Survey: Would you cross a picket line when RNs were striking? - page 7

This months survey question: Would you cross a picket line when RNs were striking (at your own hospital or another)? Yes or No? FYI: Here are the results from this survey: Q: Would you... Read More

  1. by   L'beth
    Stiritup, please give it up. Over the past few days you have not offered constructive ideas, vented, aired frustration or answered a question. You have only trashed or belittled others for doing so. I realize this may be your purpose (hence, your name), but really...that's just tired and sad.
  2. by   willie2001
    I would not cross a picket line for all the money in the world. It would be a slap in the face to the stiking nurses who are trying to make things better for all of us, including our patients. I will say that it is sad when nurses have to resort to striking in order for administration to take notice of our plight. I am behind the striking nurses, all the way.
  3. by   123lisa
    No!
  4. by   ornurse2001
    I have posted this question elsewhere on this forum with no response-I'll try posting it here.When the nursing staff prepare to strike in LTC facilities, what measures are taken to ensure the well being of these elderly people?I have noted that there are strike actions in the works for a chain of several nursing homes(most in one state)and that agencies are advertising for relief RN,LPN,and CNA's.I have been taking care of my husband's 95 yr old grandmother for 2 yrs.in our home, and will be placing her in a nursing home in July due to her deteriorating mental status.It is difficult enough to worry about a loved one recieving quality care without the threat of all the nursing staff walking out.So, hospitals give a 10 day notice-what about nursing homes?Are these elderly people expected to move out of THEIR HOME for the purpose of allowing the nursing staff to strike?Most elderly people are confused enough without being moved around and forced to leave their familiar environment.THIS IS THEIR HOME.Even if these people can be moved, they shouldn't be.And if all the nursing staff walks out, somebody better darn well see to the needs of these elderly people.There is an ethical responsibility here.If the nursing staff are striking due to poor patient care issues-high ratios,etc., then state inspection agencies should instead be notified as LTC facilities are held to different standards and laws than hospitals.I would definitly be a "scab" and cross your nursing home picket line.
  5. by   Chellyse66
    ...
  6. by   lactationrn
    yes if I were contracted to work there, no if I were striking and fighting for a good cause.
  7. by   psnurse
    For all the naysayers, I have a different perspective on this question. It has nothing to do with issues of abandonment or patient ethics.

    There are some that would just as soon bring foreign nurses over here to take those striking nurses jobs at a fraction of the pay. So the striking nurses need a little time to work out the details of their contract to their satisfaction. But they still want a job to go back to, I would assume.

    Wouldn't you rather have some nurse already in this country, that doesn't really want your job to hold your place and give you the negotiating time that you need? Seems to me that you could get a better contract that way. The hospital isn't going to shut down because you strike. They will find a way to continue to operate, with or without you.

    So I guess, to hold your place while you advance your position and advance mine by proxy, yes. I would cross the picket line. And if I ever need it, I hope someone will hold my place too.
  8. by   fergus51
    Originally posted by psnurse
    . The hospital isn't going to shut down because you strike. They will find a way to continue to operate, with or without you.
    .
    They will continue to operate only because strikebreakers cross the picket lines!!! If not for strike breakers, strikes would never happen because the administration of a hospital would have to adress nurses' concerns in a reasonable manner. Look at other strikes where scabs have "held the places" of the other nurses for MONTHS. I doubt you'd be thanking them if they kept you out of work for 6 months and allowed the hospital to avoid dealing with you.
  9. by   lactationrn
    what aboutt he patiets that are already there?
  10. by   fergus51
    Originally posted by lactationrn
    what aboutt he patiets that are already there?
    They would be cared for because a strike would never happen!!! If administrators knew they couldn't replace RNs they would deal with them fairly and a strike wouldn't be necessary.
  11. by   nurs4kids
    Originally posted by RN2Bn2003
    yes I would cross in a heart beat. I do not have the luxury of being able to go without a pay check. My hubby and I have worked very hard for what we have and I am not about to lose it all to pound the pavement for a few dollars more. Think what you will and call me what you want but my family comes first not your cause
    RN2Bn2003,
    First, let me apologize for stirritup's ignorance. He/She speaks for the minority, not the majority. Good luck, and regardless of your opinion, I wish you well. Now, I understand your reply from a narrow perspective, BUT you must look at the bigger picture. You can either pound the pavement NOW or you can wait until LATER. Eventually, you'll understand. Work a few years, miss a few hours sleep, explain to your kids why you won't be home when Santa comes (four or five years in a row), explain to your kids why you can't take them to the movies you promised..because you're working MOT AGAIN, explain to the little ole lady at the end of the hall why you gave her the wrong med...perhaps she or those she left behind will understand that you are tired, overworked and understaffed. Work five years and smile as the new grads enter the field making more than you.

    Union's are working so that you will not have to work paycheck to paycheck (so you CAN afford to go without a paycheck), they are working for safe nurse patient ratio's, they are working so you CAN put your family first. Do you honestly think your administrator puts YOUR family first? I'm in a non-union state, and we actually have pretty good working conditions. I give all the credit to the union states and the nurses that have the guts to stand up for the rest of us cowards. So, in my humble opinion, it's not "your cause", it's a cause for society. The issues these unions are dealing with effect EVERYONE!
  12. by   psnurse
    Originally posted by fergus51


    They will continue to operate only because strikebreakers cross the picket lines!!! If not for strike breakers, strikes would never happen because the administration of a hospital would have to adress nurses' concerns in a reasonable manner. Look at other strikes where scabs have "held the places" of the other nurses for MONTHS. I doubt you'd be thanking them if they kept you out of work for 6 months and allowed the hospital to avoid dealing with you.
    Better to be out of work six months because some US citizen stepped in, than the duration of the work visa granted the nurse from the Phillipines, for example. Not to mention, if I stepped in, they would have to reach deep into their pockets. Big bucks takes on a new meaning when you come from an impoverished country.

    Think that is far fetched? I don't. It has already been posed as one solution to an impending nursing shortage. Not because I said so, but because it is included in a recent National Labor Bureau report.

    You think that nurse from the Phillipines cares what you think the problems in American healthcare are? I bet she/he has seen far worse and lived to tell about it. Not to mention that she would get a big, fat raise just by coming here to work for less money than you. Don't expect any loyalty there.

    So American nurses, the ANA, and other interested parties would kick and scream if the immigration flood gates were opened to foreign nurses. But in the end, the federal government isn't going to allow a shut down of essential healthcare services. Don't fool yourself into thinking healthcare isn't an essential service. The government calls for a cooling off period everytime air traffic controllers are about to strike, and there are other, if more time consuming, forms of transportation available.

    Then there is the American public. While possibly able to see and understand the points you are trying to make by striking, the American public is basically selfish. They will support your right to do whatever you want, as long as it doesn't interfere with what they feel they are entitled. And the American public feels entitled to healthcare. Where does this place their sympathy? Not with the nurses who are interfering with their ability to obtain healthcare services at the facility of their choice, but with the facility that is "struggling" to stay open in the face of striking nurses.

    Furthermore, if you think that hospital ever HAS to deal with you, think again. The hosital is a business. Seemingly sometimes, they are in business to lose money, but a business nonetheless. They are federallly subsidized providers of essential community services. So you better hope it is me stepping in to hold your place. You better hope that while I am there I soak every cent I can out of them. Because when everything is said and done, it is in the best interest of the federal government to ensure they stay open, it is in the best interest of the American public to ensure they stay open, not to mention the best interest of the hosptial administration, even if they dance with the loss of their collective a**es.

    Right now, you have the laws of supply and demand on your side. There are a limited number of nurses willing to hold your place in the event of strike and they are willing to provide services for a limited amount of time. You also have the financial principles of profit on your side. Even not-for-profit facitities make a profit, they simply reinvest it. Should the federal government ever decide that they must open immigration channels, the supply becomes too great for the demand to be high, and the facility can accomplish its goals with an increased profit margin.

    So I reiterate, you better hope it is me or someone like me and that we cut the profit margin so thin that what you are fighting for is cheaper than paying us. By keeping the immigration gates only selectively open, we further your cause and our own. The financial bottom line may be the only thing that keeps the hospital at your negotiating table. Lose that leverage and you may not have a job or a work environment to improve.
  13. by   fergus51
    Originally posted by psnurse


    Better to be out of work six months because some US citizen stepped in, than the duration of the work visa granted the nurse from the Phillipines, for example. Not to mention, if I stepped in, they would have to reach deep into their pockets. Big bucks takes on a new meaning when you come from an impoverished country.

    Think that is far fetched? I don't. It has already been posed as one solution to an impending nursing shortage. Not because I said so, but because it is included in a recent National Labor Bureau report.

    You think that nurse from the Phillipines cares what you think the problems in American healthcare are? I bet she/he has seen far worse and lived to tell about it. Not to mention that she would get a big, fat raise just by coming here to work for less money than you. Don't expect any loyalty there.

    So American nurses, the ANA, and other interested parties would kick and scream if the immigration flood gates were opened to foreign nurses. But in the end, the federal government isn't going to allow a shut down of essential healthcare services. Don't fool yourself into thinking healthcare isn't an essential service. The government calls for a cooling off period everytime air traffic controllers are about to strike, and there are other, if more time consuming, forms of transportation available.

    Then there is the American public. While possibly able to see and understand the points you are trying to make by striking, the American public is basically selfish. They will support your right to do whatever you want, as long as it doesn't interfere with what they feel they are entitled. And the American public feels entitled to healthcare. Where does this place their sympathy? Not with the nurses who are interfering with their ability to obtain healthcare services at the facility of their choice, but with the facility that is "struggling" to stay open in the face of striking nurses.

    Furthermore, if you think that hospital ever HAS to deal with you, think again. The hosital is a business. Seemingly sometimes, they are in business to lose money, but a business nonetheless. They are federallly subsidized providers of essential community services. So you better hope it is me stepping in to hold your place. You better hope that while I am there I soak every cent I can out of them. Because when everything is said and done, it is in the best interest of the federal government to ensure they stay open, it is in the best interest of the American public to ensure they stay open, not to mention the best interest of the hosptial administration, even if they dance with the loss of their collective a**es.

    Right now, you have the laws of supply and demand on your side. There are a limited number of nurses willing to hold your place in the event of strike and they are willing to provide services for a limited amount of time. You also have the financial principles of profit on your side. Even not-for-profit facitities make a profit, they simply reinvest it. Should the federal government ever decide that they must open immigration channels, the supply becomes too great for the demand to be high, and the facility can accomplish its goals with an increased profit margin.

    So I reiterate, you better hope it is me or someone like me and that we cut the profit margin so thin that what you are fighting for is cheaper than paying us. By keeping the immigration gates only selectively open, we further your cause and our own. The financial bottom line may be the only thing that keeps the hospital at your negotiating table. Lose that leverage and you may not have a job or a work environment to improve.
    I am not naive enough to think a nurse from the Philipines cares about my work conditions, but I am not naive enough to think that other North American nurses do either. I have learned not to expect loyalty from either group because the almighty dollar is more important to both than the conditions at other hospitals or the reasons why other nurses are striking. If they care did they wouldn't undermine the efforts to improve conditions. Unfortunately hospitals have proven again and again they will pay the RIDICULOUS salaries strike breakers command, so I don't see the fact that it costs them a lot of money will help the striking nurses at all. Unfortunately it it never cheaper for the hospital to settle with their own nurses. (Case in point: Our government would rather have a system that is based on OT (where we get paid double) than give us a decent wage to begin with so we could attract more nurses and not have to work OT.) That is a rationalization strikebreakers use to justify undermining the efforts of other nurses. If they want the money I just wish they would admit it instead of trying to say that they are really helping nurses on the picket lines.

    I am not suggesting that all healthcare should go to **** in the event of a strike. Obviously essential services would need to be covered and in the US this can often be done by other hospitals in the area. I live in BC Canada now and we are in the middle of a job action. In the event of a strike only the emergency and urgent cases are treated. We can not all strike because every hospital in the province is staffed by the same union and foreign nurses can not flood in because a nurse has to be a member of the union to work here. We are not doing the elective surgeries that can wait. A strike is possible without endangering the lives of patients. Especially when hospitals are given advance notice.

    As for the public, an overtime ban here has caused the cancellation of THOUSANDS of surgeries and the public is overwhelmingly behind us. They realize that we need better conditions and better wages in order to keep nurses here or there will be none left to care for them in the future. The public is not as shortsighted as you think. They know that nurses can leave and find work elsewhere so it is essential to retain nurses here. A few years ago nurses in one proince went on strike (illegally by the way) and the public supported them like you wouldn't believe. They called on the health employers to give the nurses a fair contract.

    I will say it again: THE ONLY REASON HOSPITALS DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH NURSES FAIRLY IS BECAUSE THEY KNOW THERE ARE NURSES TO TAKE THEIR PLACE IF THE WAGES ARE GOOD ENOUGH. If nurses were as united in the US as they are here in Canada believe me, you would see that employers would have to deal with you. As I already said, here in BC we are it. Other nurses (foreign or domestic) legally can't come in and take our jobs so our employer is forced to deal with us. If that were the case in the US I am certain nurses would achieve more. Unfortunately I doubt that will ever happen. The individual's desire for a quick buck is more important than what nurses could achieve collectively.

close