Hartford - By signing a pair of executive orders last week, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy did what the General Assembly this spring opted not to do: open the door to unionizing thousands of day care workers and home health care aides whose paychecks come from state-administered programs.

"It is important that those who care for both our youngest and oldest citizens receive equitable pay and work force security," the governor said in announcing his decision.

And in issuing his orders, Malloy opened himself to fierce criticism from Republican legislators, some of whom speculate that the twin directives could be the result of an alleged secret deal between the Democratic governor and public-sector labor following the tense relations this spring and summer during the negotiations and ratification of work force concessions deals.

"The unions wanted this very badly when they were before the legislature, and I think this was his way of satisfying their demands," said state Sen. Joe Markley, R-Southington, who considers the orders "an abuse of power." "This [unionization measure] is obviously something that should be done by the legislature - not by the governor unilaterally."

Labor officials dispute any notion that they pressured Malloy into issuing the two orders which, for the unions, could result in thousands of new dues-paying members.

"This doesn't have anything to do with any deals. It has to do with giving people their rights," said Deborah Chernoff, spokeswoman for the New England Health Care Employees Union District 1199, SEIU, which the workers may eventually get an option to join.

Fielding media questions on Friday, Malloy defended his executive orders and reminded reporters that his mother worked as a public-health nurse. "No one should be surprised that I believe that people who care for others need to earn decent wages and earn respectable benefits," he said.

The first order concerned the roughly 4,000 day care workers who are paid through the Connecticut Department of Social Services' Care 4 Kids program for low- to moderate-income families. It allows these workers to elect representation through a process commonly known as "card check," which moves forward once a majority of workers have signed and mailed in authorization forms, or "cards."

Union officials say card check elections are more appropriate than secret balloting when individual workers are spread over distances.

The workers' representation could then engage in non-binding discussions with the state over workplace issues, including wages and benefits. A separate, nine-person working group is then charged with making recommendations to the governor by Feb. 1 on how to extend true collective-bargaining rights to the day care workers.

The second order concerns personal care attendants who help elderly and disabled people dress, bathe and care for themselves. These attendants are also offered to low- and moderate-income people through the state's PCA Waiver program.

The attendants are paid by the state but are hired, trained and dismissed by the disabled or elderly person for whom they work. State officials are unsure how many care attendants are affected by the order, although there are more than 20,000 active care attendants listed in state directories.

Malloy gave care attendants a path to unionization similar to that for day care workers. Union officials said Friday it is their understanding that, under the executive orders, both groups of workers could eventually complete the unionization process without needing legislative permission.

Chernoff emphasized that these workers are not being "forced" into unions. "They always have the right to say no," she said.

The governor's office says both day care workers and health care attendants currently receive low wages and no benefits or paid time off.

The average hourly wage of personal and home health care aides was $11.52 last year, according to the state labor department. Under the state's current pay ceiling for PCA Waiver attendants, wages can't exceed much over $13 an hour.

Two bills this spring that would have promptly extended collective bargaining to state-funded day care workers and personal care attendants passed several legislative committees but didn't come to a vote in either the House or Senate. Both bills would have prohibited worker strikes.

In public testimony for the care attendants' bill, some attendants described financial hardships and of having to live on food stamps and without health insurance. A few expressed frustration with a state rule that forbids attendants from working more than 25.75 hours a week for a particular client because anything above that would require offering workers compensation coverage.

But disabled clients who testified were largely opposed to unionization. Some worried that unionization would raise costs and then result in service cuts because the funding to pay attendants is also capped.

Catherine Ludlum, 49, who has spinal muscular atrophy and employs eight to 10 attendants a week, gave testimony earlier this year against the bill and returned to the Capitol Friday to voice her opposition to the executive orders.

"We feel that it's going to create bureaucracy and confusion and interfere with the loyalty that we have with one another," Ludlum told reporters from a wheelchair. "My assistants have all said to me, 'I don't want to be part of this.' [Union dues] is money out of their pocket, and they don't necessarily see an advantage to that."

State Rep. Chris Coutu, R-Norwich, who once worked as a personal care assistant, issued a news release condemning Malloy's orders for not being in the best interest of either care givers or clients. "Home care providers don't want to unionize, they don't want to pay union dues, so why are we doing this?"

In an interview, Coutu said he thinks the orders were "100 percent" part of a deal between the governor and unions.

He noted how the out-of-state National Correctional Employees Union is actively courting roughly 4,500 corrections workers whose membership has expressed interest in leaving AFSCME Council 4. If those workers depart, an influx of new unionized day care workers and home health aides would help to make up for the loss, Coutu said.

Political observers often credit Malloy's strong support from unions last November with pushing him to a narrow election victory over Republican Tom Foley. Malloy didn't have substantial union endorsements during his 2006 gubernatorial campaign and finished second in the Democratic primary to the candidate who did, New Haven Mayor John DeStefano.

During Friday's news conference, a reporter asked Malloy if the two executive orders could be considered "payback for all of the union support you received in the election."

"I understand some people might say those kinds of things," the governor replied. "I think they probably forget that my mother was a public health nurse, that she labored in the field of health care for many years."

He later added: "So I don't think anyone should be surprised by what I did. It is part of my core belief system."

j.reindl@theday.com