Professionals or "workers"

[blackribbon]

I am attending nursing school in Michigan, a very "union" state. I have recently moved here from Texas, a right to work state. There is a big political issue going on here about Right-to-work. And until people started posting on our student fb page, I don't think it dawned on me that nurses had a union. I have a lot to learn fast, I guess.

The biggest issue I have is that I don't really want to be a "worker" that needs protection by a union, but would rather be considered a "professional". Other than teachers, are there any other degreed professions that have a union? I may just be ignorant because of my life in Texas, but I haven't been able to find any or references. Most just have professional societies ... which we also have...but these are not unions. It almost seems demeaning that teachers and nurses, both primarily female professions, feel the need to be "protected" like lower skilled workers.

I have a degree in Bioengineering and never heard of a union for engineers. Lawyers and doctors don't have unions. I couldn't find one for respiratory therapists, physical therapists, or registered dieticians. I know in both my husband's line of work (teamster) and my father-in-laws work (electrician), you no longer could belong to the union when you moved to a professional role (management of any sort).

Isn't it kind of demeaning to our professional status to unionize?

(Please be kind, I am asking really asking to learn and not to challenge.)

[MN-Nurse, ASN, RN]

I don't agree. Leave your feelings out of this and try to discuss this intellectual matter seriously, please. It is very true that unions in most cases are utilized by laborers, not autonomous professionals -- which is what nursing is supposed to aspire to. By denying this, you help to hold back the profession.

I call BS again.

I didn't deny that unions are also comprised of laborers; I responded to the characterization of union nurses as "demeaning."

Feelings had nothing to do with it. Starting a conversation by tagging the joining of a union as "demeaning" is inflammatory, whether you choose to ignore it happened or not.

[elkpark]

... that includes being reasonable with staff, which in turn must be individually organized and reasonable[/Quote]

Entertaining oxymoron ...

[PMFB-RN, RN]

Apparently not all that far in some professions. If a person does not want to work where she feels (or is) abused, that person can and should leave. Expecting some union "leaders" to fix it for them is a very ineffective means of dealing with it.

*** Um OK. I see your mind is made up and no amount of facts will change it. BTW If I were you I would stop putting words into others mouths and thought into their heads like you do in the above quote. You really really suck at it.

[PMFB-RN, RN]

If I believe I am not being paid adequately for my work, I move on. When people realize this, then poor management will have no choice but to straighten out its act, or close down. I do not want some clown "representing" me and I certainly do not want my money being used for something I do not wish to fund nor support. I know what I want and I pursue that, plain and simple.

*** Managment has already sucessfully eliminated the "I'll just leave option". For the las 20 years they have been putting out the false and self serving "nursing shortage" propaganda. Their goal is to create a nurse oversupply siuation. To make matters even worse managment has even gotten nurses to pay for their own destruction by lobbying state and federal governements for massive amounts of nurses tax money to expand and increase the number of nursing programs This benifits them in several ways, primarily among them is it removes managments need to treat it's nurses well for fear they will vote with their feet.

[BrandonLPN, LPN]

Apparently not all that far in some professions. If a person does not want to work where she feels (or is) abused, that person can and should leave. Expecting some union "leaders" to fix it for them is a very ineffective means of dealing with it.

You don't understand what unions do. It's called COLLECTIVE BARGANING. The union fights to extract the highest possible compensation (in the form of wages and benefits) from the employer. If an employer is abusing their employees, that employer should be held accountable. Why should the employee leave? Unions hold employers accountable. Why should employers hold all the cards?

[PMFB-RN, RN]

Apparently any time that is spent in school not "learning the trade" is a waste according to most of the threads.

*** Yes you are right. The BSN only crowd does believe that. The evidence for that is the fact that ADN + bachelors degree does NOT equal BSN. About 1/3 of our local ADN sudents already have a bachelors or higher degree when they enter the ADN program.

[BrandonLPN, LPN]

And I hate it when people say "if you don't like it, just leave". Heck no, if I don't like it, I'm gonna change it! There's nothing more satisfying than toppling unjust authority and making the powerful pay.

[Overland1, RN]

You don't understand what unions do. It's called COLLECTIVE BARGANING. The union fights to extract the highest possible compensation (in the form of wages and benefits) from the employer. If an employer is abusing their employees, that employer should be held accountable. Why should the employee leave? Unions hold employers accountable. Why should employers hold all the cards?

I fully understand what unions do, and it has, in general terms, become something that much of the public is not supporting anymore.

Employees should leave if they do not like their current employment - they have the right to choose where they work. Enough good people leave... management will be held accountable. That is the way the free market works.

[Overland1, RN]

And I hate it when people say "if you don't like it, just leave". Heck no, if I don't like it, I'm gonna change it! There's nothing more satisfying than toppling unjust authority and making the powerful pay.

If you can change it, more power to you, but "making the powerful pay" is more of a fantasy that is pushed on us by those who want our money and adoration. They prey on those who pay and follow them.

Standing around in front of a work place, chanting that totally worn out "hey hey ho ho" thing, will not change things for the better. It may get a pay raise for some, but that money will have to come from somewhere. Simple math.

Unions have a major PR (public relations, for those in Rio Linda) problem lately; a regrouping and change in their tactics is likely all that will address that problem.

[nursel56]

If you can change it, more power to you, but "making the powerful pay" is more of a fantasy that is pushed on us by those who want our money and adoration. They prey on those who pay and follow them.

Standing around in front of a work place, chanting that totally worn out "hey hey ho ho" thing, will not change things for the better. It may get a pay raise for some, but that money will have to come from somewhere. Simple math.

Unions have a major PR (public relations, for those in Rio Linda) problem lately; a regrouping and change in their tactics is likely all that will address that problem.

It sounds like you believe unions shouldn't exist at all. Is that true?

[Overland1, RN]

It sounds like you believe unions shouldn't exist at all. Is that true?

Must be the tone of my voice was misinterpreted.

I am in favor of unions (they are a business, too), but am also in favor of people being able to choose where they work and not be required by law to join a union (nor pay dues) to work there. Yes, I have read and heard numerous "freeloader" arguments, and they do not carry the water. A person does a job (or not) and is paid by the employer in cash, benefits, etc. for that work (and sometimes for goofing off). If the employer wants more money, he can go elsewhere, ask for a raise (bad choice - never, ever ask for a raise), or go on strike. If there are "X" number of dollars to pay for staff (usually the largest expense of running most places of employment), and the amount paid to each is increased, the number of "each" will likely be reduced, either by attrition or layoffs. Granted, some employers will increase their budget for staffing, but can only do so if revenue is increased or waste is reduced.

If unions are so great and beneficial to all, why is union "membership" required in order that a person work in certain places? One would think that everybody would be flocking to join ASAP. :)

Another consideration is that, while Nurses want to be considered as "professionals" (we definitely are!), some do not realize that professionalism begins with appearing professional... not just in dress and general appearance, but in how we are perceived (perception "grows legs" and becomes reality, good or bad) by the public and related professions. We need to frequently assess ourselves and see ourselves and our profession as others see us - often not an easy nor palatable thing to do.

[nursel56]

Must be the tone of my voice was misinterpreted.

I am in favor of unions (they are a business, too), but am also in favor of people being able to choose where they work and not be required by law to join a union (nor pay dues) to work there. Yes, I have read and heard numerous "freeloader" arguments, and they do not carry the water. A person does a job (or not) and is paid by the employer in cash, benefits, etc. for that work (and sometimes for goofing off). If the employer wants more money, he can go elsewhere, ask for a raise (bad choice - never, ever ask for a raise), or go on strike. If there are "X" number of dollars to pay for staff (usually the largest expense of running most places of employment), and the amount paid to each is increased, the number of "each" will likely be reduced, either by attrition or layoffs. Granted, some employers will increase their budget for staffing, but can only do so if revenue is increased or waste is reduced.

If unions are so great and beneficial to all, why is union "membership" required in order that a person work in certain places? One would think that everybody would be flocking to join ASAP. :)

Another consideration is that, while Nurses want to be considered as "professionals" (we definitely are!), some do not realize that professionalism begins with appearing professional... not just in dress and general appearance, but in how we are perceived (perception "grows legs" and becomes reality, good or bad) by the public and related professions. We need to frequently assess ourselves and see ourselves and our profession as others see us - often not an easy nor palatable thing to do.

Thanks for the reply. The tone -- well the remark about Rio Linda toward the readership here was somewhat snarky, and the content sounded sort of libertarian, but at least now I don't have to post about the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire. It seems like you feel the behavior of striking workers in the public square is unseemly and not something professionals would want to be associated with. I can see that point, but the line between between "professional" and "collective bargaining" isn't that sharp, and is becoming increasingly less so. The ANA, the premiere advocacy group for professional nursing, works hand in glove with the nurse's unions and stands in picket lines with them, chanting away. :) Many of the professional societies are starting offshoot groups who do vote to go on strike.

I looked up the Michigan right-to-work battle and found the "union" to be the Michigan Nurses Association, which I assumed was one of the state branches of the ANA, (not a union). Turns out the MNA is a union now, because they broke free of the ANA several years ago, and they aren't the only state branch to do that. That's bound to cause confusion in the minds of the public, as most aren't keenly interested in the issue unless it affects them directly.

Some trade societies and Guilds do vote to strike, such as the Screen Actors and Writers Guilds. Producers have a defacto union as well, and I don't think the public views them as unprofessional. Both sides do their level best to make the other appear as horrible as possible. That's the worst part of the whole controversy to me.