John Eskew

In Missouri, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), have formed a coalition known as the Missouri Home Care Union. The two unions are now holding another election to unionize home care workers, after having the results of the first union election overturned. The union is seeking to represent about 13,000 home care workers. Home care workers as government employees?

As CEI Editorial Director Ivan Osorio and his co-authors note in their study of public-sector unions recently published by the Cato Institute, this tactic is not new. Evidence has shown that public-sector unions are an enormous burden to taxpayers. Additionally, well-funded unions create a permanent constituency for Big Government. The Missouri example follows the same pattern as the models established in California, Oregon, and Washington state for unionizing home care workers who look after disabled and elderly residents.

Some unions are now trying to expand the definition of “public” by trying to organize government contractors. Washington state provides a good example of this. There, the trend began in 2001, when voters approved a ballot measure, Initiative 775, to allow independent long-term health care providers to unionize and bargain collectively over hours, compensation, and working conditions. Then in 2007, Washington state authorized collective bargaining for adult home care providers who receive Medicaid and other state aid. Stretching the definition of “public employee” to any home-care provider who may contract with the state can give a public employee union a foothold in the private sector.

The roots of the Missouri unionization campaign started with a proposition on the November 4, 2008, ballot–Proposition B.

The language of the bill was harmless enough, “Shall Missouri law be amended to enable the elderly and Missourians with disabilities to continue living independently in their homes by creating the Missouri Quality Homecare Council to ensure the availability of quality home care services under the Medicaid program by recruiting, training, and stabilizing the home care workforce?”

The exact cost of this proposal to state governmental entities is unknown, but is estimated to exceed $510,560 annually. Additional costs for training are possible. Matching federal funds, if available, could reduce state costs. It is estimated there would be no costs or savings to local governmental entities.

Unions are never mentioned in the ballot initiative. The Associated Press wrote, “The ballot summary shown to voters said nothing about making it easier for in-home care providers to unionize.” The proposition passed overwhelmingly 75.3 percent to 24.7 percent. The SEIU was quite disingenuous and deceptive in getting Proposition B passed, having donated $936,575 for the effort.

After the election, the union organizing campaign went into full swing. Home care providers voted overwhelmingly in July to be represented by the new union, after being promised better wages and more hours by union organizers. Those election results were challenged in court by Integra Healthcare Inc., which alleged various procedural flaws. It also alleged that the Missouri Quality Homecare Council violated the state Sunshine Law by meeting without first posting a public notice and without keeping minutes.

A Missouri judge has barred the July election results from being counted and stated that a new election is necessary. He also ruled that the Missouri Quality Homecare Council had violated the state Sunshine Law. The union twisted the ruling around on its website, stating that the rerun of the election is happening at the union’s request.

The unionization process is fundamentally flawed, as it would place additional requirements on home care workers working under the Medicaid system, and increase overall health care costs. Additionally, it would cost far more than the $510,560 estimated in the proposition. Moreover, state programs already exist to keep patients in their homes. In short, the effort is mostly about expanding the ranks of the SEIU and AFSCME.

Missouri governor Jay Nixon has cut 1,800 state jobs in his first two years in office, and his recent budget recommendations call for $253 million in cuts, $121 million from Medicaid. Thus, even if the rerun of the union election is successful, home care providers will be stuck paying union dues, while getting nothing in return. This is yet another glaring example of tax payers and workers alike getting burned by public-sector unions.