[HM2Viking]

Here is a very straightforward proposal. Let's have a national policy to make every human-service job a good job -- one that pays a living wage with good benefits, and includes adequate training, professional status, and the prospect of advancement -- a career rather than casual labor.
...

America needs a good-jobs strategy. And human-service jobs are a good place to begin. How would such a transformation happen? Congress could require that any job in the human services supported in whole or in part by federal funds would have to pay a professional wage and be part of a career track. A minimum starting annual salary might be $24,000 a year, or about $12 an hour, an increase from the current common wage of around $9 an hour for nurse's-aide and home-care workers, and a sharp jump from the median wage of $7.69 for direct child-care providers. Opportunities for genuine advancement with pay increases would have to be part of the plan. For example, instead of defining a nurse's aide as a high-turnover, low-qualification, low-pay occupation, the job would require substantially more training, much of which could be done on the job. Such jobs would also be entry points to higher-level positions, such as licensed practical nurse. With more training and qualifications, these workers could be entrusted with more responsibilities, and nursing-home residents would get better care.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...help_americans

[oramar]

Have thought as much myself. No one that does the important job of caring for sick, elderly, disabled or very the young people should be considered unskilled. The jobs should be well paid WITH benefits and portable pensions.

[HM2Viking]

And real career ladders....

[SharonH, RN]

That's very idealistic and I agree with parts of it only. I do believe that the wage for CNAs and HHAs should be increased and they should have better benefits as well. While that will decrease the high turnover it will not eliminate it. An important factor in the high turnover are working conditions like mean nurses and families and low staffing. If you don't change that, throwing extra dollars at it won't help.

Furthermore, I am absolutely opposed to the CNA as rung one on the career ladder for nurses. If CNAs want to become nurses, they can and already do. Most hospitals have tuition reimbursement for those who want to go back for nursing so I don't think this proposal is necessary. Why always try to make nursing some sort of career ladder? It's a real profession that requires education, not just training. It's not something that you just put your time in and you work your way up to RN. I don't agree with that bit at all.

[Spidey's mom]

Originally Posted by SharonH, RN

Furthermore, I am absolutely opposed to the CNA as rung one on the career ladder for nurses. If CNAs want to become nurses, they can and already do. Most hospitals have tuition reimbursement for those who want to go back for nursing so I don't think this proposal is necessary. Why always try to make nursing some sort of career ladder? It's a real profession that requires education, not just training. It's not something that you just put your time in and you work your way up to RN. I don't agree with that bit at all.

You have my hearty agreement here also Sharon.



steph

[jjjoy]

I don't see how making CNA training step one on a career ladder in any way diminishes the professionalism of nurses.

The first labs of most nursing programs is essentially a CNA course... teaching feeding, bathing, transferring, etc. I don't see any reason not to make that a pre-req for nursing school. Why is that any worse than having anatomy, physiology, microbiology, etc as pre-reqs? If it were a common pre-req, such courses would be more readily available than they currently are in some places and nursing school could start right in on the nursing skills & knowledge above and beyond what NAs are responsible for.

And the reality is that we need many nurses. There are many different levels of nurses as well. So why not make it more of a ladder? The requirements to acheive any specific of licensing could still be just as rigorous (or more so, depending). Meanwhile, by making it a progressive career track, it might be easier to keep new nurses at the bedside having worked their way up through the ranks as.

But the point of the OP was that jobs like NAs should provide a living wage... and just think how wonderful it would be if those who are talented caregivers could make a career of it and share their talents while supporting their family!! Imagine caregivers who enjoyed their work and weren't overtired from working 2-3 jobs... what a dream!!

[Mijourney]

Originally Posted by oramar

Have thought as much myself. No one that does the important job of caring for sick, elderly, disabled or very the young people should be considered unskilled. The jobs should be well paid WITH benefits and portable pensions.

I agree with you oramar. My belief is that men and some women determined that those who were mothers and/or performed nursing activities from the days of old did not provide skilled labor. Today, we look upon caregiving as requiring skill, talent, creativity, education and more.

[HM2Viking]

Plus this would more than we realize in improving the lives of patients and their caregivers than we can imagine.

Our unwillingness to adequately compensate our caregivers of the very young and very old speaks volumes about our society.

[love_being_an_aide]

Originally Posted by SharonH, RN

That's very idealistic and I agree with parts of it only. I do believe that the wage for CNAs and HHAs should be increased and they should have better benefits as well. While that will decrease the high turnover it will not eliminate it. An important factor in the high turnover are working conditions like mean nurses and families and low staffing. If you don't change that, throwing extra dollars at it won't help.

Furthermore, I am absolutely opposed to the CNA as rung one on the career ladder for nurses. If CNAs want to become nurses, they can and already do. Most hospitals have tuition reimbursement for those who want to go back for nursing so I don't think this proposal is necessary. Why always try to make nursing some sort of career ladder? It's a real profession that requires education, not just training. It's not something that you just put your time in and you work your way up to RN. I don't agree with that bit at all.

Training is education. Learning how to do a job MEANS becoming educated in how the profession works. If the profession only required education and not training, how do you expect people to do there jobs? Education in itself can only teach you so much. You can talk a person through giving an injection, but the training aspect comes into play when the person does it. Nursing DOES require training. Thus why the programs have clinical components added to them. And some people learn by doing, not just sitting in a classroom being lectured at.