To Unionize or Not To Unionize: Questions that every nurse should ask themselves

Nurses Union

Published

came across this while link hopping tonight...

thought provoking article...

to unionize or not to unionize:

questions that every nurse should ask themselves

we can agree to disagree. having been the victim of a mobbing instituted by a manager and her crony i have a much different experience base to draw from in forming my opinion about the value of unions. namecalling from either side on this issue does very little to advance the interests of nursing.

the goals of most social democrats are:

in general, contemporary social democrats support[citation needed]:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_democracy

my experience and observation tells me that the average nurse in an organized labor maket has better wages, benefits and pension coverage. (did you know that defined benefit pensions (supported by unions) have a better rate of return to the worker than defined contribution plans (supported by business.) see the epi.org website for details.

0 Votes
Here you assume all management is imcompetent and we all want the same thing when it comes to the work environment and our individual needs.

Many years ago, I was working as a per diem for a small local hospital which decided it needed a union. As momentum grew I really questioned what I would gain from having a union represent me. At the time I really didn't feel the end justified the means. They were representing the needs of the full time worker and I was per diem. So I decided this was not in my best interest and would not support it. Well, fellow nurses who I had known for years suddenly aquired a mob mentality and turned on me, writing scab next to my name and reporting any little infraction to my superiors. It was a low point in my career as an RN and left a really bad taste in my mouth for unions in general. Eventually things got better and people started to respect my decision, even as the union took hold.

Nothing you can say will change my opinion of unions in professional nursing as I feel they do not have a place in an educated group of people. I think it tends to squash individualism, competition and inovation. as these have no place in a socialist society.

" Living is hard, dying is easy" Jack Lalane

Count me in . . . . . thanks!

steph

0 Votes
we can agree to disagree. having been the victim of a mobbing instituted by a manager and her crony i have a much different experience base to draw from in forming my opinion about the value of unions. namecalling from either side on this issue does very little to advance the interests of nursing.

the goals of most social democrats are:

in general, contemporary social democrats support[citation needed]:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_democracy

my experience and observation tells me that the average nurse in an organized labor maket has better wages, benefits and pension coverage. (did you know that defined benefit pensions (supported by unions) have a better rate of return to the worker than defined contribution plans (supported by business.) see the epi.org website for details.

wow . . . .i disagree with just about all of those goals and think they will ruin our country.

agreeing to disagree here too . . . . .

steph

0 Votes

http://krla.townhall.com/pages/KEVINJAMES

Here is one example, from California, about government interference.

"Democrats say they want to keep the government out of your bedroom.

Actually, they want government in every room of your house and in the ventilation system as well.

By now, you’ve probably heard about the proposal of the California Energy Commission to require that all new homes in the state be outfitted with a “programmable communicating thermostat,” an Orwellian device which would allow the government to control the temperature inside your house. Imagine: a government bureaucracy along the lines of the Department of Motor Vehicles or the U.S. Postal Service controlling the comfort level you are allowed to maintain inside your own home!

You may have read the elitist article in the New York Times which dismissed opponents of the plan as technophobic rubes.

And you might have done a high-five in your mind’s eye when you heard that the Commission was forced to table the idea after an avalanche of protests driven by the internet and talk radio (my talk radio audience was furious). A day later, the Commission dropped the idea entirely.

But this isn’t Yorktown, it’s the Battle of Lexington and Concord, and many hard years of struggle lie ahead.

The Democrats (a.k.a. global warming wimps) have found the rhetorical weapon they will use for at least the next decade to decrease your liberty while increasing their power, and that weapon is the hysteria over global warming. . . . ."

0 Votes

The fundamental difference in the two ideologies, IMO:

You're on your own vs we're in this together.

I choose the latter.

0 Votes
The fundamental difference in the two ideologies, IMO:

You're on your own vs we're in this together.

I choose the latter.

Very well put....

0 Votes

The funny thing about Social Democracies is that as a group they are outcompeting the US in the world market. The Euro is trading at a 46% premiom to the US dollar as of today. I think that ome of the reasons for this is that they have a strong labor movement and universal health care.

0 Votes
The funny thing about Social Democracies is that as a group they are outcompeting the US in the world market. The Euro is trading at a 46% premiom to the US dollar as of today. I think that ome of the reasons for this is that they have a strong labor movement and universal health care.

If you live long enough you realize that everything runs in cycles.. Sometimes the US is doing better and sometimes it's another market. Do you think the guy you are quoting at the bottom of your statement plays lotto? I gotta tell you, I'm for extreme wealth.. I could go for my own privite island and a privite jet!. I have a competative nature.. another reason for my dislike of unions!

0 Votes

Paul Krugman is a very very smart PHD trained economist. I am not holding a gun to your head and forcing you to join CNA. I simply am pointing out that in general societies managed for broad prosperityare safer, healthier and happier places to live. See:

Since 2000, employment has actually grown a bit faster in Europe than in the United States — and since Europe has a lower rate of population growth, this has translated into a substantial rise in the percentage of working-age Europeans with jobs, even as America’s employment-population ratio has declined.

In particular, in the prime working years, from 25 to 54, the big gap between European and U.S. employment rates that existed a decade ago has been largely eliminated. If you think Europe is a place where lots of able-bodied adults just sit at home collecting welfare checks, think again.

Meanwhile, Europe’s Internet lag is a thing of the past. The dial-up Internet of the 1990s was dominated by the United States. But as dial-up has given way to broadband, Europe has more than kept up. The number of broadband connections per 100 people in the 15 countries that were members of the European Union before it was enlarged in 2004, is slightly higher than in the U.S. — and Europe’s connections are both substantially faster and substantially cheaper than ours.

...

What European countries definitely haven’t done is dismantle their strong social safety nets. Universal health care is a given. So are a variety of programs that support families in trouble, helping protect Europeans from the extreme poverty all too common in this country. All of this costs money — even though European countries spend far less on health care than we do — and European taxes are very high by U.S. standards.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/11/opinion/11krugman.html

Fifteen years ago the US was outcompeting the social democracies. Mr Krugman just wrote a column that discussed the "success" of Reagans economic policies:

But where in his remarks was the clear declaration that Reaganomics failed?

For it did fail. The Reagan economy was a one-hit wonder. Yes, there was a boom in the mid-1980s, as the economy recovered from a severe recession. But while the rich got much richer, there was little sustained economic improvement for most Americans. By the late 1980s, middle-class incomes were barely higher than they had been a decade before — and the poverty rate had actually risen.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/opinion/21krugman.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Since PATCO there has been open warfare declared on labor. There has been a very real economic decline for the middle class. The reality is that the US has substantially lower economic mobility than other western countries. See:

Recent studies suggest that there is less economic mobility in the United States than has long been presumed. The last thirty years has seen a considerable drop-off in median household income growth compared to earlier generations. And, by some measurements, we are actually a less mobile society than many other nations, including Canada, France, Germany and most Scandinavian countries. This challenges the notion of America as the land of opportunity.

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2007/05useconomics_morton.aspx

Full report with charts at: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2007/05useconomics_morton/05useconomics_morton.pdf

0 Votes

"Recent studies suggest that there is less economic mobility in the United States than has long been presumed. The last thirty years has seen a considerable drop-off in median household income growth compared to earlier generations. And, by some measurements, we are actually a less mobile society than many other nations, including Canada, France, Germany and most Scandinavian countries. This challenges the notion of America as the land of opportunity. "

I won't debate the fact that there is probably less income growth, however I will challange the statement that American may not be the land of opportunity. Free will and the basic freedoms listed in the constitution assures me that there is plenty of opportunity in America.. but I do see alot of "victims" and poor choices in regards to economic growth in individuals. I believe the "I want it all and I want it now" philosophy is alive and well in America which translates into increased debt and less savings. Time will only tell how Americans will fare.. but I'm getting off topic.

How can you not feel apathy and boredom, when you know no matter how hard you work, it is not a measurement that is used when competing for a specific job.. An example might be the nurse who has 10 years of experience and expertise in critical care, but has only worked in the hospital for 3 years, never calling in sick and persues continuing education in the related field.. goes up against a nurse with only 4 yrs experience, has repeatedly called in sick but has worked for the hospital 3 years and 2 months.. Both want the day shift in critical care.. In a union hospital the person with the most seniority gets the job.. This leaves no insentive to improve yourself or be accountable.

0 Votes
Specializes in MPCU.

I have had bad experiences with unions. I've had excellent experiences with unions. I'd like to think that unions could be of help by negotiating for magnet status or similar empowerment for nurses. Most of my bad experiences were with unions which only negotiated salary and benefits. I know of a health care organization that went out of business directly due to the union. The union refused to negotiate for higher starting salaries and the company could no longer attract new nurses.

0 Votes

How can you not feel apathy and boredom, when you know no matter how hard you work, it is not a measurement that is used when competing for a specific job.. An example might be the nurse who has 10 years of experience and expertise in critical care, but has only worked in the hospital for 3 years, never calling in sick and persues continuing education in the related field.. goes up against a nurse with only 4 yrs experience, has repeatedly called in sick but has worked for the hospital 3 years and 2 months.. Both want the day shift in critical care.. In a union hospital the person with the most seniority gets the job.. This leaves no insentive to improve yourself or be accountable.

What you are describing is urine poor management. Good managers monitor these issues and hold employees accountable for their behaviors. Good managers also help their employees find ways to succeed. I just don't buy the idea that a professional would be demotivated by not having first choice in shift. A good manager would encourage employee A to apply for promotion in order to get a better shift. Employee B may have valid reasons for use of sick leave. Is that a reason to deny a shift change? What if Employee B has a sick child or spouse with a chronic illness? I think the complaint raised is shallow absent the whole picture for both employees.

Seniority is one of those issues that can cause heartburn for everyone involved. I can defend seniority clauses as they are a tool that rewards loyalty to the organization as well as assuring that employees are treated consistently and fairly. Internally driven people hold themselves accountable and seek improvement for the reasons that it is simply the right thing to do.

0 Votes
+ Add a Comment