Homecare workers draw union support on eve of hunger strike

Cristina Rodriguez-Hart is one of the DC 37 members supporting the bill to end 24-hour shifts that her union has staunchly opposed.

Harper Freeman/ The Chief

In April, Cai Qiong Liu went eight days without food, joining 14 other home healthcare workers in a hunger strike outside City Hall. The strikers were calling on City Council Speaker Julie Menin to bring to vote the No More 24 Act, which would ban 24-hour shifts for homecare workers and cap workweeks at 56 hours.

The strike ended after Menin agreed to bring the bill, Intro 303, to the Council floor. But that vote never came.

Now, Liu is back outside and has begun yet another hunger strike alongside a dozen of her colleagues. The protesters staged a two-week sit-in outside Menin’s Upper East Side home in July before calling a strike on July 28 and rallying outside of City Hall July 30 labor allies from the rank and file of unions hoping to push their union leaders to support the home healthcare aides.

“The 24-hour workday is a torture to us working women, in that it destroys our health, and destroys our families,” Liu told The Chief in Cantonese, through a translator, in the blue tent outside the gates of City Hall that has become her temporary home once again. 

Inter-union fight

While the rally demonstrated a broad range of support for the bill, the issue has pitted major labor groups against each other and created a rift within others. One such union is District Council 37, the city’s largest union of municipal employees, that was behind a May 20 rally in opposition to the bill.

Henry Garrido, DC 37’s executive director, spoke at the May 20 rally alongside leaders from major labor unions like the DC 37-affiliate Home Care Employees Local 389 and the New York City Central Labor Council as well as representatives from the Legal Aid Society and disability rights groups.  But that rally also featured DC 37 members joining pro-Intro 303 advocates in protest against their own leadership.

Among the DC 37 dissenters was DC 37 delegate Cristina Rodriguez-Hart, who called out Garrido at the July 30 rally alongside home healthcare aides

“What I've seen is a lack of leadership from my union,” said Rodriguez-Hart, a member of DC37’s Local 3005, which officially supports Intro 303. 

When she pressed Garrido on his stance, she said he claimed homecare workers in the union could lose healthcare benefits if their shifts were cut to 12 hours. Rodriguez-Hart said she’s still seeking proof from Garrido on this claim, as well as “concrete” evidence behind “broad, nebulous claims” that capping shifts at 12 hours would be cost-prohibitive.

“Plenty of homecare agencies, including small ones, have shifted over to two 12-hour shifts and they have been able to manage themselves financially,” she said. 

Garrido and other vocal opponents of Intro 303 argue that banning 24-hour shifts could cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars and bankrupt homecare providers. This would leave thousands of vulnerable New Yorkers without homecare — sending many to expensive nursing homes — and thousands of homecare workers without jobs, they argue. 

Rodriguez-Hart believes that an awareness gap about the 24-hour workday and its pay structure persists, even among union leaders. When people learn about the conditions, they usually express support for the bill, she said.

“What I ask is that the head of my union speak up for members that are not only in his union but on outside of this union too, and that Julie Menin put forward the original bill and stopped following the advice of union leaders who care more about profit-seeking home care agencies and insurance companies than they do about the well-being of their own members," she pleaded.

DC 37 did not respond to a request for comment.

Mimi Rosenberg, from Legal Aid Society ALAA–United Auto Workers Local 2325, was also at the rally despite the Legal Aid Society's public resistance to the bill. She denounced the division between labor unions on this issue. 

“The homecare worker and the disabled elder are standing on the same side,” she said. “They're on the same side of history. One is denied rest. The other is denied adequate care. Both have been told there isn't enough money, there's not enough time, there's not enough workers.”

The hunger strike set up outside the gates of City Hall, erected on July 28.

BY BRENNAN LA BRIE/ The Chief

'The 24-hour workday is exploitation'

Sleep-deprived caretakers cannot provide the care many patients need, said Craig Moore, a healthcare worker and leader of the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists.

“The 24-hour workday is exploitation,” Moore said. “No other profession in America tolerates this — no firefighters, no police officers, no nurses, no doctors, no elected officials.”

Homecare workers get paid for only 13 hours of their 24-hour shifts. In theory, they’re given eight hours to sleep, five of it uninterrupted, and three hours to eat and recharge. In practice, they often work throughout the night with sporadic rest, Liu said.

“Those who get approved for 24-hour care are all patients with very severe conditions, patients who are disabled, who cannot at all be left alone for any single minute,” she pointed out.

The hunger strike is organized by Labor for No More 24 and the advocacy group Ain’t I a Woman?!. It’s the most recent escalation of a campaign that has targeted city officials for more than a decade.

Intro 303 was first introduced by lower Manhattan City Council Member Christopher Marte in 2022, but that attempt, like others in 2024 and earlier this year, stalled out.

Several disabled New Yorkers testified at a hearing of the Committee on Disabilities in early May that Intro 303 would deprive them of in-home care, just as the bill was gaining momentum. Shortly afterwards, five of 14 city council members withdrew their names from the bill.

"Speaker Menin has long fought for stronger worker protections and remains focused on phasing out the 24-hour workday, an outdated practice that places workers under extreme physical and emotional strain," a spokesperson told The Chief in response to a comment request. "There is more work to be done, and she encourages all stakeholders to come to the table to help identify a viable and sustainable path forward."

A City Hall spokesperson did not respond to a comment request.

Each speaker at the July 30 rally emphasized that this issue is one of not just public health, but also civil rights, women's rights and immigrant rights. New York City’s healthcare workforce is 77 percent female, and 57 percent foreign-born, according to the Center for Migration Studies. 

The United Nations’ Working Group on discrimination against women and girls, in an April letter, expressed "serious concern” at the 24-hour workday, finding “several indicators of forced labor” that could potentially violate the human rights of workers, and especially migrant women. 

Despite heavy rain in the forecast, Liu plans to carry on without food until strikers secure another promise from Speaker Menin to introduce the No More 24 Act. 

“The hunger strike has been taking a toll on our health and bodies, but it's nothing compared to the damage done to our health by the 24-hour workday,” she said. 

Correction: A previous version of this article noted that representatives from SEIU Local 1199 spoke at a May 20 rally opposing legislation that would end 24-hour shifts. No leaders from that union spoke at that rally.