In historic vote, Minnesota home health care workers unionize

http://www.startribune.com/local/272817821.html ^ | 8-26-14 | ABBY SIMONS

[TurboZamboni]

In one of Minnesota’s largest labor organizing efforts since the Depression, home care workers across the state on Tuesday voted to join the Service Employees International Union, giving that organization the power to bargain on their behalf.

The vote is the culmination of one of the most sweeping union expansion efforts in Minnesota history and represents a victory for Gov. Mark Dayton and the DFL-controlled Legislature, who pushed through legislation that enabled the certification vote.

Workers and those they care for erupted in cheers and chants of “When we fight, we win!” when results were announced at the labor pavilion on the Minnesota State Fair grounds Tuesday.

“We have been working toward this day for many years,” said Sumer Spika, of St. Paul, a home care worker and SEIU campaign leader. “We’ve seen the stories of the lack of benefits and training and the low pay facing home care workers. We know what this does to Minnesota families and we know that it needs to change.”

But Tuesday’s vote hardly represents a majority of home care workers in the state, and the controversial action is all but certain to trigger a legal challenge.

Nearly 27,000 of the state’s enrolled 109,000 personal care attendants were eligible to vote in the election — primarily those who work for people whose care is covered by the federal Medicaid program. Only 5,872 workers — 21 percent of those eligible — cast ballots. However, the threshold requires only a majority of ballots cast. Of those who voted, 60 percent opted to join the union.

[samadams2000]

Maam sorry I can’t pick you up I’m on OT.

[FlingWingFlyer]

Just more Minnesota union corruption.

[TurboZamboni]

If everyone getting a gubmint subsidy is deemed a union member, I guess 70% of the state is union.

Even if not technically “forced” to “join the union”, you’d still be forced to pay “fair share” portion-—or about 80% of full dues.(which is what rats need to elect more rats)

[KarlInOhio]

Nearly 27,000 of the state’s enrolled 109,000 personal care attendants were eligible to vote in the election — primarily those who work for people whose care is covered by the federal Medicaid program. Only 5,872 workers — 21 percent of those eligible — cast ballots. However, the threshold requires only a majority of ballots cast. Of those who voted, 60 percent opted to join the union.

So 3500 workers can force 109,000 to join the union? Yeah, that seems fair.

[Sgt_Schultze]

Not so far from how the federal government works. When controversial subjects present in the Supreme Court, if the delicate balance is 5/4, a single justice - Kennedy usually, becomes king of the US, as that fifth opinion becomes the law for 300+ million Americans.

[DB]

So if they had gotten 3 people to vote and 2 voted for unionization, all 109,000 would have to join...

Sounds very unionesque...

[political1]

I’m sorry, but you’re going to have to pay me more or I want help you out of that wheel chair.

[onedoug]

Having taken care of a loved one till her death, this would really make me laugh...were it not actually happening.

[doorgunner69]

Ah yes, the one state that rejected Reagen not once, but twice.

Isn't this where that weird little freak Smalley comes from? And the buffoon suing Chris Kyles's widow?

[Mrs. P]

Sort of like the news story years ago from the hospital where I worked. The union was bragging about a whole department that they were able to get unionized! Only problem was the numbers, which were NOT reported in the story. Four guys - one signed a card to unionize. No vote was needed because they had their percentage and bam, unionization! The one guy who signed was real sorry too, there were changes made in their work by the union’s rules that made his job way less enjoyable.

[ImNotLying]

When the unions win, someone else loses. And you know who that will be. The old, the feeble, the weak, who were able to stay in their own home and receive care will soon be forced to be placed in a facility. What a shame.

[98ZJ USMC]

But Tuesday’s vote hardly represents a majority of home care workers in the state, and the controversial action is all but certain to trigger a legal challenge.

Sure. It represent Minneapolis, not the rest of the state.

[stylin19a]

uh-oh....remember what happened in Michigan

[cherry]

until you get into the situation of needing home care, people just do not realize how expensive it is....its really not affordable for ordinary people to afford....you have to get your loved one to become broke before the govt will kick in and even then its very controlled...

I imagine there will even less care available with this ruling...

I will say that the people that care for our children and our sick and elderly and disabled in this country are paid and benefitted like their work has no value....

[TurboZamboni]

MOBocracy

[Wage Slave]

I have been employed by one of these companies. Most of the clients are on Medicaid and the Medicaid reimbursement was about $13.00/hr.

The care givers were paid $7.25 - $8.00 per hour. Most of them were ghetto gibsmedats. There is no way the owner of the company could stay in business if he had to offer benefits or higher pay.

I hope these whiners lose their jobs. They have no concept of what a business is.

[justrepublican]

I wonder how many parents will drop out of the work force because of cost increase.

[OldMissileer]

I wonder how this will play out since SCOTUS just ruled this unconstitutional.

[wbarmy]

And as they did in Michigan, the date and time of the vote was probably only sent to reliable voters, the rest probably did not know the elections was event asking place. This is what started the voter fire in Michigan, the home health care workers found out they had been ripped off. I hope that when all of the home health care workers start seeing union dues flying out of their wallets, the same bonfire gets started there.