Governor Newsom’s May revision budget proposal slashes IHSS overtime pay for caregivers, consumer access to care and nursing home oversight. SEIU 2015 President Arnulfo De La Cruz speaks with Solano County IHSS worker Daphne Dunstan and Local 2015 Statewide Policy and Research Director Brandi Wolf about the devastating impact and what we can do to fight back.
Join us in Sacramento on June 4th, 2025 to protest these proposed cuts!
Transcript
Arnulfo De La Cruz: Welcome to Who Cares, a podcast by SEIU 2015. I’m your host. Arnulfo De La Cruz, President of SEIU Local 2015, the largest union of long term care workers in California and across the country. We represent over a half a million caregivers who show up every day to care for our state’s older adults and people with disabilities.
Today’s episode is a critical one. California’s May budget revision is out, and it’s proposing cuts that would slash hours for hundreds of thousands of home care providers and put their recipients in danger of not having a worker to provide the vital hours of care they need. These aren’t just numbers on a spreadsheet, but these are cuts that would devastate IHSS providers and recipients alike. These cuts threaten real people, real families and real futures.
Joining me to talk about the may revise today are two incredible leaders in our movement, Brandi Wolf, our policy and research director here at SEIU 2015 and a key voice on aging equity and state policy who has been working on these issues for years. And Daphne Dunstan, an IHSS provider, a member leader and a powerful advocate from Solano County, who knows firsthand what these cuts would mean. Daphne is also one of our regional vice presidents in the Union. Brandi, Daphne, welcome to Who Cares.
Brandi Wolf: Thanks for having us, Arnulfo.
Arnulfo De La Cruz: We always start Who Cares by grounding ourselves in a care story, because caregiving isn’t something that’s abstract, it’s real, it’s emotional, and it’s something that connects us all. Daphne, I know you’ve been a care provider, not just professionally, but also as a mother. Can you tell us a bit about your story and how you became an IHS worker.
Daphne Dunstan: I am a pharmacist by profession, and here in this country, I’m a pharmacy technician. I left my pharmacy job to take care full-time for my two boys who are autistic. I was thinking that nobody can give good care except me, because I’m the mother. I’m doing everything for them, for both William and Edward, and from medication to our daily to my daily care and the emotional toll, but also the love and commitment for both of my boys.
Arnulfo De La Cruz: Thank you, Daphne, and I do know a little bit of your story, and every time you say it, I think what we can sense is that it’s full of compassion and love that you have for your sons, and that was powerful. I know every listener listening now also feels that in their heart, and it’s really a calling that brings so many people to this profession the love of your sons.
Brandi, you’ve spent years advocating for care providers across California, and I know that you’re an expert on the policy side, but you’re also someone I always appreciate having conversations with across the spectrum of our union. Do you have a personal story about caregiving that you’d like to share with our audience?
Brandi Wolf: Yeah, I do. In fact, I think that we all have a care story, because at some point in everyone’s journey, the need for care is going to touch our life.
So my care story really starts with my maternal grandma, Patty. She was a CNA in what they used to call convalescent hospitals, what we call now a skilled nursing facility, or a nursing home. And she was also a private pay home care worker for a number of years near the end of her life. Unfortunately, my grandma lost her battle with breast cancer at the very young age of 54 but I think her passion for caregiving really lives on in my family.
My younger sister, many of my cousins and I were all born at Enloe Hospital in Chico, California, and today, my sister is a physical therapist at Enloe. My brother in law and one of my cousins are RNs there. I have a cousin who is an RN at Oroville Hospital in Northern California, and the cousin that is an LVN at Sacramento County Behavioral Health as well. So it runs deep in our family.
And finally, my mom is not a caregiver by trade. She actually worked for nearly 40 years as a proud UFCW member at Safeway before she retired in 2020, but she really stepped up last year to provide the most compassionate care to one of her friends as she was transitioning to the end of her life after battling cancer, and my mom really ensured that her friend lived out her final days with dignity in the home that she loved. So I think that my grandma’s legacy lives on through my family and through me and this work that I do at 2015.
Arnulfo De La Cruz: Wow. What a wonderful, powerful story. Thank you, Brandi. I actually didn’t know that story, and really appreciate you sharing that both caregiving and the Union run deep in your family.
And you know, you would think that in California–given that we’re an aging population–and Brandi, I appreciate you saying that you think that everyone has a care story. Maybe it’s just a question of how you identify it and bring it out. And I, I would agree with that. And you would think in California, as our population continues to age and that the demand for care is going to exceed the number of caregivers available to provide that care, both now and into the future, what we call the care crisis, is going to exacerbate. You would think that California, through the budget process, would be doing more to resource the crisis of care, attracting caregivers for the future, to ensure that California’s need for long term care is going to be met, both now and beyond.
But instead, unfortunately, there’s a lot at stake. California’s May budget revision is out, and instead of investing in care, it actually slashes it. So we want to talk about that. Brandi. Can you help explain what Governor Newsom is proposing and what it means for caregivers and care recipients?
Brandi Wolf: Absolutely. So I want to take a step back and give a quick overview of the timeline of the state budget, just to provide some context. So the fiscal year runs from July 1 to June 30 each year. And in January, the governor puts out a draft budget for the following fiscal year, which is really based on current revenue projections and spending. Then in May, the governor releases a revision of that budget proposal based on updated revenue projections. That’s what we saw come out a few weeks ago, known as the May Revise.
Between the May revision and June 15, the legislature will hold a series of budget hearings, both on the governor’s proposal as well as what are the legislative budget priorities for the following year. The legislature must then pass the final budget by midnight on June 15. That is constitutionally required. The governor then signs the final budget and it becomes operative on July 1 of each year.
So for the fiscal year, 2025-26 this upcoming fiscal year, unfortunately, the state of California is facing a $12 billion budget deficit, and that is expected to grow to nearly $45 billion over fiscal year 2026-27. But instead of finding real solutions to fill this gap, including revenue solutions and asking corporations to pay their fair share, the governor’s May revision proposals are really nothing but a ruthless attack on hundreds of thousands of Californians who rely on long term care services and low wage workers who actually make that care possible.
So with that context being given, there are several proposals in the May revision that impact the membership of local 2015, the first one that I want to review with our listeners is the Governor has proposed to cap IHSS work weeks at 50 hours per week.
So right now, an IHSS provider can work up to a maximum of 66 hours per week. And some family providers, like our sister Daphne, who provide care to their loved ones that have very high levels of care needs, they are able to work up to 90 hours per week. This is all because in 2016 for the first time in history, IHSS providers were included in the Fair Labor Standards Act. So that law allows for overtime pay, which is at time and a half, that is for any hours that are worked over 40 hours in one week.
So current law in California allows for a maximum work week of 66 hours per week for IHSS providers, which is a maximum of 24 hours of overtime per week, the governor is proposing to cap the work week at 50 hours, which would result in a loss of up to 16 hours of overtime per week for a provider, this loss of income would be absolutely catastrophic for those IHSS providers that are impacted these hours really are the difference between paying for the rent or not or providing basic necessities for a provider’s family.
What’s interesting is that while testifying in legislative budget hearings over the last several weeks, the state and their representatives have tried to make the claim that while the proposal caps IHSS work weeks at 50 hours, the proposal doesn’t reduce the number of hours a consumer will get each week. But we know that that just simply is not true. 70% of IHSS providers are family. Members, if their hours are capped at 50 hours a week, who is going to provide the remaining 16 hours a week? That’s asking somebody like Daphne, a mother, to have someone come in and take care of their children for those 16 hours a week, because they can no longer provide them.
We’re already facing a workforce shortage crisis in home care, both in our state and nationally. And a pretty disturbing fact is that over 44 million hours of IHSS care went unprovided last year because IHSS consumers couldn’t find the providers they needed to work those hours. So now the Department of Social Services is estimating, in addition to those hours that went unserved, these proposed work week caps would result in the need to recruit and retain new providers to cover more than 12 million hours of care that current providers will no longer be able to provide.
We know that IHSS is really one of the only reasons many Californians can live safely and independently in their setting of choice, and this proposal to cap IHSS work weeks at 50 hours directly threatens that. I would say this is one of the most dangerous proposals in the May revision.
The next proposal that the governor has put forward is one that would reinstate a decades old asset limit test for Medi-Cal eligibility. As just a reminder to our listeners, Medicaid, or as we call it, Medi-Cal in California, provides health coverage to millions of Americans, including eligible low income adults, children, pregnant women, elderly adults and people with disabilities. The governor is proposing to reinstate an asset limit test that would kick over 110,000 low income, older adults and those living with disabilities off of Medi-Cal.
If a single person has more than $2,000 in their checking or savings account, or a couple has more than $3,000 in their accounts, they will automatically lose their eligibility for Medi Cal without access to the vital healthcare services that are provided through the medical system, those in need that have been kicked off will be forced to seek ongoing care in places like the emergency room, which we know are significantly more expensive to the state.
One thing I would mention is that these asset limits were set in the 1980s. So someone with only $2,000 in their account in the 80s was considered to be low income. Can we imagine, in 2025, $2,000 may not even be enough to cover somebody’s monthly rent. That isn’t a savings account– that may be half of your rent or half of your mortgage for the month.
And the final proposal I’ll talk about today is one that impacts our workers and skilled nursing facilities. It is a proposal to eliminate the nursing home workforce Quality Incentive Program, or as we call it, WQIP. The WQIP is a program that holds nursing home employers accountable to standards of care and provides additional funding for our nursing home workers through the form of a bonus. So we bargain with our employers over the WQIP dollars, and that money goes directly into the pockets of our nursing home workers through the form of an annual budget.
So we have worked hard as a union to pass the WQIP into law, really ensuring that nursing homes are meeting higher standards of care for their residents, and that nursing home workers are being compensated for providing that higher level of care. So this proposal would effectively eliminate all of that hard work.
While this overview that I’m giving doesn’t necessarily cover all of the proposals in the governor’s May revise, these are the big ones facing our members, Arnulfo, and ones that I know members of Local 2015 are going to be impacted by, and those that we love and care for will be impacted by.
Arnulfo De La Cruz: Thank you so much, Brandi, and it really calls the alarm. I think these are devastating proposals. And really, you know, painting a picture–sometimes you look at a policy proposal, but to try to visualize it and the impact that would have on both the individual and the person receiving care, it certainly raises giant red flags.
And I think, as you mentioned, the data makes it clear that this is not about reform. This isn’t reform. It’s a giant step backwards as we’re working to fix California’s broken long term care system. We fought for years to win back care hours. We fought to win things like the right to overtime and our workers were excluded from prior to 2016–and we’re going to dig into this a little bit more later on in this podcast.
But let me just emphasize quickly here that this is just a proposal, as Brandi said, it hasn’t been finalized, and we have a long history of fighting back against destructive proposals like this. The final June budget proposal must be voted on by the legislature by midnight on June 15, as Brandi mentioned. So we’re going to be fighting over the next few weeks to make sure that our voices are heard and that these cuts don’t go forward.
Now, Daphne, you’ve said in the past, if these cuts go through, your family could face the impossible choice of sending your sons to a group home. Can you walk us through what would these cuts mean for you and your family,
Daphne Dunstan: These cuts for my IHSS hours will be a big devastation for my family. First, it’s so expensive here in California, we cannot afford–I calculated already my budget, and I’m losing a lot of overtime hours, so I really cannot afford… me and my husband will be homeless. So I have no choice than to bring my two boys to a group home, and the government will be paying per kid, like 12k per kid. That’s what I heard. So I don’t know. I just don’t want to think about it, and I really want to fight like hell with this budget cuts by Governor Newsom.
Arnulfo De La Cruz: That’s exactly what we’re preparing to do. And I know that you’re not alone when you speak about the impact this would have on you, your husband, your sons and your family.
And I think what’s upsetting is, you know, the reason why the IHSS program exists was–it was the most cost efficient way to provide long term care, right? If Daphne was not able to care for her sons, and Daphne had to look for a far more costly alternative, such as group home or advanced care, but because of the love she has for her sons and also her being the best caregiver as the mother, it makes all the sense in the world that Daphne is able to care for her sons with her husband’s support, and that’s why this program exists.
The idea that you would cut Daphne’s hours and caregivers hours, it just goes against everything that we stand for in terms of providing quality home care and affordable and accessible home care in California.
Let’s zoom out a second. As Brandi mentioned, California is facing a $12 billion budget deficit this next fiscal year–it’s expected to grow to about 45 billion in the next 18 months. How does the fourth largest economy in the world, which is California, ensure that the wealthiest Californians and some of the wealthiest people in the country in the world, also pay their fair share to ensure that we have revenue solutions in California. Rather than doing that, the governor is asking caregivers, which are the largest low wage workforce that we have in the state of California, to sacrifice even more.
Brandi, back to you. What does this say about our state’s priorities, and what are the long term consequences if these cuts ultimately were to go through?
Brandi Wolf:
One of the things that we have been discussing since the May Revise came out is that long term care is not just a line item in a budget, it is a lifeline. And I think that Daphne’s story really speaks to that. It is a tough job to balance a budget deficit in the fourth largest economy in the world. I understand that, but the fact that these proposals are so adversely impacting the individuals that need these services the most, really is quite disappointing.
I touched on this a little, but if these proposals were to go through, they would have absolutely catastrophic impacts to the financial stability of IHSS providers, but would also disrupt the care for hundreds of thousands of IHSS consumers. Daphne’s sons included. The Department of Social Services, actually estimated that this proposal would impact about 205,000 IHS providers that are currently working over 50 hours a week, and that is 31% of the provider population, so nearly a third would be impacted. They also estimated that it would impact about 230,000 consumers, which again, is just about 30% of the consumer population that would be impacted.
So if IHSS consumers are left without their provider of choice to cover their assessed hours, they may be forced to seek care in an institutional setting, which not only does that create significantly more costs to the state, but it also denies those consumers their fundamental right to age in the setting of their choice, which we know is their home and their communities that they love and thrive in.
As I mentioned earlier, as well, it’s estimated that the work week cap would result in needing to find new providers to cover over 12 million hours of care in a workforce that is predominantly women of color and is already fighting these huge workforce shortages due to low wages, lack of benefits and isolation. Adding this pressure to recruit and retain new providers will likely be impossible. I don’t think it comes as a surprise to many folks that Republicans in Congress are looking to balance the national budget and deficit on the backs of low wage workers. But I do think many of our local 2015 members and listeners were very surprised that our own governor would propose nearly a billion dollars in cuts to our most vital safety net programs.
So these proposals really directly undermine the governor’s master plan for aging, in particular the goals that were within the master plan for things like affordable aging and caregiving. That works. So I think those are some of the real world consequences, Arnulfo, that may happen if these cuts take place.
Arnulfo De La Cruz:
Thank you so much, Brandi. Really appreciate that vivid illustration. As you all know, at SEIU 2015, we are not going to take this sitting down right. Caregivers across the state are standing up–if they’re able to–speaking out and fighting back, and we’re demanding a better path forward.
Before we end our podcast today, we’re going to give you more details on how you can join us in Sacramento, where I know thousands of IHSS providers are excited to rally at the capitol to demand that our legislators reject these cuts.
Daphne, this is not your first rodeo. You’ve been part of many of these fights in the past. I know that last year, you helped stop harmful proposals that were targeting immigrant families in IHSS, what gives you hope in this time?
Daphne Dunstan: Arnulfo, I have very high hopes with our union. Our union is a fighter–we never say, you know, yes, for anything cuts. We’ve done it before, and we have to use our union power and collective action also and our determination. We stopped cuts before, so we’ll stop them again, because we are not backing down. Really.
We started a lot of calls for one of the legislators today, and I told my parents, who are my friends, to really like get involved at this time, because we need to fight like hell. That’s what I’m telling them. We need to fight. This is our livelihood. This will affect our family, so we need them to get involved. And that, I promise you that there will be a lot of them who’s coming to the Capitol on June 4 and doing the calling also for starting today until May 30.
Arnulfo De La Cruz: Thank you, Daphne, so much, and I know how skilled you are at recruiting other union members to step into their power, to lift up their voice and take action. And we’re really excited to see everyone in June at the capitol to do just that and appreciate your leadership.
Brandi, back to you. You know, unfortunately, the bulk of our conversation is talking about, how do we beat back these draconian, devastating proposals, and I get the budgetary restraints in the state on the conversation that’s happening nationally with potential cuts to Medicaid. But, you know, there is an argument that we should be really thinking about, what are long term solutions? What do those look like? How do we protect care and expand it instead of gutting it? So I’m just curious, what would a real solution look like, one that addresses expanding care rather than just having to deal with constant attacks and gutting the program, given what’s happening both at the state and nationally?
Daphne Dunstan: Yeah, that’s a great question, Arnulfo. I think we need a budget that speaks to the California that we say we want to be, and that this Governor says that we want to be a state that is fighting back against the attacks by the federal government. In a state that is a beacon of hope for our residents and nationally, the legislature and the governor must pass a budget that protects over time for IHSS providers, rejects the reinstatement of the cruel asset limits on Medi Cal eligibility, and maintains quality of care in our nursing homes. Those are just a few of the policy solutions for a real budget.
I think most importantly, instead of balancing the budget on the backs of low income older adults and low wage caregivers. The state needs to find real solutions that don’t put lives at risk. Nowhere in this budget are corporations and the 1% asked to do their part. It’s really unconscionable to demand sacrifice only from those who can least afford it and already carry the burden of just trying to survive day by day. So I think the governor and the legislature need to prioritize looking at revenue solutions to bring more revenue into our state, and really need to focus on passing a budget that is reflective of the values of California.
Arnulfo De La Cruz: Daphne, Brandi, our guests today. First, I just want to say thank you both for your leadership, for joining the podcast. I can’t think of two more fiercest advocates for a care system that works in California and one that we can all be proud of, but most importantly, that those who need care are able to receive it and live with dignity, and that those who provide care also are deserving of dignity so that they can take care of themselves and their families.
And today, we heard the truth about these cuts. And now, as Daphne and Brandi said, it’s up to us, up to us to speak out, to stand up and to organize and to speak truth to power, to everyone listening. The future of care in California is being decided right now, and we want to make sure that we don’t miss this moment. We want to make sure that we make our voices heard.
What we’re encouraging everyone to do is to call your state legislators and please tell them: “Reject the proposed cuts to IHSS, to skilled nursing, and Medi Cal in the May Revise. Protect long term care and protect caregivers.”
Then on June 4, join thousands of caregivers in Sacramento who will be lifting their voices to say “no way” to IHSS cuts or to reduction in IHSS benefits, and demanding that AB 283 which is statewide bargaining for home care that it gets passed. And to find out more information about that rally in Sacramento, you can go to our website, seiu2015.org, or be in contact with your organizer if you’re a union member, or contact our union if you’re an ally in the community and would like to join us.
We know that, as Brandi said, everyone has a care story. If you’ve ever had a loved one who needed care, this fight is for you. If you’ve ever worried about being able to age with dignity, this is your fight. If you’ve ever needed a paycheck that keeps the lights on, this fight is also for you. I’m Arnulfo De La Cruz, and this has been another episode of Who Cares. Until next time, take care of yourselves and take care of each other.