Legislature(2021 - 2022)GRUENBERG 120
04/16/2021 08:00 AM House LABOR & COMMERCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB87 | |
| HB145 | |
| HB149 | |
| HB125 | |
| Alaska Workers' Compensation Board | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 87 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 145 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 149 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 125 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 149-CHILD CARE PROVIDER COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
8:48:54 AM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 149, "An Act relating to allowing
certain child day care providers to organize for the purpose of
collective bargaining."
8:49:12 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS, as prime sponsor, summarized the HB 149. He
explained that it would allow child care providers, which
include business owners and employees, to vote for unionization
and subsequently negotiate with the state for wages and
benefits. He said that unionization would follow the "Right to
Work" model, with membership being optional, but those who did
choose to join would have wages and benefits set by a sectoral
model designed to raise both wages and benefits, reduce
turnover, and provide a structure under which members could have
access to better and more affordable healthcare and to
structured training.
8:50:54 AM
CHRISTINA EUBANKS testified in support of HB 149. She said
she's been an early childhood education provider in Alaska for
14 years. She said that the poor wages and benefits of child
care providers is detrimental to working families, and a healthy
early learning system depends on having a variety of providers
that are well-trained and well-compensated. She said that
Alaska's youngest residents experience alarming rates of adverse
childhood experiences, and a quality early learning system
supports children and families in building resiliency. The
system in Alaska doesn't provide the livable wages necessary to
keep a trained workforce, she said, with early childhood
educators among the lowest-paid professionals in the state
despite the high cost of child care.
MS. EUBANKS said financial investment in early childhood saves
money in education and health care costs in the long term. The
majority of early childhood educators live in poverty, which
causes stress and decreases the ability of providers to be
attuned to the needs of the children in their care. Losing a
child care provider causes stress on the family and children,
and with the shortage of child care providers in Alaska families
have to choose a provider based on what's available instead of
on what's best for the family or child. She said that
everything possible needs to be done to minimize stress on
families, children, and providers, and to keep child care
businesses open, as well as attract new ones, and to incentivize
providers. Allowing independent child care business owners the
ability to engage in collective bargaining with the state, she
said, would provide a way to increase wages and keep programs
open.
8:54:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether the proposed legislation
could reclassify private employees as state employees.
8:56:49 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS explained that the proposed legislation would
not designate child care employees as public employees. He said
that it's also stated in the proposed legislation that nothing
in the unionization or collective bargaining actions would
change the nature of the employee/employer relationship. He
said that under that provision, the child care sector, by
negotiating as such, would experience better outcomes for
workers, business owners, and working parents who utilize child
care providers. He said that it would not be a model used by
other sectors of the economy because most other sectors are
under the purview of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
He expressed that the history of excluding domestic and farm
workers from foundational labor laws allows space to create a
new model for a collective bargaining structure; the new
structure would not affect the industries currently under the
purview of the NLRA, as those industries could continue
collective bargaining within the framework of that law.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked, "In the work of Cesar Chavez,
didn't he not override what happened in the 1930s to acknowledge
those individuals you mentioned?"
CO-CHAIR FIELDS replied that he employed consumer pressure to
force union recognition. He said farm workers, historically
excluded from rights under NLRA, have the ability to petition an
employer for voluntary recognition and may employ public
pressure to do so. Employers decided that economic losses
resulting from boycotts were so great, he said, that they
decided to sign agreements with organizations such as the
Teamsters or the United Farm Workers. Co-Chair Fields pointed
out that Cesar Chavez figured out a way to make the system work
in favor of workers despite historic exclusions in a different
way than that which is contemplated in the proposed legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether HB 149 would allow child
care providers to be subsidized or whether supply and demand
would remain in effect.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS explained that with the passage of the American
Rescue Plan Act of 2021, the State of Alaska will receive $76
million per year over what is currently in receipt in community
development block grants for child care. He said, "We're going
to get a lot of additional resources, as a state, to support
child care, and I think we have a choice." He expressed that
the choice was between continuing to subsidize child care within
the framework of the existing system or expanding supply while
raising wages, using the federal resources to reduce turnover,
improve working conditions, and not raise prices on parents.
It's only because of the infusion of federal money, he said,
that such an opportunity exists. Each employer chooses whether
or not to participate, he explained, and evidence from other
states' show that it's a "win-win" situation which results in a
larger pool for health care and training programs along with
reduced turnover resulting from higher wages and benefits.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY expressed the belief that subsidizing one
industry sets a precedent for all businesses to be subsidized.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS replied that child care subsidies will continue
to exist whether or not HB 149 is passed; the question is how to
best structure subsidies to meet the needs of parents and
employers. He shared his perspective that child care subsidies
currently exist in a "broken system" and pointed out that the
amount of subsidies is determined by Congress. He referred to
the construction industry, in which there are prevailing wages
for public construction and well-funded state capital budgets,
and said that someone working in construction can support a
family. "Why have we made that decision for construction but
not child care? Aren't they both important?" he asked. He said
that the goal should be to strive to provide conditions under
which people can earn a living wage and employers can thrive.
9:04:06 AM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ pointed out that the hospitality industry is
subsidized by low-wage workers being on Medicaid. She stated
that a person can make more money working at Starbucks than
caring for children. She expressed that it's important to look
at different ways of restructuring the system. She said that
due in part to the gender pay gap, lack of child care options
make it difficult for women to participate in the workforce
because the parent who earns less money is the one who stays
home with the children. She pointed out that child care
consists of a mostly female workforce and is disproportionately
composed of people of color.
9:06:16 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS noted that it's important to look at how other
developed countries handle child care. He said that many
countries subsidize at a much higher level, which is a policy
choice they made. He expressed that HB 149 represents the most
affordable and least coercive model he could find.
9:07:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN opined that the influx of federal money
is attractive when thinking in terms of building programs, but
the unionization of child care workers would result in higher
costs. He discussed "money printing and the destruction of the
dollar" and stated his concern with using federal money. He
asked for an explanation of how unionization would reduce the
total cost of child care. He then said, "I think the ultimate
value of child care rests with - if a mother can raise the child
and be with them as much as possible. That's what I had, and it
was great." He said he's been "working" since he was four years
old because his mother had a job that would allow her to take
her child to work with her.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS asked Ms. Eubanks how having a livable wage with
benefits positively impacts an employer.
9:09:53 AM
MS. EUBANKS responded that she has some really skilled staff who
she characterized as "meant" to work in child care but who don't
see it as a career option because the pay is low and there are
no benefits such as health care or retirement. She said society
does not commonly have stay-at-home parents anymore, and parents
are often working more than one job each, so ensuring that
children are loved, cared for, and have good memories is
essential.
9:11:33 AM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS stated that when funding such as the Child Care
& Development Block Grants (CCDBG) is permanently authorized,
it's rational to plan around it.
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ asked whether continuing education for
providers could be negotiated for as part of the collective
bargaining under HB 149.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS replied yes, and pointed out that in other
states a pool of employers working together could mean more
robust training programs.
9:12:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN suggested that the "core question" is
whether HB 149 would strengthen the family or strengthen "the
state's approach to raising children."
CO-CHAIR FIELDS responded, "I think the decision has,
effectively, been made ... with 40 years of stagnant wages for
the middle class." He referred to Ms. Eubanks' statement that
most parents must work, and economic conditions have made it so
that most working families must rely on child care. He said
he's in support of everyone having the choice to stay home and
raise children, but economic conditions don't necessarily permit
the choice.
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN opined that the transfer of wealth and
commerce overseas is a big reason for the erosion of wages and
discussed repatriating overseas companies. He suggested that
building a better economy would help strengthen the nuclear
family.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS agreed and pointed out that countries with
strong economies and high-wage jobs are the same countries with
the strongest early child care and learning programs, as well as
the strongest career and technical education programs. He said
those countries invested in early care and learning because
that's how to get human capital to a point of being highly-
productive workers who are competitive in a global environment.
9:15:56 AM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ pointed out that there are many reasons why a
parent would choose to work outside the home and that the
decision should be made by the family instead of by
policymakers. She suggested finding a way to remediate the
outdated structural system of compensation to ensure that people
doing critical work are able to live with dignity.
[HB 149 was held over.]