Tension is rising at City Hall as lawmakers consider banning 24‑hour home health aide shifts, a proposal supporters say would protect workers but that disability advocates warn could threaten the lives and independence of those who rely on round‑the‑clock care.

José Hernandez, who was paralyzed in a spinal cord injury 15 years ago, depends on aides for nearly every daily task. He says the bill would leave people like him without the support they need to live safely at home.

“You name it — any activity of daily living, I need some kind of assistance,” Hernandez said. “For people with disabilities, that’s a fate worse than death. You lose everything.”

The legislation would prohibit home‑care agencies from assigning a single aide to a 24‑hour shift and instead require the work to be split into two separate shifts. It would also prevent employers from assigning more than 56 hours a week to a home care employee, unless the employee consents to the excess hours in writing. They would have the right to revoke their consent to work over 56 hours. Fines would also be imposed up to $500 for violations by the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection.

Supporters argue the change is necessary to end what they describe as an exploitative system in which workers are paid for only 13 of the 24 hours, they are on duty.

“This is probably the only industry where workers are required to work 24‑hour workdays and only get paid for 13 of those hours,” said Councilmember Oswald Feliz, one of 17 sponsors of the bill. “That is unacceptable.”

Disability advocates say the proposal overlooks the realities of people who need continuous care. Steven Robles, an employment specialist at Bronx Independent Living Services who has cerebral palsy, said the bill could create dangerous gaps in coverage.

“We feel for the workers,” Robles said. “There’s a middle ground that can be reached. We can help the workers and not take away from the disability community.”

His colleague, Jessica Tambor, who has relied on an aide since birth, said low wages are already contributing to a shortage of available home‑care workers.

“Home care workers in general need to be paid more money so that more people are willing to adopt, because right now there’s a big shortage,” Tambor said.

The Legal Aid Society has also raised concerns, saying the bill contains two 'fundamental flaws'. The group argues the proposal would eliminate 24‑hour shifts without creating a mechanism to replace them, since only insurance plans, not city‑regulated agencies, can authorize two 12‑hour shift

"People will go without care, which means they will either suffer, die, or be sent to two nursing homes, or their family members will have to quit their jobs to take care of them. The second problem that's related to that is procedural, which is that the disability rights community, which could have called attention to these problems, has been shut out from this entire process," said Richard Blum with the Legal Aid Society.

Feliz said the council is discussing possible amendments, including ensuring aides are paid for all 24 hours if they choose to work extended shifts. He said any final version must balance the needs of both workers and patients. Feliz says it is also going to require more city and state funds in order to pay home aides' a deserving wage.

“Making sure that patients get the 24‑hour care they need is something that absolutely cannot be ignored,” Feliz said. “The big question is how we create a better system for the patients, but also for the workers.”

A date is not yet on the City Council agenda for a vote.