OAKLAND - A U.S. District Court judge issued an injunction Thursday afternoon ordering the state of California to halt a proposed $2 cut in wages for the state's 400,000 home care workers. The injunction has the effect of stopping pay cuts in all California counties that were planning on passing the state cut through to their homecare workers.
The injunction, issued by federal judge Claudia Wilken, was in response to a lawsuit filed by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), which has 250,000 home care members in California.
"This ruling is bringing hope to hundreds of thousands of home care consumers and workers all across the state," said Mary Harms, a home care worker in Contra Costa County. "We had no choice but to ask the court to help us after the governor and legislature let everyone down and put so many people in danger."
The enjoined state budget cuts would have slashed homecare workers' wages to as low as $9.50 an hour. The wage cuts would have forced thousands of homecare providers to leave their employment to seek living-wage jobs, forcing frail seniors and people with disabilities to enter nursing homes or other residential institutions.
The lawsuit alleges the wage cut violates the federal Medicaid Law, Americans with Disabilities Act, and Rehabilitation Act.
Martinez et al. v. Schwarzenegger et al. – June 25, 2009 update
What is the case about?
Homecare consumers and their providers have sued the state and county agencies to stop IHSS wage reductions. The case arose out of a new state law enacted in February and scheduled to take effect July 1, 2009. The new law caps the state's contribution in wages to a top wage of $9.50 per hour, which is a $2.00 per hour reduction from the current cap of $11.50.
What just happened in court?
• Plaintiffs filed a motion asking for a preliminary injunction to prevent the cuts from taking effect on July 1.
• The state and Fresno County opposed the motion.
• Plaintiffs argued several points, including procedural and substantive Medicaid claims, as well as violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act.
• Ruling from the bench during a hearing on the motion on June 25, 2009, Judge Claudia Wilken issued an injunction prohibiting the state from implementing the reduction.
• Judge Wilken based her ruling on the Medicaid procedural claim, which asserts that the state failed to conduct a required impact study to assess the impact of the wage cut on access to care and quality of care.
• Because Judge Wilken was able to reach her conclusion clearly and quickly with respect to the procedural claim, she did not rule on any of the other claims.
• This means that Judge Wilken did not rule on the claims against Fresno, preferring to see how the county reacts to the injunction.
• If the county decides to submit a new rate decrease to the state, or takes the position that they can move forward with their existing rate decrease submission, plaintiffs can get before the court on short notice to seek a temporary restraining order so that no cuts can occur in Fresno County.
What's next?
Plaintiffs will demand that the state implement Judge Wilken's decision by issuing an All County Letter disapproving any rate reductions requested or approved since the February law change.
Attorney General Jerry Brown could be helpful here by communicating to DSS, DHCS and the Governor's office that they need to comply with the law and issue the All County Letter.
The legislature and Governor should enact new legislation to rescind the February cuts and restore the $11.50 wage cap. Even though today's ruling was "preliminary," an injunction is granted only when there is a high probability that the moving party (plaintiffs) will succeed on the merits and the harm will be irreparable. Plaintiffs met that burden today.