Court orders state labor department to pursue 24-hour home care cases for over 150 workers

A judge ruled in favor of unionized home healthcare workers who were seeking to recover all their stolen wages — a win for a dedicated group of home care workers that the state Department of Labor is appealing in higher court.

Albany County Supreme Court Justice Daniel Lynch ruled on Jan. 2 that a motion requiring the New York state Department of Labor (DOL) to reverse its closing of wage theft cases will apply to a class of “at least 150 home care aides” who say they were never fully paid for 24-hour shifts.

Gui Zhu Chen, one of the lead plaintiffs, joined a group of dozens of fellow home care workers on Jan. 7 to celebrate the decision outside the Chinese-American Planning Council, the agency she alleges illegally withheld wages from her for years.

Chen said her 24-hour shifts were never fully compensated under the New York state law that stipulates that health aides can only be paid for 13 hours for each shift with an 11 hour required break for meals and sleep because she wasn’t allowed to take her legally mandated breaks.

The decision orders the DOL to continue its investigation of Chen and her fellow unionized workers’ cases, stepping around a forced arbitration agreement that her union 1199SEIU negotiated for its workers several years ago.

“Finally the state Supreme Court acquired an order that the state Department Labor needs to pursue stolen wages for workers who are unionized. I am here standing to demand an immediate [repayment] of my [blood and sweat] wages,” said Chen through a translator.

The home care workers were joined by other labor groups, who led chants of “No more 24,” and called on the DOL to enforce violations of the home care labor law. The group of workers and advocates is also pursuing a City Council bill that would limit home care shifts to 12 hours within New York City.

Lynch originally ordered the DOL to renew its investigation of the wage theft cases in October 2024, but the case did not get approved to proceed as a class action lawsuit affecting potentially hundreds of workers until Jan. 2.

In response to the 2024 decision, DOL Commissioner Roberta Reardon appealed to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, Third Department. In response to the Jan. 2 decision, a DOL spokesperson said that the agency is not affected by the news and will continue its pending appeal.

The decision comes several years after 1199SEIU announced an industry-wide $34 million arbitration settlement between the union and over 42 home care agencies that it achieved through forced arbitration, a legal mechanism that often stops individual workers from seeking the full extent of stolen wage claims.

The settlement applied to about tens of thousands of workers who claim they regularly had their wages stolen on 24-hour shifts. Home care worker advocacy groups like the Ain’t I A Woman campaign, which helped organize the rally, criticized the settlement for not delivering enough for their workers. Many like Chen opted not to accept the union’s settlement, to instead pursue the full extent of their stolen wages in individual cases, which would be more costly for the home care agencies.

After the union reached its settlement with the home care agencies, the DOL dropped investigations into unionized home care workers — even those that opted not to accept the payment in order to pursue a full payout in court.

CPC released a statement accusing the Ain’t I A Woman “organizers—not the home care workers—[of continuing] to mischaracterize legal proceedings to attack CPC.” The organization is pushing for reform of the 24-hour shift policy at the state level and claimed it does not have a stance on the City Council bill.

Chen said she would continue to pursue her case, including the income she lost when CPC stopped employing her.

“I want to encourage the other workers to continue to come together and pursue their backpay through the end,” she said.

This article has been updated with a statement from CPC received after publication.