Domestic Workers Bill of Rights Act
Sponsored By: Representative Jayapal
Introduced
Summary
Extending workplace rights to domestic workers. The bill would set enforceable labor standards for household workers, add overtime and live‑in protections, require written agreements, create a Domestic Employee Standards Board, and push Medicaid rules to cover home care workers.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
14 provisions identified: 9 benefits, 1 costs, 4 mixed.
Overtime and housing rules for live-in workers
If enacted, live‑in domestic employees would gain overtime protections. When fired, the employer would have to give written notice within 48 hours and either 30 days of lodging or severance equal to two weeks of the worker’s average pay from the last six months. If severance or off‑site lodging is chosen, the worker would get at least 48 hours to move out. Employers would have to allow reasonable access to phone and internet and could face up to $2,000 per violation for blocking communications. If the termination rules are violated, the worker could also recover liquidated damages equal to the severance amount.
Higher federal Medicaid share for home care
If enacted, the federal share of Medicaid would rise for services delivered by domestic employees. The increase would last for 20 quarters, starting with the first fiscal quarter on or after enactment. The Secretary would set each State’s percentage increase, up to a 100% federal share after other boosts, based on expected cost increases from the bill’s protections. States would lose this boost in any quarter they make eligibility or methods more restrictive than at enactment. Territorial payment caps would not count these boosted amounts.
Domestic workers covered by federal discrimination law
If enacted, people who employ domestic workers would count as employers under federal anti‑discrimination law (Title VII). This would let domestic employees bring discrimination claims like other workers.
Earned paid sick time for domestic workers
If enacted, domestic employees (not in shared living arrangements) would earn at least 1 hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours worked, up to 56 hours per year unless the employer offers more. Accrual would start at hire, and use would generally start on day 60 of employment. Sick time could be used for your own care, to care for family, or for needs related to domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. Health information would be kept confidential. These requirements would start 2 years after enactment.
Stronger enforcement and anti-retaliation rules
If enacted, employers could not fire, cut hours, or punish you for using your rights, helping others, or seeking changes to your agreement or schedule. Immigration‑related threats would be unlawful unless done at the Federal Government’s specific direction, and actions taken within 90 days of a claim would be presumed retaliatory. Workers could sue for unpaid wages, benefits, interest, liquidated damages, and fees. Civil fines could reach $15,000 for a first violation and $25,000 for later ones; written‑agreement violations could cost $5,000; meal/rest break violations could add one hour of pay per violation (up to two per day). Employers would have recordkeeping duties, and deadlines would be 2 years (3 for willful cases).
Written contracts and protected take-home pay
If enacted, covered domestic employees would get a signed written agreement within 5 days of hire or by the day before first work. It would state duties, contact info, pay and overtime rates, schedule or a good‑faith estimate, paydays, and how to raise concerns, and it would ban pre‑dispute arbitration, noncompetes, and similar limits. Updates would be due within 30 days of changes, and records must be kept for 3 years after employment ends. Employers could not deduct pay for cash shortages, breakage, or lost items, or penalize you for contacting a client directly. The Labor Department would post model templates within 6 months; existing workers would receive agreements within 180 days of enactment.
Two-year pause on enforcement for governments
If enacted, enforcement of these rights would be delayed for 2 years for government agencies and entities working under government grants or contracts, with a possible 1‑year extension by the Secretary. Workers also could not bring civil suits under this Act against Medicaid‑paid employers until two years after enactment.
Worker protections in Medicaid home care
If enacted, Labor and HHS would issue joint rules within 1 year on how these worker rights apply to Medicaid‑funded services. The rules would protect self‑directed care and stop States from making care recipients use their budgets to pay employer‑mandated costs, unless directly tied to the services. States could not cut service levels because of these protections, and the rules would support ADA and Olmstead compliance.
Stronger scheduling protections and pay for cancellations
If enacted, employers would have to give written notice of schedule changes at least 72 hours before a shift. If a shift is canceled after you arrive, you would get paid your regular rate for the scheduled hours not worked; if canceled with less than 72 hours’ notice, you would get half your regular rate for those hours. There are exceptions for emergencies and shared living arrangements. In addition, each year you could request two one‑day schedule changes (or one two‑day change) for personal events. The cancellation pay rules would start 2 years after enactment; the annual right to request short changes would start upon enactment.
Who counts as a domestic employee
If enacted, the bill would define who is a domestic employee and what work is covered. It lists many covered jobs (like companions, nannies, home health aides, and chauffeurs) and lists exclusions (like some in‑home child care by relatives or friends and certain workers under existing law). It defines shared living arrangements and who counts as an elderly Medicaid home‑care recipient. These definitions would set who gets the new rights.
New board and task force on standards
If enacted, an 11‑member Domestic Employee Standards Board would set recommendations within 1 year and every 3 years after; the Secretary would respond within 90 days and could issue rules. Employer members would have to disclose recent labor‑law violations; OSHA could issue infectious disease protections. An interagency task force would meet within 90 days, hold regional hearings, give recommendations starting within 180 days, report to Congress within 1 year, support joint enforcement for up to 3 years, and audit enforcement every 3 years. The bill would authorize funding as needed and give the Secretary rulemaking authority to carry out the Act.
Guaranteed meal and rest breaks at work
If enacted, you would get a 30‑minute uninterrupted meal break when you would otherwise work more than 5 hours. It would be unpaid only if you are fully relieved and allowed to leave; otherwise it must be paid. You would also get a paid 10‑minute rest break for every 4 hours, during the first 3 hours of work. On‑duty breaks would be allowed only for safety needs, must be in a revocable written agreement, and must be paid. Shared living arrangements would be excluded.
Help line, rights notice, and pay tools
If enacted, the Labor Department would post a plain‑language rights notice online in English, Spanish, and other languages, and create a single web page within 180 days. The Department could fund a national hotline to help domestic workers. Within 1 year, it would also write rules to help payment intermediaries improve clarity and records for pay.
Stronger privacy for in-home workers
If enacted, employers could not watch or record you in bathrooms, private living space, or while you change clothes. They could not take your documents or personal items. Employers could limit calls or messages only when they reasonably believe they clearly interfere with your duties, and may set reasonable limits during work.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Jayapal
WA • D
Cosponsors
Beatty
OH • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Bonamici
OR • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Boyle (PA)
PA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Brownley
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Budzinski
IL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Carson
IN • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Carter (LA)
LA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Castro (TX)
TX • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Cherfilus-McCormick
FL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Chu
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Clarke (NY)
NY • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Cleaver
MO • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Cohen
TN • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Crockett
TX • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Davis (IL)
IL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Dean (PA)
PA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
DeLauro
CT • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
DelBene
WA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Deluzio
PA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
DeSaulnier
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Dexter
OR • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Dingell
MI • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Doggett
TX • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Escobar
TX • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Espaillat
NY • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Evans (PA)
PA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Fields
LA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Foushee
NC • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Frost
FL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Garamendi
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Garcia (CA)
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Garcia (TX)
TX • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Garcia (IL)
IL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Goldman (NY)
NY • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Gomez
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Green, Al (TX)
TX • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Hayes
CT • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Horsford
NV • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Hoyle (OR)
OR • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Huffman
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Jackson (IL)
IL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Jacobs
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Johnson (GA)
GA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Adams
NC • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Amo
RI • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Ansari
AZ • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Balint
VT • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Barragan
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Beyer
VA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Brown
OH • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Casar
TX • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Casten
IL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Kelly (IL)
IL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Khanna
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Krishnamoorthi
IL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Lee (PA)
PA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Leger Fernandez
NM • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Lynch
MA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Magaziner
RI • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Matsui
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
McBride
DE • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
McClellan
VA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
McCollum
MN • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
McGovern
MA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
McIver
NJ • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Menendez
NJ • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Meng
NY • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Mfume
MD • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Moore (WI)
WI • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Mullin
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Nadler
NY • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]
DC • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Ocasio-Cortez
NY • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Omar
MN • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Pingree
ME • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Pocan
WI • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Pressley
MA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Quigley
IL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Ramirez
IL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Ross
NC • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Salinas
OR • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Sanchez
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Scanlon
PA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Schakowsky
IL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Scott, David
GA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Simon
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Smith (WA)
WA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Stansbury
NM • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Stevens
MI • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Swalwell
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Sykes
OH • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Takano
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Thanedar
MI • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Thompson (MS)
MS • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Tlaib
MI • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Tokuda
HI • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Torres (NY)
NY • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Trahan
MA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Vargas
CA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Velazquez
NY • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Wasserman Schultz
FL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Watson Coleman
NJ • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Williams (GA)
GA • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Wilson (FL)
FL • D
Sponsored 6/12/2025
Meeks
NY • D
Sponsored 6/17/2025
Soto
FL • D
Sponsored 6/17/2025
Sewell
AL • D
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Strickland
WA • D
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Norcross
NJ • D
Sponsored 6/30/2025
Randall
WA • D
Sponsored 6/30/2025
Lieu
CA • D
Sponsored 7/15/2025
Bell
MO • D
Sponsored 7/16/2025
Landsman
OH • D
Sponsored 10/6/2025
Friedman
CA • D
Sponsored 10/6/2025
Grijalva
AZ • D
Sponsored 12/15/2025
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.govRelated Bills
HR51 — Washington, D.C. Admission Act
Full statehood for Washington, Douglass Commonwealth would admit the District of Columbia as a new state on equal footing, while defining a smaller federal "Capital" and setting staged transitions for courts, property, and federal programs. - Capital residents would gain full congressional representation: two U.S. Senators and one U.S. Representative. The bill also requires states to allow "absent Capital" residents to vote by absentee ballot in federal elections. - The U.S. House would be permanently increased to 436 members and apportionment would be adjusted beginning with the first decennial census after admission. - The bill defines the federal Capital with a required 180-day survey, preserves federal court, prosecutorial, prison, parole, National Guard, and employee benefit arrangements on a temporary basis, and phases those responsibilities to the State as it certifies the necessary laws and personnel are in place.
HR1589 — American Dream and Promise Act of 2025
New pathways to permanent residence. This bill would create a ten‑year conditional permanent resident status for certain people who entered as children and would add an adjustment pathway for specified Temporary Protected Status and Deferred Enforced Departure holders. - Young long‑term residents and DACA‑eligible people could get a ten‑year conditional status if they meet rules like continuous presence since Jan 1, 2021 and education or credential benchmarks. They could convert to full permanent residence after meeting removal‑of‑condition rules and have limits on removal while applying. - Nationals with qualifying TPS or DED status who meet continuous‑presence rules could apply within a three‑year window and face a capped application fee of $1,140. - The bill creates a competitive grant program to help applicants, allows fee exemptions for youth, low‑income people, foster care alumni, and those with serious disabilities, and adds a $25 supplemental surcharge to fund appointed counsel.
HR5390 — FAMILY Act
This bill would create a federally administered paid family and medical leave insurance program that pays eligible workers for caregiving and serious medical needs while adding job and health coverage protections. It sets benefit formulas, eligibility rules, and a new Office of Paid Family and Medical Leave inside the Social Security Administration to run the program. - Families and caregivers: Would get paid leave based on earnings with benefits calculated using a three-tier formula and monthly minimum and maximum amounts. Caregiving is tracked in 1-hour units and capped per benefit period at 12 times an individual’s regular weekly hours, and the eligibility wage floor is $2,000 for benefit periods beginning in 2026. - Workers and job protections: Would include restoration to the same or equivalent job, continuation of health coverage during leave, anti-retaliation rules with a 12-month rebuttable presumption for recent leave takers, and limited exclusions for new hires. - Administration and employers: Creates a Deputy Commissioner‑led office at the SSA to set rules, run payments, publish annual demographic usage reports, share data with federal agencies, manage legacy State programs to avoid double counting, and require a GAO study after 2026 and every five years thereafter.
HR15 — Equality Act
Adds sexual orientation and gender identity to the federal definition of sex and creates a uniform, nationwide nondiscrimination framework across employment, housing, credit, education, public accommodations, jury service, and programs that receive federal funds. The bill would harmonize definitions, remedies, and rules of construction across multiple civil rights statutes to make enforcement and claims more consistent. - Workers: Private and federal employees would gain explicit protection from discrimination for sexual orientation and gender identity. The bill would update Title VII rules, expand remedies, and adjust bona fide occupational qualification rules to account for gender identity. - People using public places, students, and tenants: Public accommodations and education laws would explicitly bar discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The Fair Housing Act would adopt the same definitions and protections to cover renters and buyers. - Borrowers, juries, and enforcement: The Equal Credit Opportunity Act would bar credit discrimination on these bases. Jury selection rules would be updated to prevent discrimination. The bill would also prevent the Religious Freedom Restoration Act from being used to challenge enforcement under the covered civil rights laws.
HR14 — John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2025
This bill would restore robust federal oversight of voting rights by rewriting Section 2 and creating a broad practice-based preclearance system. It sets new tests for vote-dilution and vote-denial claims, adds retrogression rules for actions on or after January 1, 2021, and requires extensive public notice, data disclosure, and observer powers. - Minority and language-minority voters: Provides clearer legal paths to challenge districting and practices that dilute or abridge votes, recognizes coalitions of minority groups, and applies retrogression rules to actions from January 1, 2021. - States and local election officials: Triggers preclearance using a 25-year lookback with numeric thresholds and creates an administrative bailout that requires demonstrating sustained compliance over a 10-year period to avoid coverage. - Enforcement, oversight, and courts: Expands who may sue to include private "aggrieved persons", centralizes observer authority in the Attorney General, and authorizes pre-suit inspection and information demands that courts may enforce or modify.
HR17 — Paycheck Fairness Act
Strengthening pay equity by expanding who is protected and limiting employers from using past pay, the Paycheck Fairness Act would tighten how pay differences are justified and increase enforcement and data collection. - Workers and prospective employees would gain a ban on employer reliance on wage history and new nonretaliation protections for wage discussions. The bill lets a candidate voluntarily share prior pay only after a job offer and only to justify a higher wage. - Employers would face new civil penalties for wage-history violations starting at $5,000 for a first offense and rising by $1,000 per subsequent offense to a $10,000 cap. Affected workers could recover damages up to $10,000 plus attorneys’ fees and injunctive relief where appropriate. - Federal enforcement and oversight would increase. The EEOC and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs would enforce the rules. The bill would create a National Equal Pay Enforcement Task Force and require expanded pay-data collection by EEOC, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and OFCCP from federal contractors. Provisions would take effect six months after enactment.
Take It Personal
Get Your Personalized Policy View
Create a free account to save research, track policy impacts, and unlock your personalized versions of these pages.
Already have an account? Sign in