For those that want it. Contrary to right-wing lies, people aren’t “forced” to join unions. Anyway, some time ago, Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton tried to give some child care providers in Minnesota an opportunity to obtain collective bargaining rights. The exercise of those rights, currently under relentless attack all over this country, is basically what produced the American middle class. Dayton’s attempt to use an executive order was blocked in court. With the legislature back in DFL hands (at least nominally; there’s an additional remark on that, below), another effort is underway.
Sen. Sandy Pappas, DFL-St. Paul, chief sponsor of the Child Care Collective Bargaining Act, said providers should have a seat at the table, as they do in 16 states.
“They need a unified voice to have a direct impact in raising the standards and quality in the profession,” Pappas said. “To stabilize their workforce, improve their access to training and widening the availability of affordable care for children and working parents, they need a union.”
The bill would affect an estimated 9,000 in-home providers who receive state reimbursements under the Child Care Assistance Program, which is designed to serve low-income families. They would not be classified as public employees and would not have the right to strike.
More generally, in this legislature, will enough DFLers succumb to corporate special interest pressure to block progressive legislation like this, when the chips are down? Still too early to tell, I would say.
How would having a Union improve standards, quality, availability or affordability?
Typically Unions lobby for higher compensation and more job protection of poor performers. Neither of which supports the above stated goals.
I guess it could help some, since the goal of this Union would apparently be to obtain more state funding.. So they could maybe charge the actual clients less. Will they? Or will they pocket it?
FYI. I am close to this issue. The Mrs has operated childcare out of our home for 20+ yrs.
give2attain – Unions CAN form outside of the traditional one industry or one employer model. This is not about forming a union to make more money from the parents or somehow protect its poor performers. These are generally individual providers who can’t stay in business if they’re bad at it or over-charge their clients. But these are wide-flung individuals with common needs and interests – better training, working for better industry regulations, and improved reimbursement rates from the state (which is what ties THIS group of providers together – and not all child care providers across the State).
In 2011, the State cut reimbursement rates for licensed providers by 2.5%, and for legal, unlicensed providers by 14.5% – and, that legislature cut training money and the Basic Sliding fee program of the Child Care Assistance Program by over $11 million. These providers – primarily women – otherwise lack the wherewithal to fight this type of action in any unified manner; being unionized, they would have leader representatives from their Local and the assistance of union professionals to work on their behalf. Collective bargaining can help these providers to better survive the challenges of this industry – between 2000 and 2010, their numbers fell by nearly 40%, from nearly 19,000 home-based providers to about 11,400.
Why would you stand in the way of people, who if a majority of those affected so choose, decide to unionize and collectively bargain for their own improvement?
First, the daycare subsidy is not meant for the daycare providers. It is meant to reduce childcare costs for poor parents.
Just like the food program, we may buy the food, cook it and get the reimbursement check, however it is there to help care for and feed kids. If it was not there, we would simply raise our rates.
So it seems that this just another money grab by the unions and some providers. I don’t think Liberals would support it if another group of businesses colluded to increase their fees. Why would they want this?
Here is a timely link. Deqo Daycare Fraud
Comments on this entry are closed.