Union campaign poses a collision course Carcieri fiercely opposes low-wage day-care providers' quest to gain recognition as state workers BY BRIAN C. JONES

MELIDA BRITO’S WORKDAY begins at 7 in the morning and continues for another 10 hours as she and an assistant take charge of eight children in her Providence home, where she has run a day-care program for the past seven years. Ranging in age from six months to 41/2 years, the children toss food onto the floor, take naps, line up for hand washing before lunch, march to the park in nice weather, get medication when they are sick — and, as a group, present a never-ending host of logistical challenges.

But grueling as the custodial aspect of the job is, Brito says it is not the most important part. Instead, what counts is shaping tiny personalities, introducing them to reading, art, and music, building character while there’s still time. "Each child you need to treat as an individual that has their own personality, their own needs, and you need to respect each child the way they are," Brito says. "It is not easy. It is not easy."

The job doesn’t pay that well, either — less than $3 an hour by some measures, and it lacks the benefits — paid sick leave, vacation, disability pay, and retirement planning — typical of the occupations that society considers vital. This is exactly why Brito, and what appears to be a majority of Rhode Island’s 1300 certified home day-care providers, want to be declared state employees and be represented by a labor union.

If the effort succeeds, it could bolster a family day-care system that has struggled for decades to achieve public respect, and higher pay and fringe benefits for its practitioners, many of them low-income mothers. But a successful drive could also upset Governor Donald L. Carcieri’s plans to reduce the state’s already-shrinking 15,300-person workforce, and to limit the money that taxpayers spend for public employee benefits.

The union leading the campaign, the New England Health Care Employees Union, District 1199 — part of the giant Service Employees International Union (SEIU) — believes the day-care workers’ quest for labor representation could be the first of its kind in the nation. Home day-care providers in Rhode Island, like their counterparts nationally, are considered independent contractors, running mini-businesses from their homes.

But in hearings concluded last month before the State Labor Relations Board, the union argued that the providers have such a close relationship with state government that they are "de facto" state workers. Many daycare providers get all or much of their income from the state, caring, for example, for children of parents eligible for state subsidies. Further, hundreds of day-care providers are eligible for health insurance through RIte Care, the state’s low-income health plan.

The union contends that these financial relationships — plus what it describes as an extraordinary degree of state regulation and oversight — meet the complex legal test for gaining recognition as state employees (see "Who’s the boss").

The organizing campaign has been quietly underway since last summer, when a group of about 300 home day-care providers asked District 1199 to help them form the union. The providers were members of a largely Providence-Pawtucket group, the Day Care Justice Co-op, which has long fought for reforms. The SEIU-affiliated union, in turn, is plowing a lot of energy into the effort, citing the collection of more than 900 union cards — an indication that about 70 percent of those eligible favor the union.

Union organizing campaigns are typically emotional and hard-hitting events, and this one is no exception.

District 1199 is employing seven organizers, who for months have been going house to house to meet individually and in groups with the day-care providers. Four of the organizers are bilingual and speak Spanish, since many of the providers are Latinos. The union has also hired Chas Walker, a former Co-op organizer, to help with the organizing drive. Matthew Jerzyk, previously the director of Rhode Island Jobs With Justice, an activist community and labor organization, and a well-regarded organizer, has been brought on. District 1199 plans a public relations campaign to focus attention on the importance of day-care, and it’s conducting a survey of parents to learn more about their needs.

Not surprisingly, the state is resisting the unionization effort, saying that while the day-care providers supply a vital service, they are not state workers. Rather, the state contends, they are independent businesses, sometimes incorporating as such and hiring assistants. Nor do all providers support the union drive, including some in northern Rhode Island, who say they didn’t realize they were endorsing the campaign by signing union cards. They also fear losing valuable tax benefits if they are no longer classified as independent contractors.

Meanwhile, one important subtext is whether American labor unions, whose traditional base in manufacturing and industrial employment has been shrinking for decades, can find new supporters among low-wage and immigrant workers. The employment landscape has become much more complex in the last several decades, with the development of job agencies that contract with other firms to supply workers, albeit without the headache and responsibility of being the firms’ employers of record.

Scott Molloy, a labor professor at the University of Rhode Island and former bus drivers’ union president, says unions have had to "look as imaginatively and innovatively as possible" in enlisting new groups of workers. In this case, Molloy says, the day-care mothers are a sympathetic group with close community and professional ties. "This is a public relations nightmare for the governor," he says. "It’s pretty hard to come down on mothers doing a pretty demanding job and not getting a lot for it. It’s pretty hard to portray them in a negative light."

Jeff Neal, a spokesman for the governor, says Carcieri thinks the union has little chance of having the day-care workers declared state employees. "He believes this is an open and shut case — that there is little doubt that no employer-employee relationship exists between the state and these individuals," Neal says, adding, "We have every expectation that the State Labor Relations Board will recognize that."

ANXIETY RUNS THROUGH both sides of the organizing effort. A number of providers were frightened to talk with the Phoenix on the record. Critics of the drive say they fear retaliation and name-calling by union supporters. Union supporters say they are afraid state regulators will make life tough for them if the organizing bid fails. Watching from the sidelines — and adopting a wait-and-see position — are a number of the advocates and organizations that have helped steadily improve day-care conditions over the past two decades.

Elizabeth Burke Bryant, executive director of Rhode Island Kids Count, an organization that researches and helps shape policies involving children, notes that activist family day-care providers have previously led to reforms — such as their receipt of RIte Care health insurance. It’s important that the state "move in the direction of having society and policymakers understand that child care is an important business we need to value and support," Burke Bryant says. "As to the specifics of the union, I don’t know enough to take a position on whether the union is good or not good." Similar views were expressed by officials at Providence’s Ready to Learn program and The Poverty Institute at Rhode Island College School of Social Work.

In recent years, Rhode Island has made huge strides in providing services to parents who must find care for their young children while they work, and the program’s scope has brought the state national attention. For families who meet the guidelines — incomes must be 225 percent or below the poverty line (about $34,000 for a family of three), day-care subsidizes are an entitlement, meaning care is much more available than in other states. Higher income parents contribute part of the cost.

The state plows considerable resources into the subsidies for about 14,000 children, about 23 percent of them in home day-care settings, the rest in larger formal day-care centers (which aren’t involved in the union campaign). The total annual day-care subsidy is about $82 million, mostly in state tax dollars. That compares to $18.6 million in 1997, when 6600 children were subsidized.

This cost could increase if the union effort succeeds, because the home day-care workers are expected to seek the kind of benefits, including health insurance, pensions, disability pay, and paid vacations and holidays, now received by state workers. The state Budget Office estimates that healthcare alone runs $9270 a year for one state employee. Theoretically, that could mean spending $12 million more a year for home day-care providers, minus the current cost of their RIte Care insurance, a lower-cost program.

But District 1199 says upgrading conditions is important not just for providers, but the well-being of Rhode Island families who use day-care. Union representatives also bristle at suggestions that the organizing drive will burden the state’s superior day-care system.

"The state profits from the availability of home daycare for low-income folks by freeing up these folks to enter the work force," says Marc B. Gursky, the lawyer representing the union before the labor board. "This is not a benevolent plan for the state. The reason these folks brought in the union and asked it to represent them is, the level of compensation they get for services they provide is, number one, not adequate and not proportional to the responsibility they have."

MELIDA BRITO, 52, operates her day-care in her home in Providence’s Armory District neighborhood. An elementary school teacher when she lived in the Dominican Republic, Brito says the work is rewarding, but stressful, because of the long hours and logistics of tending to children with so many needs. She says the public underestimates what’s involved. "They think, maybe, that we bring the kids to our houses, we sit them down in front of a TV, have a time to eat some food and put them to sleep," she says. "That’s not the job we do."

Instead, Brito develops individual activity plans for each child, works with parents to coordinate what happens at home and day-care, and incorporates a career-long study of educational and psychological theories, from Freud to Spanish psychologist Gregorio Mateus. She believes that the most formative period in a child’s life is the first six years, making the day-care experience far more important to the child — and society — than it might seem.

Brito, who hires assistants to help her, says she concentrates on details. At naptime, she plays classical music, both to sooth the children and to introduce them to Strauss and Vivaldi. During her regular morning reading sessions, she asks the children to describe what they see in pictures, as well what they as hear in the words. Often, she says, the children spot things that even she misses.

At the same time, Brito, like other providers, must meet strict facility and equipment standards laid out by the state Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF), from the amount of space available for children, to toilet and kitchen equipment. Recently, she moved the day-care operation from the first floor of her home to a renovated basement. But Brito had to relocate back to the first floor when the city’s zoning board said her basement ceilings were too low.

All of this means a financial struggle, although Brito is proud of what she has accomplished with her day-care operation — two of her three daughters are in college. She nonetheless craves benefits, such vacation time and relief when she’s sick.

"The biggest thing is to get the package of our benefits," Brito says. For example, RIte Care medical insurance covers only the providers and their children, not spouses. Further, providers get insurance only if their care of subsidized children equals $1800 in a six-month period. "We live with a lot of insecurity," Brito says, "and that is not the way people need to live."