S&F Online
The Scholar & Feminist Online is a webjournal published three times a year by the Barnard Center for Research on Women
BCRW: The Barnard Center for Research on Women
about contact subscribe archives links
Issue: 8.1: Fall 2009
Guest Edited by Gisela Fosado and Janet R. Jakobsen
Valuing Domestic Work

Jennifer Klein and Eileen Boris, "Organizing Home Care"
(page 4 of 4)

Our forthcoming book, Caring For America, traces the various stories of home care workers. We follow home care's political trajectory in both New York and other cities, such as Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, to see how workers and community organizers experimented with strategies that would make unionism in this sector succeed for clients and caretakers. Successful strategies include organizing in the community, direct action tactics, mass visits to the legislature, female rank and file leadership, and a new kind of steward system that could meet the needs of workers who often could not leave the home. We also write about social movements among the disabled and the elderly, which became crucial to home care workers organizing. Not only did workers organize on their own, but they cultivated political strategies and relationships at the state level. They too sought public benefits that would enable them to live with security and dignity. Together, they took labor that seemed private and projected it into the public sphere, turning the welfare state into their terrain of social struggle. They have also had to build concepts and strategies reflective of the increasingly complex inter-personal relations essential to care work.

Before the current recession, New York's home care aides made less than those in California, where unions more successfully gained higher wages through bargaining with the state. Many still had to rely on the strategies of the poor—turning to welfare or Medicaid, living with relatives, and taking on extra jobs. One of these retired workers, Jamaican immigrant Evelyn Coke, became the plaintiff in a high-profile lawsuit initiated by SEIU to challenge their exclusion from FLSA. Coke spent twenty years cooking for, cleaning up after, and bathing clients on Long Island, sometimes working twenty-four-hour shifts but rarely paid for overtime.[9]

Coke v. Long Island Care at Home exposed the limits of the search for care on the cheap. In its brief to the Supreme Court, New York City rationalized the exemption on the basis of expense. In contrast, civil, women's, and immigrant rights groups stressed the need to correct prior discrimination against household workers and revalue domestic labor. In foregrounding the concerns of receivers of domestic and personal services, Associate Justice Stephen Breyer erased the presence of providers. The Court unanimously ruled against Coke in 2007.[10] However, it left open the door for Congressional action or administrative rule changes. Long-term care could be added to social insurance, so that it becomes a right of citizenship.

Yet as our historical research has found, it takes personal and social transformation to tackle the more fundamental challenge: revaluing the labor of care. Trade unionism or other forms of collective organization, as with Domestic Workers United in New York, enables home-based caregivers to find others doing the same labor, recognize it as real work, form cultures of solidarity across race and ethnic lines, and become active political agents who put in the forefront the most urgent needs of our society. Such care worker unionism pleas for larger social benefits, advocating better care and better jobs. It not only seeks to make the home a place of dignity and respect for all those who labor there, but to recognize our fundamental human connection.

Endnotes

1. Robin Herman, "Demand for Home-Care Workers Is Rising in City," New York Times 2 October 1981. [Return to text]

2. Patrick McGeehan, "For New York, Big Job Growth in Home Care," New York Times 25 May 2007. [Return to text]

3. Rhonda J.V. Montgomery, Lyn Holley, Jerome Deichert, and Karl Kosloski, "A Profile of Home Care Workers From the 2000 Census: How It Changes What We Know," The Gerontologist 45: 5 (2005), 593-600. [Return to text]

4. See "Demand Still Rising Fast for Direct Care Workers" on the Direct Care Alliance, Inc. blog (accessed 27 December 2009). [Return to text]

5. This narrative appears in another from in our book, Caring for America: Home Health Workers Under the Shadow of the Welfare State, forthcoming from Oxford University Press. [Return to text]

6. Mary Poole, The Segregated Origins of Social Security: African Americans and the Welfare State (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2006). [Return to text]

7. "Report on the Quality of Care and Operating Practices of the Home Attendant Program: Summary of Significant Observations," Oct. 25, 1978, unpublished manuscript, New York State Library; Metropolitan Regional Audit Office, "Audit of Home Attendant Services, New York City, Department of Social Services, #76-835-S-029-58," Aug. 1977, McMillan Library, NYC, 8, 14-18; Joan Shepard, "Payroll Foulup Angers Home Health Attendants," New York Daily News, 16 December 1977; Peter Khiss, "Program to Aid Elderly Sick Poor Marked By Fraud, State Audit Says," New York Times, 15 December 1977; Richard Severo, "Troubled Program for the Disabled," New York Times, 27 December 1977. [Return to text]

8. "Union Steps up Drive to Organize Household Workers," 32B-32J Newsletter, 46 (May 1978), 1. [Return to text]

9. Steven Greenhouse, "Justices to Hear Care on Wages of Home Aides," New York Times 25 March 2007. [Return to text]

10. Long Island Care at Home, Ltd. v. Evelyn Coke, 127 S.Ct. 2339 (2007). [Return to text]

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4

© 2009 Barnard Center for Research on Women | S&F Online - Issue 8.1: Fall 2009 - Valuing Domestic Work