BILL NUMBER: AB 641	INTRODUCED
	BILL TEXT


INTRODUCED BY   Assembly Member Rendon

                        FEBRUARY 20, 2013

   An act relating to child care.


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   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:

  SECTION 1.  The Legislature finds and declares all of the
following:
   (a) Quality, affordable child care is essential to prepare
California's children to succeed in school and in life and to allow
families to work and contribute to the state's economy with the
assurance that their children are safe and well cared for.
   (b) There is a need to improve the quality of child care and to
reduce turnover in the industry that is charged with providing safe
and quality care for children in California. Limited or no employment
benefits and low wages can drive dedicated child care providers from
the profession. The resulting turnover negatively impacts the
quality of child care provided and prevents children from receiving
the type of care they require in order to be prepared for, and adapt
successfully to, school settings.
   (c) Turnover among family child care providers is estimated at 30
to 40 percent per year, five times higher than among teachers in the
public school system. Experienced family child care providers are
leaving the profession simply because they cannot afford to provide
for their own families. Losing a caregiver means children's cognitive
and social development is disrupted and parents are left scrambling
to find other arrangements.
   (d) The supply of quality child care in the market is inadequate
to meet the demand in California. In 2010, the state lost nearly
5,700 licensed child care providers, representing a 13-percent
decline in the supply of licensed child care and an elimination of 11
percent of, or 44,000, licensed slots in these homes. In 2009, there
was only licensed capacity to care for 27 percent of children with
working parents.
   (e) Family child care is affordable and convenient; it is
particularly vital to parents of infants and the one-in-five
California workers who work nontraditional schedules.
   (f) Family child care providers are a vital part of the child care
system. Their role gives them unique insight into how quality,
access, and stability could be improved for children and families.
But family child care providers lack any formal voice in
decisionmaking on issues that shape the child care system and the way
they carry out their profession.
   (g) To promote higher quality and greater access and stability in
the child care system, 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. Permitting family child care
providers a formal voice will allow the state to get input from
family child care providers and to maximize its return on its
investment in child care and will allow family child care providers
to advocate to improve the quality, access, and stability of care
available to California's children and families.