Watered Down ‘No More 24’—the Bill Nobody Wants
No More 24 advocates rally outside the Legal Aide Society’s Water Street offices in Manhattan on May 11. Photos/Joe Maniscalco
By Joe Maniscalco
The hard-fought struggle to finally end institutionalized wage theft and round-the-clock shifts in New York City’s home care industry entered a new phase this week with a possible vote a bill nobody seems to want.
New language inserted into Intro. 303—Council Member Chris Marte’s bill effectively banning bosses from forcing home care workers to work round-the-clock shifts while only paying them for 13 hours—would allow the practice to continue until Oct. 1, 2027 “if the home care employee knowingly agrees to work such hours in writing.”
According to City Council Speaker Julie Menin’s office, that language is now locked in and cannot be changed if the bill were to be put up for a vote during Thursday’s stated City Council meeting.
No More 24 advocates condemned both Mayor Zohran Mamdani and the Legal Aide Society for subjecting home care workers to ongoing abuse.
But home care workers advocating for passage of the original “No More 24” bill—as well as those who oppose mandating 12-hour split shifts because they say there is no money to pay additional workers—have both stepped up their efforts to kill “Intro. 303-B” ever since it was unveiled a week ago.
"Shame on Legal Aide for colluding with [Mayor Zohran] Mamdani to continue these dangerous 24 hour shifts,” Maggie Martinez, a former caregiver with the city’s Consumer Directed Personal Assistance Program, told No More 24 advocates rallying outside the Legal Aide Society’s 199 Water Street offices in Manhattan on Monday. “These shifts are a scam that deprives patients of the care they deserve while exhausting the very workers trying to keep them safe.”
The Legal Aide Society, District Council 37 Executive Director Henry Garrido, and advocates for disabled New Yorkers, have all been leading the charge against the No More 24 bill since Mamdani took office, arguing that forcing employment agencies to split shifts without the estimated $460 million needed to pay for them would leave many without the care they need.
Retired home care worker Ah Lin Lok says round-the-clock shifts mean workers do not have time to eat, let alone rest or sleep.
"Intro 303 raises serious concerns for many of the people we represent, particularly consumers who depend on uninterrupted 24-hour care and will face reductions in their care and potential institutionalization if this bill passes,” a spokesperson for the Legal Aide Society told Work-Bites in an e-mail this week. “Additionally, many home care workers may lose hours or their jobs if the bill passes.”
A small group of No More 24 opponents also demonstrated outside Council Member Marte’s district office in Manhattan on Tuesday [See the report from Work-Bites], urging him to pull Intro. 303 all together.
The No More 24 bill has 15 cosponsors at the time of this writing. City Council Member Shahana Hanif [D-39th District'] was among them, but jumped ship and withdrew her support for the measure last week.
Home care workers and No More 24 advocates are grim-faced rallying outside the Legal Aide Society’s Water Street offices on Monday.
And it’s unclear exactly what will happen next. Marte still has the option to keep fighting for language acceptable to home care workers and their allies determined to end round-the-clock shifts and push for passage of a strong No More 24 bill at a later date.
The Council Member has already made it clear that his “fundamental line in the sand is to make sure we end the 24-hour practice.”
Mayor Mamdani also called for an end to the 24-hour workday during a No More 24 rally in Brooklyn when he was still on the campaign trail and trying to drum up votes.
Mayor Mamdani called for an end to the 24-hour workday when he was a candidate on the campaign trail.
“We know that those technical breakups of thirteen hours and eleven hours for so many workers [assigned 24-hour shifts] mean nothing—that you are working every single hour of that shift—and that must come to an end,” he told No More 24 advocates.
That kind of condemnation is commonplace—and it has been throughout the decade-long fight to end round-the-clock shifts in New York City’s home care industry.
“We agree the status quo is unsustainable,” the Legal Aide Society’s spokesperson also told Work-Bites this week. “The question is not whether the system needs to change—it absolutely does—but how to implement reforms in a way that protects both workers and the medically vulnerable New Yorkers who rely on continuous care.”
No More 24 advocates issued an open letter to the Legal Aide Society on May 10 condemning the group for helping the Mamdani administration to “sabotage” Intro. 303.
Public interest lawyer and Legal Services Staff Association 2320 member Nelson Mar, meanwhile, told advocates rallying on Water Street on Monday that union members at the Legal Aide Society should actually be supporting Intro. 303 and saying, “Pass the No More 24 act,” too.
LSSA 2320, according to Mar, recently passed a resolution in support of home care workers and the No More 24 bill.
“The Association of Legal Aide Attorneys should join us and pass a similar resolution in support of Intro. 303 despite what Legal Aide is telling the community,” Mar added.
Both LSSA 2320 and ALAA are members of the United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers union [UAW].
Two years ago, Council Member Marte said No More 24 legislation had enough City Council support to pass if it were allowed onto the floor for a vote. That never happened, however, because then City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams actively suppressed the bill, then known as Intro. 615.
“Today, we’re asking for democracy to happen,” Marte said in May, 2024. “I talk to all my colleagues in the City Council. They say if this bill comes to the floor, they will vote ‘yes.’
Current City Council Speaker Julie Menin made a pleadge to home care workers back in March that the No More 24 bill would get a vote by April.