Union, county clash over caregiver wages
Private contract negotiations almost went public Jan. 9 after several dozen United Domestic Workers demonstrating in favor of a substantial pay raise were met with a presentation by a Kern County’s senior staff member on why they still haven’t gotten one.
The result was a contentious morning meeting of Kern’s Board of Supervisors that focused on the importance, and the financial complexities, of in-home supportive services rendered to people who are advanced in age or disabled.
No action was taken by the board, and closed-door negotiations between the labor union and the county are expected to continue. If anything was accomplished, it was a show of strength by UDW, alongside an airing of grievances and a vigorous defense by county Chief Administrative Officer James Zervis.
What also emerged is a more nuanced understanding of where the two parties stand in the bargaining process and how county, state and federal governments work together — or don’t — to pay for and administer inhome supportive services.
The day started at about 8:30 a.m. in the cold air outside the board chambers. About 50 UDW members chanted slogans such as “Quit ignoring us” and “Sí se puede.” Some raised signs with demands like “Fair contract now” as they walked in a circuit.
UDW Regional Manager John Rozo meanwhile spoke to reporters, and though he shied from providing the level of detail Zervis would later disclose at the board meeting, he said the county’s offer amounts to pennies.
After going seven years with no contract, Rozo said, UDW workers were overdue for an increase beyond their current rate of $16 per hour, which he pointed out is $1 per hour less than IHSS workers get in Santa Barbara County and $2 less than the going rate in San Luis Obispo County.
Inside, when supervisors finally took up contract talks that have in previous meetings dominated the board’s public comment sessions, Zervis was asked to give a detailed explanation of the situation.
Zervis noted the idea behind government reimbursement for IHSS services was that keeping care recipients in their home, through assistance with chores like bathing, costs taxpayers less money overall than funding institutional care.
He said the county has a limited role to play, in that it doesn’t hire, fire or direct the workers’ activities; the care recipient does those things. The county does some background-screening and training, he said, but its primary responsibility
regards negotiating service-providers’ labor contracts.
Among the slides he showed the board was one that said there were 13,307 IHSS care recipients in Kern and 13,614 eligible workers — and thus a surplus of 307 care providers. Zervis acknowledged areas like Arvin and Delano experience shortages of as many as 48 workers each.
Zervis pointed to a state law adopted in 2022 that he said targeted Kern and two other counties with financial penalties if they cannot reach an agreement with unions representing IHSS workers. Kern’s penalty came to $788,148 last year, though Zervis noted the money was pooled and some of it may ultimately return to the county.
After criticizing that law as a distortion of the county’s negotiating authority, Zervis spoke hopefully of a
newer law tasking the state with finding a better alternative to county-by-county IHSS contract negotiations.
Another point Zervis made was that the county has no say over who qualifies to receive in-home supportive services, and so Kern is unable to limit or predict its future expenditures. He also told the board that, because such workers’ hourly wages have risen from $10.50 to $16 during the past seven years, they have effectively received a 52.4% raise.
Last year the county offered a 40-cent-per-hour raise to IHSS workers, Zervis said, after the Board of Supervisors said it would prefer the penalty amount go instead to laborers. But Zervis said the UDW rejected the offer and so wages did not increase.
More recently, Zervis said, the county has offered the UDW a 60-cent pay increase per hour. He added that the union has rejected that offer in favor of a $1 per hour raise, which by his calculations would cost Kern’s general fund almost $2.3 million.
Problem is, the contract would expire June 30 of this year, he said, meaning the parties would have to return to the bargaining table quickly. He suggested a three-year deal made more sense.
At the conclusion of the presentation, but before public comment began, District 1 Supervisor Phillip Peters blamed the state, saying Kern has “all the responsibility but we don’t have any of the authority.” If state lawmakers wants to be in control of local bargaining, he said, “then they should step up.”
Rozo was the first to speak during the public comment period, and after asking all IHSS providers in the audience to stand — about 60 did — he said Zervis was wrong to state the county bears 35% of locally delivered IHSS costs. In fact, Rozo said, Kern’s share comes to about 16.5%, which Zervis later acknowledged was correct after factoring in the federal government’s contribution.
More than half a dozen IHSS workers followed, including Sandy Moreno, who said she left her career to take care of her grandmother and now earns about a third of what she did before.
“Just because I’m caring for a family member doesn’t mean that I’m not doing work,” Moreno told the board.
IHSS provider Julie Rocha took the lectern to say that for more than five years she has served as caregiver to her daughter with a traumatic brain injury. By failing to come to terms with the union, she said, supervisors are effectively ignoring the health and well-being of the community.
After public comments closed, and board Chairman David Couch reminded the audience no action was proposed, District 5 Supervisor Leticia Perez said it appeared progress had been made and that she had “every confidence that we’re moving forward in clarity.”
Couch added that the county faced a delicate balancing act in treating everyone with fairness and respect while also dealing with finite resources. He pushed back against accusations the board is ignoring the matter, saying supervisors frequently discuss the subject in closed session.
As UDW workers filed out of the chambers, they went back to chanting.
“Dollars not cents!” they repeated.