the state level. Supporters argued it would raise wages and stabilize the workforce; county groups raised implementation and cost concerns.
The Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement advanced AB 283, a measure by Assemblymember Haney that would move collective bargaining for in-home supportive services (IHSS) providers from county-level authorities to a single statewide process.
Haney told the committee IHSS providers number "over 700,000" and the program serves "over 800,000 recipients," and argued the current county-by-county bargaining system prevents establishment of a living wage and contributes to workforce turnover. "By transitioning the collective bargaining process from the county level to the state, AB 2 83 will provide IHSS workers with living wages and benefits, ensure a more equitable distribution of long term care funds," Haney said.
Providers and recipients spoke in support. Sabrina Bishop, an IHSS provider from San Diego, described the bargaining process as "broken" and said some counties paid only minimum wage, leaving workers to take multiple jobs. IHSS recipient Ronald Penn said his provider enables him to remain at home: "Without her, I would end up in a state facility," he told the committee.
County representatives and public authorities raised concerns about scope, cost allocation and operational impacts. Justin Garrett of the California State Association of Counties, speaking also for the County Welfare Directors Association, said counties have invested county funds and are working with the administration through a CDSS workgroup. Garrett noted counties recently proposed amendments to address three concerns: (1) that the state pay its share of costs for any increases from state bargaining; (2) remove county and public authority administrative functions from the scope of state representation; and (3) ensure county and public authority input on implementation of state bargaining results.
Assemblymember Buiner moved the bill; Assemblymember Wynne seconded. The committee recorded a roll-call vote and the bill was referred to the Committee on Appropriations; a later summary recorded the committee vote as 7-0 in favor. Committee members asked the author to work with stakeholders to consider family care workers and other categories that may need separate treatment; the author said she and sponsors would continue to discuss outstanding issues.
