Worker safety

Sen. Robert Casey this week introduced legislation to expand the nation's minimum wage and overtime laws to hundreds of thousands of home care workers, who are currently excluded from those protections.

The reforms will be needed, the Pennsylvania Democrat argued, both to end the decades-old discrimination against those workers and to expand the home care workforce to meet the ever-growing need for the services they offer.

"Our Commonwealth, as well as the rest of the nation, is facing a serious problem: providing access to a quality workforce for an aging population,” Casey said in a statement announcing the bill. “The baby boom generation will start turning 65 next year and will begin to qualify for Medicare. By 2030, all 78 million will have reached that age. As this population ages, they will place new demands on our health care system." 

"We have a responsibility to do this and to get it right."

In 1974, Congress extended the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to provide wage protections to many direct care workers, including certified nursing assistants and home health aides. But the law specifically excluded workers offering so-called “companionship services,” the category where the Labor Department has put home care workers.

As a result, home care workers tend to receive lower wages and fewer benefits than most other professionals, leading to a high turnover that threatens seniors' access to in-home healthcare services.

Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) introduced an identical bill in the House last week.

“Finally, the voices of these hardworking men and women have been heard," Leonila Vega, executive director of the Direct Care Alliance, said of the legislation. "Clearly, the time has come to end unfair labor practices."

The campaign of Kentucky Republican Rand Paul is blasting away at a recent report in which the Senate hopeful questions the role of Congress to regulate mine safety.

"This is sloppy reporting on more sloppy reporting," Paul spokesman Ryan Hogan said in a statement, according to the Lexington-Herald Leader.

Hogan was referencing both a July profile of Paul in Details magazine, and comments from that article picked up this week by The Hill and The Washington Post.

Democrats in both the House and Senate are urging stricter mine-safety rules in the wake of April's deadly explosion at a West Virginia coal mine. But Paul in May dismissed the idea that mine safety is a job for Congress, Details reported, arguing instead that local lawmakers are better suited for the task.

"The bottom line is I'm not an expert, so don't give me the power in Washington to be making rules," Paul said in response to a question about the West Virginia blast, according to Details. "You live here, and you have to work in the mines. You'd try to make good rules to protect your people here. If you don't, I'm thinking that no one will apply for those jobs."

Paul's campaign office did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday. But Hogan's statement to the local press indicates that his position remains unchanged.

"Dr. Paul has been clear that he favors more local control rather than ham-fisted, one-size-fits-all dictates from Washington," Hogan said. "Insinuating Washington bureaucrats are the only solution to problems is insulting to Kentucky."

Some mine-safety experts aren't so sure. Tony Oppegard, a Kentucky-based attorney specializing in mine safety, told the Lexington-Herald Leader that Paul's comments were "idiotic."

If the government didn't regulate worker safety in the nation's mines, Oppegard said, "there would be a bloodbath."

Reform-minded lawmakers in both the House and Senate are pushing legislation to bolster the work-safety protections for miners working underground. But don't try to convince Rand Paul.

The Republican running to replace outgoing Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) in the coal-mining hub of Kentucky said recently that Washington has no business formulating mine safety rules.

"The bottom line is: I'm not an expert, so don't give me the power in Washington to be making rules," Paul said at a recent campaign stop in response to questions about April's deadly mining explosion in West Virginia, according to a profile in Details magazine. "You live here, and you have to work in the mines. You'd try to make good rules to protect your people here. If you don't, I'm thinking that no one will apply for those jobs." 

"I know that doesn't sound …  I want to be compassionate, and I'm sorry for what happened, but I wonder: Was it just an accident?"

Democrats in both chambers in recent weeks have introduced legislation designed to rein in mining companies with a history of ignoring work-safety rules in order to maximize coal production.

Democrats and Republicans in the House are blaming each other for the defeat Thursday evening of a bill that would have provided healthcare coverage to first responders of the Sept. 11 attacks in New York City.

Democrats blasted the GOP for its almost unanimous opposition to the bill, which only 12 Republicans supported. But the 255-159 vote in favor of the legislation would have been enough to carry the day, had the Democratic leadership not brought it up under suspension rules, which prohibit amendements and dictate a two-thirds majority for passage.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka called the vote "a disappointment" that "should not be a setback."

"Sadly, the majority of House Republicans voted against this bill, even though its [$7.4 billion] costs were fully paid for as required under the PAYGO rules by closing a tax loophole for foreign firms that operate in the United States," Trumka said in a statement. "It appears that some Republicans and business groups, including the Chamber of Commerce, are more concerned with protecting the interests of the foreign based companies who try to avoid paying taxes than helping those who answered the nation’s call on 9/11."

West Virginia Sens. Jay Rockefeller (D) and Carte Goodwin (D) on Thursday introduced legislation designed to protect miners from their companies.

Sen. Robert Casey (D-Pa.) next week will introduce legislation to extend employee wage protections to home care workers. 

The news comes just one day after Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) unveiled a proposal to provide minimum wage and overtime rights to home care workers, a subset of the direct care workforce that's currently excluded from labor protections granted most other employees.

Supporters of the legislation say it would end the decades-old discrimination against home care workers, who provide health and other domestic services to sick and elderly folks — services that often allow those patients to stay out of nursing homes.

The Casey bill, expected to be released Monday, is identical to the Sanchez bill, his office said Thursday.

On top of extending wage protections to home care workers, the proposals would also compile national wage and employment data on direct care workers, and provide $125 million for states to recruit, retain and train those employees.

The Department of Labor is eyeing similar reforms. The agency said this week that it would propose new rules home care workers in October 2011. 

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) lashed out at the House leadership on Thursday for requiring a two-thirds majority to pass a bill requiring healthcare for first responders to the 9/11 attacks. The bill is expected to come up later Thursday under suspension of the rules, with no amendments allowed.

"It's an outrage," Bloomberg said at a morning press conference, according to The New York Observer. 

The comments echo similar statements from Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), a lead co-sponsor of the bill who tore into the Democratic leadership in an interview with The New York Daily News on Wednesday.

"The Democrats are guilty of moral cowardice and a failure of leadership," King told the Daily News. "They put this up on the suspension calendar knowing it’s not going to get a two-thirds vote ... It’s really morally disgraceful … They are letting cops and firefighters die because their members don’t have the guts to take a vote."

Bloomberg said much the same thing, according to the Observer.

"They should bring it up," he said. "A majority of people would vote for this bill and it will pass and they know full well that they will not get 60% or whatever their threshold. Is it 60%? ... it's 66%.

"They will not get that. And they know that. So this is a ways to avoid having to make a tough decision and our, the people who worked down at 9/11 whose health has fallen apart because they did what America wanted them to do. This is an American problem and Congress should stand up.

"And I know it's a tough vote for some people. Hey, I get tough votes every day. I get tough votes with you every day where you want to know where I stand. I don't have a lot of sympathy. They should bring this up and vote up or down on any amendments and vote up or down on the bill. And go on the record! And that incidentally is what the leadership should force."

The Department of Labor (DoL) said this week that it will be 15 months before the agency proposes changes to the pay rules for home care workers, who currently aren't covered by the minimum wage and overtime protections granted most employees.

The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) provides wage protections for most direct care workers, but the DoL has exempted home care workers, whom it considers "companions" not eligible for the law's pay rules.

In April, DoL announced its intention to update the companionship language "in light of the changed nature of the employment relationship for the majority of the companions to the aged and infirm, the increased formalization of this sector of the labor market, and to reflect the secretary's strategic objectives."

The agency said Wednesday that it will issue its proposed update in October 2011.

Meanwhile, Rep. Linda Sanchez wants to make the change legislatively. The California Democrat on Wednesday introduced legislation to eliminate the FLSA exclusion of home care workers. The change, she told reporters, should be solidified in law, not left to the whims of any one administration.

The House has postponed until Thursday a vote on a bill guaranteeing healthcare benefits to first responders to the site of the 9/11 attacks in New York City. The vote is expected around mid-day; passage will still require a two-thirds majority under suspension of rules. 

The bill cleared the Energy and Commerce Committee in May, but the Democratic leadership had delayed getting it to the floor.