Our new issue, “After Bernie,” is out now. Our questions are simple: what did Bernie accomplish, why did he fail, what is his legacy, and how should we continue the struggle for democratic socialism? Get a discounted print subscription today !

Kamala Harris and Pramila Jayapal have proposed a “Domestic Workers Bill of Rights Act” that, among other things, would create a Domestic Worker Wage and Standards Board. This board would provide an agency in the government for “domestic workers” such as childcare workers, eldercare workers, nurses, home health aides, nannies, butlers, chauffeurs, and so on — accounting for about 2.5 million workers, according to their estimates. Harris and Jayapal’s bill is the result of years of organizing on the part of domestic workers, who have successfully made their issues a national talking point. The board addresses an inherent challenge to improving domestic workers’ conditions: their isolation in individual homes and the barriers that raises to bargaining. What it doesn’t address is whether domestic workers’ employment should be so tied to individual families in the first place. Much of this work, such as childcare and eldercare, rightly belongs in the public sector. To eliminate the worst abuses of the system, it’s time we talk about changing its basic structure. That means socializing this type of care, bringing these workers into the public sector, and drastically improving their ability to organize.

The Argument for the Board Advocates for the Domestic Workers Bill of Rights Act argue that domestic employees are typically hired by households, unlike most workers who are hired by private firms or the government. As a consequence, domestic workers often toil in isolation from one another and find themselves at higher risk for wage theft, sexual harassment, and general exploitation. Compounding this isolation and vulnerability, domestic workers are excluded from pathways to unionization, like the National Labor Relations Board. To quote the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA): the term ‘employee’ [ . . . ] shall not include any individual employed as an agricultural laborer, or in the domestic service of any family or person at his home, or any individual employed by his parent or spouse, or any individual having the status of an independent contractor, or any individual employed as a supervisor, or any individual employed by an employer subject to the Railway Labor Act [ . . . ] While domestic workers might stand to gain tremendously from organizing, their working conditions often mean that even if organizing were legal, it would be impractical. As other writers have pointed out, simply extending the NLRA to include domestic workers and other excluded groups, like agricultural employees, might not accomplish much. For that reason, Harris and Jayapal’s bill does not extend the NLRA’s protections and does not rely on the bargaining power of domestic workers to improve their working conditions.

The Domestic Worker Wage and Standards Board Before talking about how the board would work procedurally, it’s useful to know a little bit about its proposed structure. As proposed, it would include five representatives from domestic worker advocacy organizations and five representatives from employer associations. The secretary of labor would have one seat to occupy or allocate. In sectoral bargaining systems, seats representing employees are allocated proportionately to employee representatives. But since this bill offers no pathway for domestic workers to unionize, it cannot allocate seats in this way. Instead, the board’s representatives would be solicited through a competitive bidding process. The bill requires the board to convene every three years to discuss and vote on new wages and standards for domestic workers. After voting, the board would formally submit their recommendations to the secretary of labor. Then, the secretary could opt to: submit recommendations to Congress, implement recommendations through the rule-making process, or do neither. Should the secretary decide to do neither, they would be required to provide a written rationale for that choice. This means that while many of the standards provided for in the act are binding (e.g., written contracts, inflation pay increases), the Domestic Worker Wage and Standards Board’s determinations would be suggestive, not authoritative.