That being said, Chris Marte has been the hero…a lonely singular champion-truly- always for his constituents against powerful forces over his years in office…so for sure, he’s made enemies. While I don’t profess to know who really is behind the ‘whistleblower’ Meng Qin Zou who worked inside Marte’s office…I know that as it has to do with Home Care Aide orgs and Nursing Home orgs- and yes, 1199SEIU (in this instance-against the No More 24 Bill) and the powerful Lobby organizations writ large …many are -well-let me put it this way…a dirty bunch. (That assessment does indeed come from some personal knowledge I won’t bore you with). This 24 hour shift is de facto slave labor…nothing less (won’t bore you with that personal knowledge either).

So a logical question comes to mind…beyond the hypocritical indignation and investigation about Marte, and the pearl-clutching virtue being amplified, let’s imagine who might be after him:

Speaker Menin? She’s been facing immense, direct pressure from the Chinese Staff and Workers’ Association (CSWA) and the No More 24 movement and she broke an earlier pledge she made in  March 2026. She publicly promised home care workers that she would bring Marte’s Intro 303 (the bill to ban 24-hour shifts) to a full Council vote by late April. That vote never happened. Menin deferred the vote indefinitely, citing the need for “further stakeholder negotiation.” Opponents of the bill—including powerful healthcare unions like 1199SEIU, DC37, and various disability advocacy groups—strongly lobbied against it, arguing it would cause a shortage of around-the-clock care for the disabled. In response to the stall, workers organized aggressive protests outside Menin’s Upper East Side apartment building and launched multiple high-profile hunger strikes. The No More 24 campaign openly accused Menin of “continuing the torture” of women workers.

Menin confirmed that the City Council’s general counsel is actively working with the DOI and the  Council subsequently froze $31,000 in taxpayer discretionary funding that Marte had allocated to the CSWA. The political fallout has effectively stalled the bill, creating a scenario where Marte’s legal troubles simultaneously weaken the legislative push against 24-hour shifts

Who got to Zou? The DOI did not seek out this case on its own nor at Menin’s request. Ok with whom might that possible dirty connection rest?

The (evil, awful, BAD NURSING HOME APOLOGISTS) Leading Age New York (representing nonprofit nursing homes and home care agencies), alongside the Home Care Association of New York State (HCA-NYS)? They’ve fought for years to protect the current scheduling framework through what is known as the “13-Hour Rule.” Under current regulations, a home care aide can stay with a client for a 24-hour shift but is only paid for 13 hours. The remaining 11 hours are designated as unpaid time for sleep (8 hours) and meals (3 hours). LeadingAge and provider lobbyists argue that forcing agencies to split 24-hour shifts into two 12-hour shifts would essentially double labor costs for overnight care. Because Medicaid heavily funds these services, providers claim that without massive, multi-billion-dollar funding increases from the state government, a local city ban would cause the immediate financial collapse of home care agencies.

LeadingAge has actively intervened as a “friend of the court” (amicus curiae) in major class-action wage lawsuits. They successfully lobbied the New York State Department of Labor to pass emergency regulations protecting the 13-hour rule, explicitly stating it was necessary to prevent the collapse of the industry and stop the forced institutionalization of elderly patients into nursing homes.

Or, in surprising alliance with the healthcare lobby, several prominent civil rights and disability advocacy groups have strongly opposed the bill:

The Legal Aid Society Joint Opposition: The Legal Aid Society, working alongside 17 other organizations representing disabled New Yorkers, issued a joint letter urging the City Council to reject Intro 303. They argue that the bill attempts to fix a complex, state-regulated Medicaid problem “in isolation” at the city level. They worry that since there is currently a catastrophic shortage of home care workers, forcing agencies to find two workers per day instead of one will leave vulnerable disabled individuals without round-the-clock coverage. As a result, patients who wish to live independently would be forced out of their homes and into understaffed institutional nursing homes.

            Labor Union Resistance (DC37 & 1199SEIU) While the Chinese Staff and Workers’        Association represents independent and grassroots immigrant workers pushing for the ban,the city’s largest institutional healthcare labor unions have historically resisted the bill.Mainstream labor unions like DC37 voiced strong early opposition, forcing Marte’s team to amend the bill in May 2026.  Lobbying by these unions resulted in a controversial amendment to Intro 303. The bill now completely excludes unionized workers who are covered by an existing collective bargaining agreement (CBA). This means the ban would essentially only apply to non-union agencies, which critics say severely dilutes the bill’s impact and protects the established union-employer ecosystem.

Ultimately, the unified front of LeadingAge, the Legal Aid Society, disability NGOs, and large healthcare providers has successfully framed Marte’s bill not as an act of worker liberation, but as a dangerous disruption to the care economy that local taxpayers and the state Medicaid budget cannot absorb. Infuriating…these people  (mostly immigrants) work for meagre wages-they feed, clean, toilet, turn the patients several times at night and lovingly protect them…’them’ …could be your loved one… or in time, yourself! Shame on them!!!

Next   question…has any of the above formed their own Super PACs? I mean- what’s good for the goose should be good for the gander:

Answer-yes!   Several of the mainstream labor unions and lobbying organizations that oppose the local No More 24 shift ban (Intro 303) have created or heavily funded Independent Expenditure Committees at the New York State and New York City level).

“Competent New York”: Launched by DC37 in 2025, this Super PAC was designed to pool high-six-figure spending to boost favored candidates in the municipal elections. [

“People for a Better New York”: An older Independent Expenditure account revived by DC37 during mayoral and local primary cycles to deploy heavily targeted ad campaigns in the city.

-1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East which is the state’s largest healthcare union representing workers across the Medicaid-funded spectrum, 1199SEIU relies heavily on multi-million dollar outside spending campaigns:

“1199 SEIU New York State Political Action Fund”: While it functions globally across federal and state levels, this entity is tracked by regulatory bodies for independent expenditure ads and mailers in New York.

“LeadingAge New York PAC”: Unlike the labor unions, LeadingAge (which represents nonprofit nursing homes and care agencies) operates primarily through its standard political action committee. Under New York law, because they represent tax-exempt, 501(c)(3) nonprofit entities, they cannot directly orchestrate partisan Super PACs. Instead, they pool member donations directly into this traditional PAC to lobby state leaders in Albany and financially back candidates who promise to safeguard Medicaid frameworks like the 13-hour rule.