MNA WITHDRAWS FROM ANA

Okemos, MI In order to pursue the most effective course of action for its members, the Michigan Nurses Association (MNA) announced today that it is withdrawing immediately as a constituent member of the American Nurses Association (ANA). The decision was announced at the ANA House of Delegates in Washington D.C. MNA had been a constituent member association of ANA since 1905 and was the third largest affiliate of the ANA.

“The health care industry is changing, and ANA’s stance on issues does little or nothing to address the crisis that nurses and the profession face,” stated John Karebian, MNA Executive Director of Labor and Government Relations. “MNA will continue to champion the critical issues facing the bedside nurse at the state level and work through our national affiliation with the United American Nurses and the AFL-CIO to influence the crisis in nursing at the national level. This has not been an easy step to take, but we are unafraid to stand strong and committed to our purpose and goals.”

MNA, the strongest union for nurses in Michigan , has seen a significant and disturbing change in the goals and mission of ANA in regard to supporting bedside nurses. Bylaw changes passed this week at the ANA House of Delegates have served to reinforce MNA's concerns with the ANA leadership in other areas as well as collective bargaining. In April 2008, MNA held a special House of Delegates to discuss its national affiliation with ANA. Concerns were raised by the delegates that ANA had ceased to be relevant to its constituency in Michigan . Members raised concern that ANA was not positioned to address the challenges faced by registered nurses and its stagnant membership base over the past thirty years represented a lack of vision and direction.

“It’s clear that ANA has no interest in supporting in a meaningful way the staff nurse performing essential bedside care,” stated Diane Goddeeris, RN, MNA President. “For instance, in direct opposition to legislation that would mandate minimum staffing ratios, ANA chose to support a bill that we know from experience has little chance of addressing the need for safe patient care in the nation.”

More from the Michigan Nurses Association press release at :

http://www.minurses.org/news/press/2008/062708ana.shtml

"It's clear that ANA has no interest in supporting in a meaningful way the staff nurse performing essential bedside care," stated Diane Goddeeris, RN, MNA President. "For instance, in direct opposition to legislation that would mandate minimum staffing ratios, ANA chose to support a bill that we know from experience has little chance of addressing the need for safe patient care in the nation."

"ANA states that 73 percent of the nation's nurses identify short staffing as affecting their patient care. ANA's bill creates shared governance staffing committees to address staffing levels. Nurses have been trying this for years, and the results are the current unsafe system of mandatory overtime and inadequate staffing levels."

Michigan, along with the other members of the United American Nurses, supports HR. 2123, a federal staffing bill for REAL safe staffing.

http://http://www.govtrack.us/congre...bill=h110-2123

The ANA 2008 House of Delegates ended just yesterday. It was such a mockery of democracy, that I can't even stand to write about it, but I'll try.

The really sad thing is that the majority of the membership did not even understand how ANA was manipulating the rules to get what it wanted. They are nurses after all, not lawyers, and not many are well versed in Robert's Rules, which were strickly adhered to (as interpreted by ANA).

I felt that some of the leaders of the states knew exactly what was going on, though. It was obvious that a lot of negotiating and side-deals were being made.

What a horror and a sad day for nursing- to see ANA stoop to these tactics.

There was a gallery of observers and I wished that some neutral, knowledgeable individual could have been there to give a factual report of what was taking place. Nurses need to know the truth.

I'm not even sure the president is aware of how their attorneys are maniplulating the process "for the benefit of the Association". Does dishonesty come with fiduciary responsibility or do the leaders truely not realize what is going on? I don't see how they could possibly believe that the organization is operating from a transparent, open framework with the membership.

The House of Delegates is supposed to be the highest authority in the organization and all of them should be treated equally. They were so disrepected in the way they were treated throughout this process. Many, I think, remain silent because they too seek to attain position within the organization. Some stay silent because they fear being shamed and embarrassed in front of 700 colleagues while the whole thing is recorded for posperity.

I heard over and over again a clear message- that ANA was a busniess. What some of its members want is not good for ANA's business plan and it's more important that ANA survive and prosper.

I also heard and saw how divided the House of nursing is. This was not news to me, but the tactics I saw the various factions employ to forward their individual agendas was deplorable.

At the end, there was a speech about unity which made me physically ill.

If this is what the future of nursing depends on, and what the profession depends on to uphold its code of ethics, I weep for the future.

minnesota seems to be heading in the same direction as michigan in leaving the ana.

here's an exerpt from a communication to the minnesota ana delegation from the mna president which is posted on their website:

"...the conference call dialogue [with ana] was frank extensive and emotional, but unfortunately i must report that we were unable to resolve our differences. mna aggressively and clearly identified numerous risks to our membership irrespective of the passage of the proposed ana bylaws...

sadly, ana remains steadfastly unwilling to confront the concerns of our labor organization and reiterated ana's strong desire to disconnect from all labor involvement..."

linda slattengren rn

president minnesota nurses association

see the complete document here:

http://www.mnnurses.org/vertical/sit...c8a2a14%7d.pdf

and more information about mna and the ana here:

http://www.mnnurses.org/index.asp?ty...0-3bb826029fbc}

As seen clearly by posts here at AN:

a. The vast majority of RN's do not want to be associated with nursing unions.

b. Major RN unions CNA and SEIU union tatics reported here further disenfranchised those supporting of a union environment.

c. Nursing students and bedside staff nurses do not want to spend personal $$ on supporting professional organizations from NSNA, ENA, AACN, Sigma Theta Tau to ANA as don't see personal benefit.

As such, ANA organziation is adjusting to changing times---those changes are painful as I quite remember 1998 split in PA and divided house I listened to in 2002 in Philadelphia. Will be interested in hearing more from other delegates.

I do hope some other delegates will respond. There was little real discussion at the house. In fact, most of the discussion was shut down by the non-UAN states before anyone had made a single comment.

The DC Nurses Association walked out of the ANA House of Delegates as well, but I don't know if they have officially withdrawn.

The states that left the UAN last December- New York, Ohio, Washington and Oregon, are staying in and reaffirmed their loyalty to ANA at the House.

The states that still belong to the United American Nurses (UAN-AFLCIO), the national union which grew out of the ANA, will probably all be out of ANA by January 09, IMO. The vast majority of ANA's revenue has come from these staff nurses who belonged to the state nursing associations' unions and were mandated to be members of ANA.

Many at the recent meeting of the ANA seemed bothered by the incresed number of union nurses in the "House of Nursing". It's not a good "fit" for them. Yet the House would not pass a bylaw change that removed this mandated membership in the ANA for UAN and state nurses association union members. Seems like their money is still good, just not their union mentality.

Maybe this mandated membership in the major reason why the union staff nurse has little influence on ANA. Isn't that a major complaint of the nurses who advocate against unions?? But yet they want continued mandated membership in this non-union entity.

Interesting that just six years ago, the UAN states defended ANA when Massachusetts left. They also worked with ANA to try to keep California in.

My how soon we forget....

Of course ANA will fight the rest of the union/UAN states leaving. They'll try to sue members with their own money- again.

Below is an exerpt from the speech given at the House by the president of the Michigan Nurses Association, DIANE GODDEERIS RN.

(the entire speech is accessible through the links to MNA in previous posts)

"In casting the UAN aside, you have cast aside some of your own ANA members....

The kind of change visited upon our union states by the ANA leadership only serves to validate the decisions of states like Massachusetts and California, who concluded there is no room for them within the ANA House of Nursing.

ANA said this week that it does not want "labor" to distract them.....Well we do not feel our 10,500 Michigan members are a distraction."

This is what I don't get:

The majority of ANA members are unionized bedside RN's who have union meetings, elections and opportunities to participate in district/state meetings.....why do they feel there voice isn't heard?

Or is it that the other part of nursing not supportive of their message...and needs of each group different? Can't we work together on common interest and issues?

With today's nursing bb, very easy to blast email message and have online debates, polls etc on topics. ANA needs to move this to the forefront on their website...easy to have membership signing on issue and seperate poll for non members to add input.

IMO, The staff nurse member's voice is reduced to a distant whisper at the ANA/national level due to the complex structure and bylaws.

ANA is a federated model, as you know. If you are a member of your state nurses association, the state is considered the member of ANA, not the individual nurse. Only the executive director and president of the state association have a voice in ANA at constituent assembly meetings. As 20+ year member, I have never seen a report from these meetings or been asked for any input from either my state leadership or the ANA on issues addressed there. For that matter, I've never seen my state ask for input from the general membership on ANA's proposed bylaw amendments or in bringing forward resolutions to the ANA House.

The House of Delegates is an elected body that only meets every two years now and that meeting takes place in June during prime vacation time. Staff nurses do run and get elected, but they aren't always able to get off to go and some change their mind when they have to give up a week of summer vacation. The Board of ANA is elected from and by the delegate body.

Here's a breakdown from the 2006 ANA House of the delegates in attendance:

Administration/management 13.62%

Advanced Practice (APRN) 13.17%

Consultant 2.9%

Educator 25.0%

Nurse manager 5.36%

Managed Care/Case Management 1.12%

Quality/Risk Management 2.01%

Research 2.68%

Staff nurse 26.12%

Other 8.04%

Union staff nurses may make up a majority of the ANA's membership, but they do not make up a majority at it's highest governing body. The figure for staff nurses usually looms at around 30%, and not all of these are represented for collective bargaining.

Union issues and "voice" are insulated from discussions in bodies that are mixed with managers and union members. A voice at the local district or bargaining unit level does not translate into a voice at ANA.

Wanted to post an update-

On Sept 8, 2008, ANA and a former president of the Michigan Nurses Association jointly filed a lawsuit against the Michigan Nurses Association.

Apparently, ANA is attemptng to enforce its bylaws in court. After California left, a bylaw was passed by the ANA House of Delegates requiring a two-thirds vote of a state's entire membership (not just those that vote) before any state can leave ANA.

Talk about holding members hostage- yikes!! No way you can even get one third of any state to even participate in a vote- it just doesn't happen.

Wondering if CNA and Mass will show some support for these Michigan Nurses...

Wondering how other ANA members feel about their dues being used this way... but then the vast majority don't even know, do they?

ANA has reached a new low- IMO

And my instructors wonder, even as politically inclined as I am, why I refuse to spend a penny on the ANA.