Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« A Lady Debate Moderator! | Soon Will Come the Day When Life Vo… »

Monday, August 13, 2012

Health / Politics / Media US Department of Labor Recognizes as "Trailblazer" the Voter-Approved Home Care Aide Training Program the Seattle Times Has Obsessively Urged Lawmakers to Kill

Posted by Goldy on Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Washington's voters have overwhelmingly approved expanded training and certification requirements for long-term home healthcare workers, twice—by a 73-27 margin for I-1029 in 2008, and by a 65-35 margin for I-1163 in 2011—prompting the union-hating Seattle Times to obsessively call for the union-backed measure's repeal. In some of the dozen or so anti-1163/1029 editorials over the past few years, the editors hypocritically argued that legislators have the "moral authority" to repeal the popular SEIU-funded initiative, decrying it as "increased training that most of their members don't need ."

Well apparently, the US Department of Labor disagrees, recently recognizing SEIU 775NW's training program as a Trailblazer and Innovator of Apprenticeship. "We're supporting a new generation of workers who earn while they learn," Labor Secretary Hilda Solis said at an August 1 event commemorating the 75th anniversary of the National Apprenticeship Act.

"Establishing career pathways for home care aides is transformative not just for the home care aide but also for the long-term care system in general," explained DOL's training partnership executive eirector Charissa Raynor in a press release. "Apprenticeships create an incentive for workers to stay in the field long term, which in turn creates greater stability in the fast-growing long-term care system."

But, you know, it's backed by a labor union. So fuck it.

FacebookShare

Comments (11) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

The people for whom this issue would seem to benefit the most, people like myself who have a child with special needs did not ask for nor want this training. When the SEIU approached the legislature to push this money grab through (not once but twice) the legislature saw through the BS and told them to go to hell. Realizing the windfall that this could mean to their union coffers they paid for it to get put on a ballot, after all who would vote against more training for caregivers? I guess if you've got the cash and the power to throw around it really doesn't matter what the people who need it the most want.

Thanks for butting in though

Posted by Slackjaw on August 13, 2012 at 10:07 AM

And what about the special needs children, people with disabilities, and frail, vulnerable elders who don't have you as their Mom? They deserve to have workers who are trained to care for them in a way that improves their quality of life. Get over the union stuff and take a broader view of why this legislation was needed.

Posted by Dachsie 1 on August 13, 2012 at 10:57 AM

What about the many special needs children, people with disabilities, and frail, vulnerable elders who don't have you as their Mom? They deserve care from workers who are well trained. Get over your union bias and think more broadly and compassionately.

Posted by Dachsie 1 on August 13, 2012 at 11:09 AM

And if the notoriously anti-union Obama Labor Department recognizes it as "trailblazing", then ... um ... wait a minute.

Posted by joelgrus on August 13, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Right now, I've been chuckling over the Times' blundering headline of "Summer is Over". Gonna be in the 90s this weekend. Way to go Times. Can't even get the weather right.

Posted by CbytheSea on August 13, 2012 at 11:49 AM

The problem with the legislation was that SEIU, which wrote it and pushed it, are the ones to gain from it because they will be paid to do the training. Parents did not want it. And in fact, money to carry this out was grabbed from funding for group homes which take care of the most vulnerable people in the state, including my daughter.

Posted by sarah70 on August 13, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Dachise I would agree with you on this if caregivers were not already being trained. There was good training already in place before this was brought before the voters. This is why the people who would seem to benefit the most, people like our family, didn't want this to pass. This initiative took money and care hours away from those who need it most and redirected it to the SEIU who was the organization who created and funded this initiative. All done under the guise of helping workers receive training which they were already getting. THAT'S why the legislature turned them down...they saw it for the crock that it was.

Posted by Slackjaw on August 14, 2012 at 8:02 AM

Oh, and no anti-union bias here. I've been a union member almost all of my working life as were my parents. This might be the first pro union legislation I've ever voted against!

Posted by Slackjaw on August 14, 2012 at 8:08 AM

Luckily for the many accident victims, elderly, and other people who depend on these services to be performed by someone competent, you voted with the smallest minority in the history of Washington initiatives. You can certainly be proud of that.

Posted by aiodacklah on August 15, 2012 at 6:04 PM

You sound like you really know what you're talking about Aiodacklah...well done.

Posted by Slackjaw on August 16, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Parents who care for their adult children with disabilities are not forced to take the new training. I have never met a caregiver who regretted taking the classes that improve the lives of the people they care for. Over the years I have been in the homes of many of the clients and know that people who truly care are ready to learn.

Posted by lindas on August 17, 2012 at 9:07 PM