Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Home-care providers urge Madera County supervisors to secure a fair contract and livable wages

December 09, 2025 | Madera County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Home-care providers urge Madera County supervisors to secure a fair contract and livable wages
Scores of in‑home support services (IHSS) providers urged the Madera County Board of Supervisors on Dec. 9 to negotiate a contract that raises wages and stabilizes care for clients who rely on home-based services.

Olga Nwemy Dado, who said she has provided IHSS care in Madera County for 33 years, told the board she is the primary caregiver for her mother, who has Alzheimer’s, and that rising living costs make continuing that work increasingly difficult. “We love our work, but love alone doesn't pay the bills,” Dado said, describing the daily demands of Alzheimer’s care and asking the board to “bargain a fair contract that ensures IHSS caregivers in Madera County can be recruited and retained.”

Other caregivers echoed that testimony. Suzette Valdez — who cares for a son with Down syndrome and cancer — said the county benefits financially from in‑home care because it avoids institutional costs but “we still are paid barely above minimum wage.” David Rodriguez described leaving a stable job to be a full‑time caregiver for his wife and stressed that IHSS keeps people in their homes while saving the county money; he called inadequate compensation “deeply unfair.” Corey Croson, district chair for United Domestic Workers and himself an IHSS provider, said workforce shortages have led to missed doctor rides and skipped medication doses.

Speakers emphasized the connection between caregiver pay and client safety, dignity and continuity of care. They asked the board to recognize IHSS as skilled, essential labor and to support bargaining that would improve recruitment and retention. The board heard the public comments during the meeting’s designated public‑comment period; no board action on bargaining authority or specific wage figures was recorded during the session.

What happens next: Public commenters asked the board to take up bargaining and contracting in future agenda items. The board did not adopt a wage or contract measure at the Dec. 9 meeting; any formal bargaining direction or contract would require future staff reports and board action.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep California articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI
Family Portal
Family Portal