I-775 is not a good solution for home care

Mark Stroh

The Washington Protection and Advocacy System is the private, nonprofit organization designated by the governor, pursuant to federal law, to advocate for and protect the rights of persons with developmental disabilities, mental illness and other disabilities.

On the surface Initiative 775 looks good. Why would anyone, especially a disability rights group, oppose it? The problem is in the text of the initiative that would become law if voters answer yes to the simple but misleading question that will appear on their ballots on Nov. 6. If ever there was a circumstance when the old adage "the devil is in the detail" applies, this is it. There are a number of substantive problems with Initiative 775. Unfortunately, since the primary sponsor (Service Employees International Union) chose to give up on the legislative process and go to the initiative process, there is no way to fix these problems prior to passage. On Nov. 6, the decision is "take it or leave it."

At its heart, Initiative 775 provides a mechanism for individual providers of in-home care to form a union. That is why the Service Employees International Union is financing the campaign for its passage. We don’t object to individual providers wanting to form a union, but unfortunately, this initiative is written in such a way that the potential benefits to providers come at the expense of the seniors and persons with disabilities who use in-home care services.

Initiative 775 gives more power to the providers of in-home care services in the collective bargaining process than it does to users of these services. Providers will get to choose who represents them at the collective bargaining table. The governor will choose the employer’s side of labor negotiations. That means there will be a power imbalance favoring the providers of in-home care services. This may not seem like a big deal to many voters. But under the current system the persons who use these services are considered the employers. And that is very important to them. People with disabilities who use in-home care services have told us that the most important concept in designing the way in-home care services are delivered is that the people who use these services maintain the ability to manage and direct their care givers. I-775 shifts some of that control to the so-called home care quality authority.

In addition I- 775 does not provide adequate protection against work stoppages such as those the Service Employee International Union helped organize this year at Western State Hospital and Rainier Residential Habilitation Center.

Initiative 775 does not adequately protect the right of in-home care users to hire and fire their individual providers. It needs to clearly state that "at will" is the standard to be used when a user terminates an individual provider.

Initiative 775 restricts the liability of the home care quality authority, its members, the area agencies on aging and its contractors. This provision is poorly drafted and could have terrible implications for seniors and people with disabilities. Even the attorney general is on record as saying the implications are unclear.

There are functions assigned to the authority created in I-775 that are worthwhile. However, those functions are either currently being performed by the Department of Social and Health Services or could more cost effectively be performed through a competitive bidding process. The revised estimate from the Office of Financial Management on the administration cost of Initiative 775 is more than $6 million for a full biennium. It would be cheaper to contract with any of number of existing consumer based organizations to perform these functions and then the savings could go directly to services for seniors and persons with disabilities.

In short Initiative 775 creates bad law under the guise of improving the quality of in-home care.

There is actually some consensus around the problems in providing in-home care. However, there is not a consensus on this solution. We still need to find common ground on how to fix the problem and where to find the money. These are complicated issues that cannot be addressed appropriately with an overly simplistic ballot initiative. Complicated public policy issues are more suited to the legislative process that requires consensus building.

Ultimately, to fix the complex problems of providing in-home care, we’re going to need help from Congress. That’s why we encourage voters to look at the bipartisan effort to pass S 1298 in Congress. This bill has wide support within the disability community.

At a recent meeting a user of in-home care services summed up her opposition to I-775. She understands the problems with the current system but does not agree I -775 is the solution. She put it this way: "You don’t put a broken shoe on a lame horse."