AB 641, as introduced, Rendon. Child care: family child care providers: bargaining representative.
Existing law, the Child Care and Development Services Act, administered by the State Department of Education, requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to administer child care and development programs that offer a full range of services for eligible children from infancy to 13 years of age.
This bill would state that the Legislature finds and declares, among other things, that it is necessary to enact legislation that would grant family child care providers the right to choose a representative to negotiate collectively with the state over the operation of the child care system.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
The Legislature finds and declares all of the
2following:
3(a) Quality, affordable child care is essential to prepare
4California’s children to succeed in school and in life and to allow
P2 1families to work and contribute to the state’s economy with the
2assurance that their children are safe and well cared for.
3(b) There is a need to improve the quality of child care and to
4reduce turnover in the industry that is charged with providing safe
5and quality care for children in California. Limited or no
6employment benefits and low wages can drive dedicated child care
7providers from the profession. The resulting turnover negatively
8impacts the quality of child care provided and
prevents children
9from receiving the type of care they require in order to be prepared
10for, and adapt successfully to, school settings.
11(c) Turnover among family child care providers is estimated at
1230 to 40 percent per year, five times higher than among teachers
13in the public school system. Experienced family child care
14providers are leaving the profession simply because they cannot
15afford to provide for their own families. Losing a caregiver means
16children’s cognitive and social development is disrupted and
17parents are left scrambling to find other arrangements.
18(d) The supply of quality child care in the market is inadequate
19to meet the demand in California. In 2010, the state lost nearly
205,700 licensed child care providers, representing a 13-percent
21decline in the supply of licensed child care and an elimination of
2211 percent of, or 44,000, licensed slots in these homes. In
2009,
23there was only licensed capacity to care for 27 percent of children
24with working parents.
25(e) Family child care is affordable and convenient; it is
26particularly vital to parents of infants and the one-in-five California
27workers who work nontraditional schedules.
28(f) Family child care providers are a vital part of the child care
29system. Their role gives them unique insight into how quality,
30access, and stability could be improved for children and families.
31But family child care providers lack any formal voice in
32decisionmaking on issues that shape the child care system and the
33way they carry out their profession.
34(g) To promote higher quality and greater access and stability
35in the child care system, it is necessary to enact legislation that
36would grant family child care providers the right to choose a
37
representative to negotiate collectively with the state over the
38operation of the child care system. Permitting family child care
39providers a formal voice will allow the state to get input from
40family child care providers and to maximize its return on its
P3 1investment in child care and will allow family child care providers
2to advocate to improve the quality, access, and stability of care
3available to California’s children and families.
O
99