|
||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
TESTIMONY OF
Danny Rosenthal, Director of Public Policy and Planning – UJA—Federation of New York Good morning, Chairpersons Dilan and Adabbo. I am Danny Rosenthal, Director of Public Policy and Planning from United Jewish Appeal—Federation of New York or UJA-Federation, a philanthropic organization serving as a funding source and coordinating body for approximately 100 nonprofit health, human service and educational organizations—many of which are highly dedicated to serving seniors in New York City. I begin by thanking you for organizing this hearing on the critical subject of salaries for staff who serve seniors in programs managed by nonprofit organizations in partnership with government. Such staff perform the most important and challenging of functions, but have historically been financially compensated at the most modest of levels. Despite the deep dedication of staff, many ultimately determine that they are unable to sustain themselves on the salaries provided them via government contracts, and they depart their positions and the field of senior service in favor of professions offering reasonable remuneration. As a result, the turnover of staff in programs serving seniors is alarmingly high, causing upset to seniors for whom relationships with staff are precious as well as serious disruptions to programmatic operations. Traditionally, staff serving seniors have received annual Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs), which at least begin to help them keep pace with the ever-rising expenses we all face in this City. Over the last five years, however, these COLAs have not been forthcoming, and so these problems I have described continue to become increasingly severe. I am very pleased to appear before you today alongside my colleagues from the umbrella and advocacy organizations Human Services Council, United Neighborhood Houses, Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies and Council and Senior Centers and Services. Together, we represent a highly substantial portion of organizations serving seniors in the City and we agree, unequivocally, that the chronic under-funding of salaries for senior-serving staff is a profound disservice to these staff and seniors themselves, and that correcting this problem should remain among the highest priorities of advocates and government alike. Good afternoon. My name is Kathy Fitzgibbons and I am the Senior Policy Analyst for Elderly Welfare for the Federation of Protestant Agencies. I want to thank the Council for the opportunity to testify before you today. The Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies (FPWA) is an alliance of over 200 human service agencies providing social services to over 2 million city residents of every age, religion and race. Our diverse membership includes child care centers, after school programs, family support programs, nursing homes, senior day care centers, mental health clinics, Y’s, settlement houses, and AIDS service organizations. For over 80 years, FPWA has championed humane health and social welfare policies and fought for expanded resources for the City’s most disenfranchised communities. We share a special concern for the elderly. According to the results of a voluntary survey of aging workers performed by the Human Services Council (HSC), the average salary of the respondents was roughly $22,000 annually. This is less than the annual pay of over $33,000 for all employees in New York State’s services industry, including protective services, food and health services, cleaning and building services and personal services. Several of our member agencies report that in order to retain staff they have given salary increases and, in some cases, even provided tuition assistance, despite the fact that these costs are not reimbursed by the city. Increasing staff costs, along with the increased cost of doing business including higher rents, insurance costs, etcetera, places a huge financial burden on the providers. Compensation is one of the most important factors contributing to an employee’s decision to accept a job offer and competitive pay is necessary to recruit competent, skilled employees. Without the ability to offer compensation that provides a living wage, vacancies can stretch on for months at a time. Providers and their clients are further impacted when remaining staff become ill or exhausted from carrying larger workloads.
Staff turnover cripples the operations of an organization. Of the agencies included in the Human Services Council survey, the average turnover rate among the full time direct care workers was 37.5%. Because human services are relationship-based, the quality of service suffers when staff members are unable to get to know clients and their individual needs or are providing services to so many clients that personal attention is compromised. In collaboration with HSC and coalition members, FPWA respectfully asks the City Council and Mayor Bloomberg to make a meaningful financial commit to addressing the workforce crisis in the aging sector. The bond between client and employee is not the only relationship harmed by high staff turnover. Instead, high turnover rates can make it difficult for the employees themselves to establish positive working relationships with one another. Studies have shown that clients receive better care when employees work as a team and take an important role in the support of clients. Working as an isolated unit (where there is a lack of cohesion between employees) discourages the sharing of new ideas and of helping one another. As such, this could potentially impact client services. Good afternoon, my name is Allison Sesso and I am the Senior Policy Analyst for the Human Services Council of New York City, an organization of over 200 not-for-profit, New York City-based, human services providers. We are the meeting-ground for the leadership of the entire sector. Our membership includes federations, subsector-specific umbrella associations, advocacy groups, and direct service providers, both large and small that provide a wide variety of human services from child care and after school programs for children and youth to transportation and meals for seniors, as well as child welfare, mental health and substance abuse services. Because of our diversity we are known as the “federation of federations,” “the umbrella of umbrellas,” and “the organized voice of the human services community.” As the organized voice of the not-for-profit providers of social services in New York City we promote the collective interests of our constituents and agencies in partnership with government and its elected leadership. In that role I am here today to discuss what has been identified, sector-wide as the chief impediment to the provision of high quality human services, the inability to recruit and retain experienced, well trained staff and are asking that you work with us to address this important issue. As my colleagues have pointed out, salaries in this field do not adequately reflect the value of the work performed by this sector. Even more discouraging however, is the fact that these salaries also fail to reflect changes in the cost of living. Cost-of-Living-Adjustments (COLAs) are simply small salary increases designed to reflect the inevitable decrease in the value of money over time. When these adjustments are not made, the value of a salary is essentially lowered. Unfortunately, COLAs are not automatic for most human services providers in New York City forcing workers to constantly fight for them. Aging services providers have only received a 19 percent increase over the past 10 years. The Consumer Price Index for the New York Metro Area has, however, increased by 46 percent over that same period of time. The value of these salaries have then, actually decreased by 27 percent leaving these poorly paid employees with less disposable income. These decreasing salaries have led to high leave rates among employees in the aging sector which does not only impede the delivery of quality services to seniors, but also results in efficiency losses. When an agency has a high turnover rate, there are both direct and indirect costs. The indirect costs that result from reduced supervision, employee burnout, and, the learning curves of new employees can be substantial as can be the direct costs which include things like overtime pay and job advertisements. In the presence of high turnover rates then, it often costs more to provide lesser quality services to fewer clients. By funding salary increases government can reduce the turnover rates of not-for-profit human services agencies thereby ensuring the efficient use of our public investment and allowing for the provision of high quality services for more people. Improving and sustaining client well-being relies on a stable and qualified workforce, and high staff turnover due to inadequate compensation stands in contradiction to these goals. Oftentimes, existing staff must take over caseloads for workers who leave, which means less time spent with each client, as well as staff burnout because workers are putting in considerable amounts of overtime. Not to mention the reduction in supervision workers receive as the time of supervisors is increasingly consumed by efforts to replace workers. The negative effects of turnover are many, but the solution is simple, we must invest in the caregivers.
In the short-term we must address the immediate needs of the workforce. Based on information provided to us by the City we expect the City’s share of an immediate 3% COLA for aging workers to be approximately $1.6 million ($3.9 million gross) and are asking that this minimal amount be allocated for this purpose. My name is Bobbie Sackman, Director of Public Policy, for the Council of Senior Centers and Services. On behalf of our 265 member agencies providing services to 300,000 older New Yorkers and the workforce that serves them, we would like to thank Councilman Erik Martin Dilan, Chair of the Subcommittee on Senior Centers, Councilman Joseph Addabbo, Jr., Chair of the Civil Service/Labor Committee, and committee members for holding this important hearing on the need for salary increases for the aging services workforce. To my knowledge, this is the first time City Council has held a hearing on this issue. This low paid, undervalued workforce is on the frontlines everyday helping older New Yorkers age in place in their homes and communities with dignity. The majority are NYC residents, many live in the neighborhoods they work. They are your constituents and reflect the diversity of the city’s population.
From 1979-1999, New York City had a policy of tying the level of salary increases, or COLA (cost of living adjustment), to whatever was won by DC-37. Base salaries have always been lower in the contracted out agencies than among municipal employees. In order to allow nonprofits to remain competitive in recruiting and retaining staff, these increases were given so these workers wouldn’t lose ground. However, the last salary increase was given to the aging services workforce in April,1999. Imagine, five years without a salary increase when you are already earning a low salary, barely enough to raise a family if that. The Human Services Council’s chart documents the widening gap between salaries for this workforce and inflation – 27%. Base salaries have stagnated as well. CSCS did a salary study in 1989 and found that the average salaries of professional staff was $22,000 and of other workers was $14,000. Fifteen years later, the average salaries of case managers are $29,500 – only a $7500 difference. There are other workers still earning only $14,000. The 1989 study also reported that the majority of workers were women and minorities. This trend has clearly continued over the past fifteen years perpetuating inequities for these individuals. Recruitment and retention of staff suffers which impacts the continuity of care for seniors. All too often the aging services network is forced to support the working poor. Staff either leaves because they cannot live on the salary, work a second job if they can, and are eligible for benefits such as food stamps. A glaring example is that of case managers who labor under caseloads averaging 90 clients to one case manager. Case managers have a tremendous responsibility which is to coordinate the needs of frail, homebound elderly. They coordinate services such as meals-on-wheels, home care, finances, medical care and prescription drugs, mental health, housing, transportation, family situations, emergencies and other needs of daily living. The case manager often stands between a senior being able to stay in the community or being forced into a nursing home. The average salary for a case manager is only $29,500 and has been frozen at that level for five years. Obviously, this makes it difficult to recruit, train and then watch staff leave for higher salaries. Case managers working at ACS earn $49,000 with significantly smaller caseloads. Homebound elderly who build relationships with case managers suffer when staff leaves. Another example is van drivers bring meals-on-wheels to seniors or driving them to doctors and other important places, earning as little as $12,000 a year for full-time work. This is not a livable wage. We are asking City Council to work with us to get funds allocated for salary increases. The re-establishing of the tie between DC-37 increases to increases for this workforce needs to be done. Increasing the baseline salaries of workers is also important as they will never catch up to a livable wage otherwise. As you will hear today from the frontline workers, there are justice issues and practical issues here. Thank for holding this long overdue hearing and we hope this just a beginning to bring much deserved salary increases to this workforce.
CONTACT INFORMATION Danny Rosenthal, Director of Public Policy and Planning
About CSCS |
Advocacy |
Programming |
CSCS Members List |
Membership Services
Publications | Library | Photo Gallery | Events | CSCS Links | Make a Contribution | Contact Us
49
West 45th Street, 7th Floor |
|||||||||||||||||||||
