Is Public Act 12-33 a litmus test?
Public Act 12-33 allows Personal Care Attendants (PCAs) to collectively bargain with the state through the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).
This legislation was opposed by every organization that advocates for individuals with intellectual disabilities.
It was opposed by the Council on Developmental Services.
It was opposed by the Office of Protection and Advocacy for Persons with Disabilities.
It was opposed by The Arc Connecticut.
It was opposed by the Connecticut Council on Developmental Disabilities.
The Commissioner of the Department of Developmental Services (DSS) expressed grave concerns about the impact of this legislation.
The Department of Social Services and the Governor's own Workforce Council wrote that some individuals could be institutionalized.
As a consequence of this opposition, the Labor Committee did not report the bill to the General Assembly. The bill died in committee.
Nevertheless, in the General Assembly, the legislation was reintroduced through a strike-all amendment on a different bill, H.B. 5312. After twelve (12) hours of acrimonious debate, it passed and became law as Public Law 12-33 on July 1.
Testimony to the Labor Committee and lengthy debates in the House and the Senate informed every member of the General Assembly about the negative consequences of this legislation for individuals who depend on self-directed services from DDS.
The law does not reflect the complexity or the great variety in the Medicaid Waivers. It does not respect the highly personal and individualized nature of the employer-employee relationship. It establishes a centralized power structure which will compete with the individual employer. Institutional interests of the State and the SEIU may come to dominate decisions.
This law will probably curtail services. It fails to appropriately safeguard individual budgets and services. Despite the intent to protect individual services, the language falls short of full protection and begs unintended negative consequences.
The administration of this new system is beyond the capacity of the volunteer Workforce Council and will incur costs that are not included in the current budget. The new law will likely add bureaucracy and bloat costs.
All these problems were known to our legislators when they voted.
Yet many legislators still voted for this bad bill!
Click here to view the votes of our State Representatives.
Click here to view the votes of our State Senators.
In this election season it is fair to ask incumbents to explain their vote on H.B. 5312!
This web page is brought to you by Raising Voices for Action, Inc. http://raisingvoicesforaction.weebly.com
This legislation was opposed by every organization that advocates for individuals with intellectual disabilities.
It was opposed by the Council on Developmental Services.
It was opposed by the Office of Protection and Advocacy for Persons with Disabilities.
It was opposed by The Arc Connecticut.
It was opposed by the Connecticut Council on Developmental Disabilities.
The Commissioner of the Department of Developmental Services (DSS) expressed grave concerns about the impact of this legislation.
The Department of Social Services and the Governor's own Workforce Council wrote that some individuals could be institutionalized.
As a consequence of this opposition, the Labor Committee did not report the bill to the General Assembly. The bill died in committee.
Nevertheless, in the General Assembly, the legislation was reintroduced through a strike-all amendment on a different bill, H.B. 5312. After twelve (12) hours of acrimonious debate, it passed and became law as Public Law 12-33 on July 1.
Testimony to the Labor Committee and lengthy debates in the House and the Senate informed every member of the General Assembly about the negative consequences of this legislation for individuals who depend on self-directed services from DDS.
The law does not reflect the complexity or the great variety in the Medicaid Waivers. It does not respect the highly personal and individualized nature of the employer-employee relationship. It establishes a centralized power structure which will compete with the individual employer. Institutional interests of the State and the SEIU may come to dominate decisions.
This law will probably curtail services. It fails to appropriately safeguard individual budgets and services. Despite the intent to protect individual services, the language falls short of full protection and begs unintended negative consequences.
The administration of this new system is beyond the capacity of the volunteer Workforce Council and will incur costs that are not included in the current budget. The new law will likely add bureaucracy and bloat costs.
All these problems were known to our legislators when they voted.
Yet many legislators still voted for this bad bill!
Click here to view the votes of our State Representatives.
Click here to view the votes of our State Senators.
In this election season it is fair to ask incumbents to explain their vote on H.B. 5312!
This web page is brought to you by Raising Voices for Action, Inc. http://raisingvoicesforaction.weebly.com