RALEIGH, N.C. – Working parents in North Carolina are growing increasingly frustrated with the lack of child care options for infants and toddlers.

Of the state's 100 counties, 99 have areas where child care options are so scarce that parents are wait listed, have to rely on relatives and neighbors or drop out of the workforce.

According to the Center for American Progress, 44% of North Carolina families live in these so-called child care deserts.

Heba Atwa, a mom in Wake County, says she spent months trying to find infant care for her daughter, before relatives stepped in to help.

"There are the places that are really desirable that everybody wants to send their children to,” she states. “Those have ridiculously long waiting lists. They aren't for single mothers – full-time, working single mothers – who don't have the luxury to wait around until one of those spaces opens."

Center-based care for infants and toddlers can cost on average nearly $1,000 a month per child.

And according to the North Carolina Early Childhood Foundation, 67% of children in the state under age six have parents who are working.

Federal government-sponsored child care subsidies ease the financial burden, but many eligible families don't have access to them.

More than 31,000 children are on the subsidy wait list in North Carolina.

Michele Rivest, policy director of the North Carolina Early Education Coalition, says the current business model for providing child care for infants and toddlers isn't working. She maintains the state should develop a new model that reflects the true cost of quality care.

"The issue with infant/toddler care is that you need more qualified teachers and staff per child than you do in preschool,” she states. “Babies, you know, can't fend for themselves, but it's also that babies need much more individualized and constant care and attention."

Rivest says the state also should increase child care subsidy funding and change wait list policies, as well as adopt a paid family and medical leave policy for workers.

She points out that one-quarter of North Carolina parents are back at work within two weeks after having or adopting a baby.

Labor groups representing thousands of Minnesota state workers find themselves at serious odds with Gov. Tim Walz over his move this week to reduce remote work options.

Walz announced that, starting June 1, most state-agency employees have to carry out their duties in person at least 50% of the time. That has drawn swift criticism from the unions that negotiate for nearly 40,000 state workers, including the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 5 is another, and at a Thursday news conference, its executive director, Bart Andersen, expressed frustration about having no input in the decision.

"If we are going to be considered a labor-friendly state, we need to have conversations," he said, "not dropped at the last minute and told that all these people have to go back to work in a month and a half, with no means to get there."

MAPE officials have said this also disrupts the lives of workers with children, citing day-care demands and long waiting lists for those facilities.

The governor has pointed to an exemption for people who live more than 75 miles from their primary work location. He also has said the change should help downtown businesses in the Twin Cities by spurring more foot traffic.

These debates have been happening in the private sector, too, since the constraints of the pandemic have faded. But Andersen suggested to anyone who believes remote workers are "slacking off" to think again.

"They're not in a bubble. They're not isolated," he said. "They're working with their teams and they're getting the work done."

Andersen said they know tasks such as road maintenance can't be done from home. But he highlighted the effectiveness of telework in recruiting and attracting people for the public-sector jobs that have that flexibility. The mounting tension between these labor groups and the administration comes as talks on a new contract take shape.


get more stories like this via email

Kansas City transit riders and workers are fighting proposed cuts, warning of a looming public transit crisis.

Hundreds of advocates of the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority gathered on the steps of City Hall last week over threats to cut 13 bus routes, eliminate up to 175 transit jobs and shut down the Immigrant and Refugee Integration Services microtransit program.

Protesters warned the cuts could strand thousands, cost hundreds of jobs and leave misclassified IRIS drivers without unemployment benefits.

Ashley Ball, a leader with Stand Up KC and the Missouri Workers Center, relies on public transit for work.

"I was living in a hotel with my kids in North Kansas City and the buses weren't always reliable, so I got IRIS early to be able to get to my shift," Ball explained. "I work in the city now, overnights at Taco Bell. It's very beneficial to have IRIS when I get off work."

Supporters argued the cuts are needed to address KCATA's budget shortfall, as the city's $71 million allocation falls far short of the $117 million needed. Officials also cited high administrative costs and call for more efficient transit operations.

In 2024, KCATA reported 1.1 million riders, a four-year high, averaging more than 35,000 people daily. Couple that with KC Streetcars, and Kansas City's transit served more than 40,000 people per day last year.

For Ball, its significance goes beyond just transportation.

"Our public transportation is the heart of the city," Ball emphasized. "It allows us, no matter where we are from or what we look like, to move around, accomplish our goals and try to live a better dream."

The budget cuts are being discussed by the City Council Finance Committee after talks were delayed in a previous session.


get more stories like this via email

Minnesota's up-and-coming doctors say in order to better care for patients down the road, they need collective bargaining power.

A large group of them has filed to form a union, reflecting an industry shift. This week, a supermajority of nearly 1,000 University of Minnesota resident physicians and fellows submitted their union-creation plans. It follows a similar move by peers at Hennepin Health earlier this month.

Dr. Thomas Schmidt, infectious diseases fellow at the University of Minnesota, said the current work environment for providers advancing through their training in hospitals and other settings is pretty grueling, with up to 80-hour workweeks in some cases.

"It's us making sure that we're having some breaks and making sure that we're able to have some life outside of training," Schmidt explained. "To ensure that we can be good doctors when we're there with our patients."

Schmidt cited burnout, still lingering from the COVID-19 pandemic, as one factor behind doctors embracing unionization. Researchers say the number of newly union-represented doctors could soon double, compared with the past two decades.

Because of consolidation in health care, more physicians are now employees of larger systems, as opposed to independent practitioners. The university said it will be responsive to all necessary parties as the process takes shape.

Doctors still getting their training say the residency system leaves little room to advocate for changes or request a new location. And while established medical professionals might make good money, Schmidt said it is not the case for residents, who are often in the $15 to $20 per-hour range.

"That is not a substantial amount of money to be able to take care of your housing, to take care of your family," Schmidt pointed out. "I'm a parent of two young kids, so it has not been easy to be a trainee."

He added some peers are delaying starting a family because of the limited pay and long hours.

Skeptics fear the union push among doctors will reduce the earnings of specialists. Meanwhile, the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, which has members working on infectious disease control in the state health department, recognizes the need for providers to have a bigger voice. It said it is vital as public health concerns, such as the bird flu, add to the work demands for the young professionals.