REMARKS OF REPRESENTATIVE GALE D. CANDARAS, ESQ. DELIVERED IN NURSES’ HALL, STATE HOUSE ON MAY 3, 2001

In a time of deep tax cuts, declining revenues and many unmet needs, each of us who serves in elective office must prioritize carefully how we allocate increasingly scarce resources. We have to be careful not to get sidetracked by an agenda that has more to do with politics than with the lives of real people. Real people such as the human service workers of the Commonwealth.

Our direct care workers are the unheralded heroes of the Commonwealth. These selfless individuals care for adults, adolescents and children who receive services through state funded, contracted programs. They provide services through treatment programs and other facilities. For the most part, they serve consumers who are struggling to overcome physical and mental challenges, substance abuse problems as well as problems relating to advancing age, abuse and poverty. These workers do everything from managing the programs to providing the essentials of daily personal care. They are responsible for the health and safety of their clients. No accolades or bonuses for them. In fact, direct care workers are among the lowest paid workers in the Commonwealth. Yet, they continue to tell you how rewarding their profession is.

Hard work may be its own reward but our direct care workers cannot pay the mortgage, car insurance and put food on the table with the rewards they receive. With salaries routinely below $20,000 per year, these workers are often obliged to work second jobs and, even then, cannot make ends meet. When the stress of trying to survive collides with the enormous stress these workers face on the job, they are often forced to choose between meeting the needs of their own families and remaining in the jobs to which they are called. When the sacrifice becomes too great, they are forced to leave and, inevitably, the most vulnerable of our citizens suffer their loss. What is fundamental about direct care relationships is that they must be built on trust and respect. Our consumers need continuity and stability to live with dignity. Having a never-ending parade of changing faces providing personal care is frightening and degrading. A civilized society cannot abide such a cavalier treatment of its most needy citizens.

People who work full time should be able to support themselves and their families and when they cannot, we need to take a hard look at why. The traditional answer was to be found in government intervention. But for the past eight years, we have listened to the mantra of less government, smaller government, no government and people now question whether government has a legitimate role in their lives. They have been lead to believe that if the very rich are allowed to grow even richer, the benefits will trickle down to the lowest level and everyone will benefit. How many times have we been told, “a rising tide lifts all boats.” Of little else we may be certain except that millions of Americans have been left behind in the boom of the past eight years. A recent study by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office based on Census and IRS data shows that for the nineteen year period from 1979 to 1997, the after-tax income of the wealthiest Americans grew by 157 per cent while the income of the “working poor” remained static or declined. The hows and whys of this phenomenon are beyond the purview of these remarks but what should be clear is that only government can be the great equalizer. There is a role for government. Lifting working families out of poverty is not only a traditional government function but it is the public trust. Ensuring that our most vulnerable citizens live with dignity, cared for by people who know and value them, is what a civilized society requires of all of us.

Our efforts in the House to raise the salaries of the Commonwealth’s human service workers as part of this year’s budget process was inspired by the direct care workers and the people they serve. Our goal was to bring all direct care workers, supervisors and management staff up to a level that more fairly compensates them. The amendment my colleagues and I sponsored gave the lowest paid workers a very modest 2-3% pay raise and further required the Administration to provide a plan by year’s end to address, over a three year period, an entry level salary floor, more equitable salary rates for all workers and an identification of recruitment and retention programs and other benefits.

This year’s budget process was marked by legislators being called upon to make very hard choices. Choices between education and senior pharmacy; hospitals and affordable housing. What we who serve in the House want you, our direct care workers to know, is that we did not forget you. You were uppermost in our thoughts throughout the budget process. The choices we were called upon to make were difficult or heartbreaking than the choices you have to make every day. Our jobs are challenging but compared to what direct care workers do every day, our jobs are easy. There are many days I believe that, when it comes to reaching people, touching peoples lives and improving the human condition, what our direct care workers do will be remembered long after what we do in the legislature is forgotten.

I hope our amendment is only the beginning of more equitable treatment. It is a modest but fair start. Until this matter is resolved, please know that your efforts are acknowledged and appreciated.