“If the direct support workforce crisis is not resolved—if direct support workers in the community continue to receive low wages and poor benefits—people with disabilities, family members, and advocates may not have a say in the matter of whether direct support workers become unionized. It is far better to engage in constructive dialogue with forward-looking unions or even a single union than to let events unfold on their own,” says The Direct Support Workforce Crisis: Can Unions Help Resolve This?
Author Steven J. Taylor says the difference between the pay and benefits earned by direct-care worker in state-operated institutions and the higher amounts earned by their peers in private community services doesn’t necessarily represent an “institutional bias.” Instead, “the discrepancy reflects the fact that state workers are likely to be represented by public employee unions, while private sector workers have not been unionized by and large.”
The report outlines the history of the direct care crisis and various efforts to solve it, including other ways of raising wages and the strides made by unions. It also acknowledges that unionization of direct support workers is “deeply controversial among people in the field of developmental disabilities” and lists the main reasons, which include a concern that “unions have a history of letting the interests of workers trample the interests of people with disabilities.”
The report lists conditions for unions to meet in order to avoid sacrificing the rights and interests of people with disabilities.
Elise Nakhnikian, Senior Online Editor
enakhnikian@phinational.org
My personal opinion: I would welcome union representation. There doesn’t seem to be any other effective option to help improve the conditions for direct care workers. (With some provisions)
1.) Any union that represented me would have to have guarantees in place that ensured the rights of consumers being served. I wouldn’t want to have substandard/neglectful staff hiding behind union protection, and would like to see consumers have more direction in who performs their care.
2.) Union representation would be performance-based. If the union failed to improve wages/benefits, they could be fired. I have seen a few unions get voted in, only to just talk about improving things, and not actually do anything but collect dues and waste time.
The article does have some very interesting examples of unions protecting the rights of the consumers. If I could have something like that in my state, I would be very pleased.
Thanks for the great article!!