Bill isn’t about union membership

As a person with some experience in providing home care to adult family members, I was quite concerned by the effects imputed to House Bill 2686 (family members as care givers) in a letter in Tuesday’s Herald (“Olympia hearing: Citizens forced to wait, and for what?”).

The text of HB 2686 that is currently posted on the Legislature’s Web site (www.leg.wa.gov) makes no reference to union membership. It does state that licensed home-care agencies may not hire nor contract with a client’s family members who provide care to that client. There is further information about this issue on the Web site for the companion bill in the Senate — SB 6601 (2007-2008). The original version of SB 6601 had essentially identical wording to that in HB 2686. However, in the meeting of the Senate Committee on Health &Long-Term Care on Feb. 7, a substitute bill was adopted that eliminates all reference to family care givers. The wording of the bill is at the “Substitute Bill” link. The “Senate Bill Report” link summarizes the discussion in committee, clarifies the change in wording, presents the arguments pro and con and lists the senators who favored the substitute bill.

I am encouraged by the action thus far in the Senate Committee, and I hope that the House follows that precedent. I encourage those with interest and concern in this area to track activity on these two bills and, if necessary, contact your legislators to request they support the substitute SB 6601 version of the bills.

Gerald L. Bartlett

Marysville