This bill amends the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to codify what counts as “companionship services” and “domestic service,” and to make clear that both the companionship exemption (for minimum wage and overtime) and the live‑in domestic exemption (for overtime) apply when care is provided through third‑party employers. The statutory text lists included activities (non‑medical personal care, assistance with ADLs/IADLs, and related household tasks), excludes services requiring trained medical personnel, and limits general household work to 20% of weekly hours.
The practical effect is to preserve and tighten a statutory exemption that has been controversial: home‑care agencies and staffing firms are explicitly covered as employers under the exemptions, while families and payors retain lower out‑of‑pocket staffing costs. The bill also narrows the Secretary of Labor’s regulatory leeway by striking the prior reference to definitions “as defined and delimited by regulations of the Secretary,” creating fresh questions about which tasks require medical training and how states and courts will enforce the new statutory text.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill adds a new statutory definition of “companionship services” that lists non‑medical personal care duties, caps unrelated household work at 20% of weekly hours, and excludes services that require trained medical personnel. It also defines “domestic service” with an enumerated list of occupations and creates a definition of “third‑party employment.”
Who It Affects
Home‑care agencies, staffing firms, and third‑party employers that place aides in private homes; families and households who hire or contract for in‑home care; individual caregivers and aides (including home health aides and certified nursing assistants) who may be classified under the domestic‑service label. State Medicaid programs and private payors that fund in‑home care will also be affected.
Why It Matters
By embedding these definitions in statute and expressly covering third‑party employment, the bill preserves wage and overtime exemptions that keep consumer costs down but also limit wage protections for many direct‑care workers. It reallocates decisionmaking from agency rulemaking to statutory text, altering enforcement points and litigation risk for employers, workers, and regulators.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill inserts new, detailed definitions into the FLSA to specify what Congress means by ‘‘companionship services’’ and ‘‘domestic service.’’ For companionship services the bill lists typical non‑medical activities—help with bathing, feeding, medication reminders, meal prep, laundry, errands, and similar tasks—and allows general household work only when it does not exceed 20 percent of an aide’s weekly hours. It also says the companionship exemption does not cover work that requires trained medical personnel, like a registered nurse.
Separately, the bill defines ‘‘domestic service’’ by naming a range of household jobs—cooks, nannies, housekeepers, certified nursing assistants, home health aides, personal care aides, chauffeurs for family use, and similar roles—performed in a private home. Importantly, the text introduces ‘‘third‑party employment’’ and explicitly says the companionship and live‑in domestic exemptions apply when the worker is employed by someone other than the household receiving care (for example, an agency or staffing firm), whether or not that worker serves multiple households in a week.The bill also removes the phrase that previously left the scope of these exemptions ‘‘as defined and delimited by regulations of the Secretary’’—shifting the definitional authority into statute.
Practically, that reduces future regulatory flexibility at the Department of Labor and places courts and enforcement agencies in the position of interpreting the new statutory terms. That matters because disputes will center on whether particular tasks are ‘‘medical’’ (and thus excluded) and whether the 20 percent cap on unrelated household work is being honored in practice.Taken together, these changes preserve exemptions that keep home‑care labor costs lower for families and payors but also lock in limited wage and overtime protection for many aides, including those employed by third‑party agencies.
Implementation will hinge on how ‘‘trained medical personnel’’ is read against the bill’s list of covered occupations and how enforcement resources are used to audit time‑use across multi‑household schedules.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill creates a statutory definition of “companionship services” that explicitly includes non‑medical personal care and household tasks related to care, while limiting unrelated household work to 20% of weekly hours.
It excludes from the companionship definition any services that “require and are performed by trained medical personnel,” creating a medical‑task boundary for the exemption.
The bill lists occupations that qualify as “domestic service,” explicitly naming roles such as certified nursing assistants, home care aides, and personal care aides as domestic employees for FLSA purposes.
It defines “third‑party employment” and amends the FLSA exemptions to apply to companionship and live‑in domestic work even when the employee is paid by an agency or other employer rather than the household.
It strikes the prior statutory language deferring definition and delimitation to Department of Labor regulations, embedding the definitions directly in statute and reducing regulatory discretion.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Provides the Act’s name: the Ensuring Access to Affordable and Quality Home Care for Seniors and People with Disabilities Act. This part has no operative legal effect beyond identifying the bill; its utility is signaling congressional intent and policy framing for interpretation of the rest of the Act.
Statutory definitions for companionship, domestic service, and third‑party employment
Adds a new subsection to FLSA section 3 that defines three terms. The companionship definition catalogues included activities (ADLs/IADLs, household tasks tied to care) and sets a 20% ceiling on general household work; it also states the exclusion for services requiring trained medical personnel. The domestic‑service definition enumerates types of household employees—explicitly including CNAs and home health aides—bringing those job titles within the statutory concept of domestic work. The ‘‘third‑party employment’’ definition makes clear that workers employed by agencies count as employees for purposes of the exemptions. Operationally, these definitions shift contested lines that enforcement agencies and courts will now apply directly against statute rather than primarily against agency regulations.
Preserves companionship exemption and limits regulatory delegation
Amends the FLSA’s companionship exemption by adding the parenthetical “(including through third‑party employment)” and striking the clause that left the exemption’s scope ‘‘as defined and delimited by regulations of the Secretary.’’ That change means companionship services provided by agency‑employed aides remain exempt from minimum wage and overtime under the statute itself. Practically, employers and litigants cannot rely solely on existing or future Department of Labor regulatory definitions; instead, they must read the newly enacted statutory language to determine coverage.
Preserves live‑in domestic overtime exemption for third‑party employment
Amends the live‑in domestic employee exemption by inserting “(including through third‑party employment).” The effect is that live‑in domestic workers employed by staffing firms or agencies (not just by the household) remain exempt from overtime pay under the FLSA’s live‑in provision. For multi‑household placements or agency models that routinely place live‑in aides, this change confirms exemption status regardless of employer‑of‑record.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Employment across all five countries.
Explore Employment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Home‑care agencies and staffing firms — The bill removes ambiguity about agency‑employed aides, preserving exemptions that lower employers’ wage and overtime obligations and simplifying cost forecasting for multi‑household placements.
- Families and private households that contract for in‑home care — By preserving statutory exemptions, the bill helps keep hourly rates and overall costs lower than they would be if overtime and minimum‑wage obligations expanded to many in‑home aides.
- State Medicaid programs and private payors — Lower provider labor costs translate into lower program expenditures or the ability to serve more clients within existing budgets, since agencies can continue relying on exempt classifications to contain payroll costs.
Who Bears the Cost
- Direct‑care workers and home‑care aides — The statutory preservation of these exemptions maintains limited access to minimum‑wage and overtime protections for many aides, reducing potential earnings for staff who work long or split shifts across households.
- Labor enforcement agencies and courts — The change transfers definitional work from agency rulemaking to statutory interpretation, generating contested litigation and enforcement questions (for example, what constitutes a ‘‘trained medical personnel’’ task).
- Worker advocates and unions — Organizing and bargaining leverage may weaken where statutory exemptions reduce the legal basis to demand wage and overtime remedies; advocates may need to pursue alternative state‑level protections or collective bargaining terms.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is access versus protection: the bill prioritizes affordable, flexible home care by preserving exemptions that lower labor costs for agencies and families, but in doing so it keeps many direct‑care workers outside of standard wage and overtime protections—creating a policy trade‑off between keeping care affordable and extending labor protections to a low‑paid workforce.
The bill resolves one source of regulatory uncertainty—whether agency‑employed aides fall under the exemptions—by embedding definitions in statute, but that resolution creates fresh ambiguity elsewhere. The phrase ‘‘require and are performed by trained medical personnel’’ will be a focal point: the bill excludes those services from the companionship exemption but elsewhere lists certified nursing assistants and home health aides as domestic workers.
Reconciling those provisions will require interpretation—are CNAs performing routine ADL assistance covered as domestic workers, or are certain CNA tasks sufficiently medical to be excluded? That line will matter for millions of hours of care and for who must receive overtime and minimum wage.
Enforcement is another practical tension. The 20% cap on general household work is straightforward on paper but hard to monitor when aides work for agencies and split time across households.
Agencies and households may structure schedules to avoid crossing the cap or to obscure the allocation of tasks. Finally, by removing the statutory delegation to Department of Labor regulations, the bill limits the agency’s ability to respond quickly to changing care models; disputes that could previously be addressed through rulemaking and guidance may now funnel into litigation and statutory interpretation, increasing uncertainty for employers and workers alike.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.