State turns family care into union cash cow, suit claims

The Mackinac Center for Public Policy will represent family caregivers in their lawsuit against the Michigan Employment Relations Commission and the Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity on Wednesday.

The complaint filed in the Court of Claims on behalf of two home health care providers alleges that the agency is unlawfully preparing an election that may end up designating the Service Employees International Union as the exclusive bargaining representative for the providers. That change of designation, which came after Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed enabling legislation last year, allows unions to skim the paychecks of home health care workers even though it can’t boost their pay.

The lawsuit claims that Tammy Martin, Dick Sullivan and thousands of providers who care for loved ones at home were illegally designated as public employees for the sole purpose of unionization.

The plaintiffs claim that the legislation to allow the unionization of home help providers, via two laws enacted in 2024, violate state and federal law.

Public Act 144, the Home Help Caregiver Council Act, created a council governing home care work that has since been allocated $7 million. The act requires all state-paid providers caring for disabled or sick loved ones at home to attend an orientation program which includes a membership pitch from the union.

The Service Employees International Union collected an estimated $34 million from family caregivers under a previous dues skim scheme that existed in Michigan from 2005 through 2012. The SEIU has sought to benefit from a new version of the plan. The Washington, D.C.-based organization will collect money from Michigan home care providers in the form of union dues which are taken out of the federal and state stipends families receive to defray the cost of caring for the disabled.

Dues skimming is a term coined by the Mackinac Center after it found out that the state classified home-based providers as public employees and allowed them to become unionized, often without their knowledge. Most of these providers are family members who take care of their disabled loved ones. The union has no authority to negotiate contracts for these providers, whose reimbursements are determined by the Michigan Legislature.

Caregivers under the previous dues skim found that their paychecks from the state were reduced to fill the union’s coffers with dues payments. Many were unaware at the time that they had been pulled into the union.

Then-Gov. Rick Snyder signed legislation banning the practice in 2012. But the Legislature reversed that law in 2024. In addition to Public Act 144, Whitmer signed Public Act 145, which removed the ban on home-help organizing.

The law violates the rights of home caregivers, said Patrick Wright, vice president of legal affairs at the Mackinac Center.

“The government has no right to assign them to a union simply because it wants to boost union rolls and bank accounts,” Wright said in a press release.

Forced unionization, according to Wright, violates their providers’ rights. He added that it undermines the deeply personal these caregivers provide.

The SEIU did not respond to an email seeking comment.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 2014 case Harris v. Quinn that forcing caregivers, like Martin and Sullivan, into a union violates their First Amendment rights.

“The state can’t just pretend I’m a government employee to justify handing money over to a union who doesn’t have any power to affect my rights,” said Martin.

The Michigan Employment Relations Commission and the Department of Labor and Economic Development did not responded to a request for comment.