Caring for an aging population is growing more difficult. We are living longer. Many older Americans can no longer rely on sons and daughters for end of life care. An awful lot of baby boomers will be needing a lot of home health care in the next few years. Who will care for this rapidly growing segment of our population? Many of us who will be unable to care for ourselves as we age will be cared for by home care providers. Who are these people? They’re generally female, many times minorities, often not well educated or skilled, and typically not paid a lot above minimum wage. And, if they’ve met the companionship exemption of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), they’ve been exempt from minimum wage and overtime payments.

That exemption was challenged by a long time caregiver in the case of Long Island Care at Home, Ltd. v. Coke, recently decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. The plaintiff had sued her employer for minimum and overtime wages. The legal issues centered on whether the exemption applied regardless of whether a caregiver was hired directly by a patient or was placed by a third party service provider. The Court found for the employer. Third party care providers, who argued they would be driven out of business if forced to pay overtime, scored a significant victory. Legal issues may have decided the case but economic issues were certainly in the forefront as well. Even the Court seemed to recognize the possible social catastrophe if our aging or disabled population could no longer afford caregivers. But what about the economic issues surrounding the thousands of caregivers struggling to make ends? Economic and moral issues swirl around this case.

It’s possible that Congress may take action to address the issue, but fixing one problem creates others. It’s a complex issue that seriously affects a lot of people. Remember also that many states don’t provide such caregiver exemptions, so state law may control. It’s an issue you’ll likely hear more about.