RE: SIEU and the Home-Based Programs

[Guest guest]

Could you explain this one point further?

* Workers had to go through mandatory trainings and drug testing. In

Virginia, there had been 250,000 direct support workers. Of those only

97,000 passed the testing creating a shortage of workers.

Thanks,

Tori

From: IPADDUnite [mailto:IPADDUnite ] On

Behalf Of Charlotte Cronin

Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 10:06 AM

IPADDUnite

Cc: 'Tina Seidel'

Subject: SIEU and the Home-Based Programs

Folks, I have been communicating with Tina (Trainer) Siedel from ACES$ in

Pennsylvania. They have had quite a bit of experience dealing with unions

trying to " unionize " direct support workers in programs similar to the

Home-Based Support Services Programs in a variety of states.

Here are a few dot points that she shared with me in a phone call day before

yesterday. I hope I am re-capping them accurately.

* In states where direct support workers were unionized the cost per

hour for workers went up $4 to $5 per hour. So you would have far fewer

hours available per month.

* Participants lost the ability to decide what they wanted to pay

workers because the union agreement now dictated that. So if you wanted to

pay less, you couldn't. If you felt it was appropriate to pay more you

couldn't.

* Workers had to go through mandatory trainings and drug testing. In

Virginia, there had been 250,000 direct support workers. Of those only

97,000 passed the testing creating a shortage of workers.

* If you want to fire your worker, it will be very difficult.

* ACES$ did a study in Pennsylvania where the unions are also active

and estimated that workers in Pennsylvania would pay $7.9 million in union

dues.

* In California, the unions promised a no strike clause. But then they

struck. Apparently new union officers don't have to honor commitments of old

union officers, so it is a common practice to make these commitments while

planning to simply change officers when they need to strike.

* Tina shared these websites with me for advocates to use for a

resource: www.realinhomecarepa.com <http://www.realinhomecarepa.com/> and

the ACES$ website home page has this announcement:

http://www.acessfea.org/Alert%20on%20Union%20Visiting%20Personal%20Support%2

<http://www.acessfea.org/Alert%20on%20Union%20Visiting%20Personal%20Support%

252>

0Workers.pdf.

I will share more information as I receive it.

In the meantime I am copying Tina on this. Tina, I think it would be great

if you would join this group so you can share or answer questions as

you feel is appropriate.

Charlotte

[Guest guest]

Considering those statistics on the drug testing, which are sad, to

me that was not a negative thing, but a positive one. What kind of

people are applying for the jobs??? I think that is horrible! I

personally would not want any druggie in my home, dealing with my

family! But then, I am extremely careful about my caregivers and

have always been. Some of these things are plain common sense.

Plus to me it sounds like on the east coast, they are are much more

of an 'active' union with the caregivers than they are in Illinois.

I still do not think there is a need for it here.

Kathy

>

> Could you explain this one point further?

>

>

>

> * Workers had to go through mandatory trainings and drug testing. In

> Virginia, there had been 250,000 direct support workers. Of those

only

> 97,000 passed the testing creating a shortage of workers.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Tori

>

>

>

> From: IPADDUnite

[mailto:IPADDUnite ] On

> Behalf Of Charlotte Cronin

> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 10:06 AM

> IPADDUnite

> Cc: 'Tina Seidel'

> Subject: SIEU and the Home-Based Programs

>

>

>

> Folks, I have been communicating with Tina (Trainer) Siedel from

ACES$ in

> Pennsylvania. They have had quite a bit of experience dealing with

unions

> trying to " unionize " direct support workers in programs similar to

the

> Home-Based Support Services Programs in a variety of states.

>

> Here are a few dot points that she shared with me in a phone call

day before

> yesterday. I hope I am re-capping them accurately.

>

> * In states where direct support workers were unionized the cost per

> hour for workers went up $4 to $5 per hour. So you would have far

fewer

> hours available per month.

>

> * Participants lost the ability to decide what they wanted to pay

> workers because the union agreement now dictated that. So if you

wanted to

> pay less, you couldn't. If you felt it was appropriate to pay more

you

> couldn't.

>

> * Workers had to go through mandatory trainings and drug testing. In

> Virginia, there had been 250,000 direct support workers. Of those

only

> 97,000 passed the testing creating a shortage of workers.

>

> * If you want to fire your worker, it will be very difficult.

>

> * ACES$ did a study in Pennsylvania where the unions are also active

> and estimated that workers in Pennsylvania would pay $7.9 million

in union

> dues.

>

> * In California, the unions promised a no strike clause. But then

they

> struck. Apparently new union officers don't have to honor

commitments of old

> union officers, so it is a common practice to make these

commitments while

> planning to simply change officers when they need to strike.

>

> * Tina shared these websites with me for advocates to use for a

> resource: www.realinhomecarepa.com

<http://www.realinhomecarepa.com/> and

> the ACES$ website home page has this announcement:

> http://www.acessfea.org/Alert%20on%20Union%20Visiting%20Personal%

20Support%2

> <http://www.acessfea.org/Alert%20on%20Union%20Visiting%20Personal%

20Support%

> 252>

> 0Workers.pdf.

>

> I will share more information as I receive it.

>

> In the meantime I am copying Tina on this. Tina, I think it would

be great

> if you would join this group so you can share or answer

questions as

> you feel is appropriate.

>

> Charlotte

>

>

[Guest guest]

I am, uncharacteristically WAY behind in responding to email...

I knew a unionizied direct support work staff would not be a good thing for the

employees or families/employers and this confirms my worst fears....

Unions were great at the turn of the century when workers needed protection from

various forms of " abuse " from employers. Nowadays, we have courts to remedy

infractions of the labor laws that exist to protect workers and unions are no

longer necessary nor are they particularly favorable to those they are supposed

to be " protecting " . I hope we can prevent this from happening here in

Illinois.

We have enough challenges in the world of developmental disabilities as it is!

Thank you Charlotte for some great information.

Ellen

Ellen Garber Bronfeld

egskb@...

SIEU and the Home-Based Programs

Folks, I have been communicating with Tina (Trainer) Siedel from ACES$ in

Pennsylvania. They have had quite a bit of experience dealing with unions

trying to " unionize " direct support workers in programs similar to the

Home-Based Support Services Programs in a variety of states.

Here are a few dot points that she shared with me in a phone call day before

yesterday. I hope I am re-capping them accurately.

* In states where direct support workers were unionized the cost per

hour for workers went up $4 to $5 per hour. So you would have far fewer

hours available per month.

* Participants lost the ability to decide what they wanted to pay

workers because the union agreement now dictated that. So if you wanted to

pay less, you couldn't. If you felt it was appropriate to pay more you

couldn't.

* Workers had to go through mandatory trainings and drug testing. In

Virginia, there had been 250,000 direct support workers. Of those only

97,000 passed the testing creating a shortage of workers.

* If you want to fire your worker, it will be very difficult.

* ACES$ did a study in Pennsylvania where the unions are also active

and estimated that workers in Pennsylvania would pay $7.9 million in union

dues.

* In California, the unions promised a no strike clause. But then they

struck. Apparently new union officers don't have to honor commitments of old

union officers, so it is a common practice to make these commitments while

planning to simply change officers when they need to strike.

* Tina shared these websites with me for advocates to use for a

resource: www.realinhomecarepa.com <http://www.realinhomecarepa.com/> and

the ACES$ website home page has this announcement:

http://www.acessfea.org/Alert%20on%20Union%20Visiting%20Personal%20Support%2

0Workers.pdf.

I will share more information as I receive it.

In the meantime I am copying Tina on this. Tina, I think it would be great

if you would join this group so you can share or answer questions as

you feel is appropriate.

Charlotte