[Sherwood]

Originally Posted by HM2Viking

I read your link. The union cannot demand termination under the law. Hiring/Firing is a management right NOT a union right. What the document does reference is a fairshare agreement. Fairshare means that bargaining unit members in effect pay for the costs associated with representing members in the collective bargaining and grievance processes but not expenses associated with the local.

Not true. A group of Nurses of St John Mercy Medical Center in St Louis Missouri working under a closed shop union contract decided they were fed up with their union and stopped paying dues. The union demanded their termination. The hospital decided to back their nurses and refused to fire them. The union took the hospital and the nurses to court. The case went all the way to the 8th circuit court of appeals and the nurses and hospital LOST. The nurses were TERMINATED at the request of the union. I include the actual court documents:

http://k.b5z.net/i/u/6011029/i/St_Johs_8thcourt.pdf

Sherwood

[herring_RN]

The CEO of Tenet has a contract. http://contracts.onecle.com/tenet/fetter.emp.2003.09.15.shtml

His salary in 2006 at age 48 was 3.64 million down from more than $6 million in 2002. http://www.companypay.com/executive/compensation/trevor_fetter_6122680_THC.asp


I am glad that the RNs at Cypress Fairbanks Hospital, a part of the Tenet chain in Houston Texas have a chance at negotiating a contract also.
http://www.sunherald.com/447/story/456631.html

[HM2Viking]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

Not true. A group of Nurses of St John Mercy Medical Center in St Louis Missouri working under a closed shop union contract decided they were fed up with their union and stopped paying dues. The union demanded their termination. The hospital decided to back their nurses and refused to fire them. The union took the hospital and the nurses to court. The case went all the way to the 8th circuit court of appeals and the nurses and hospital LOST. The nurses were TERMINATED at the request of the union. I include the actual court documents:

http://k.b5z.net/i/u/6011029/i/St_Johs_8thcourt.pdf

Sherwood

The organization failed to uphold the contract. The interpretation of the original link posted was inaccurate. The court decision was in effect holding hospital management accountable to follow the contract that was negotiated for collecting dues.

Of course if the disaffected bargaining unit members had simply started attending meetings to express their concerns they may very well have achieved the changes in their union that they wanted. Or they could have pursued decertification of the bargaining unit through NLRB. In my experience picking up your toys and going home is not a very effective way of handling disputes.

[Sherwood]

Originally Posted by HM2Viking

The organization failed to uphold the contract. The interpretation of the original link posted was inaccurate. The court decision was in effect holding hospital management accountable to follow the contract that was negotiated for collecting dues.

Of course if the disaffected bargaining unit members had simply started attending meetings to express their concerns they may very well have achieved the changes in their union that they wanted. Or they could have pursued decertification of the bargaining unit through NLRB. In my experience picking up your toys and going home is not a very effective way of handling disputes.

The union demanded a contract that calls for any nurse to be terminated if he or she does not pay dues. It is called a "union security clause". In non right to work states this is automatic unless the nurses think ahead and demand that the union security clause be left out. The nurses of Scripps Encinitas did just that and that's why when the CNA failed to keep its promises the nurses dropped membership and were able to keep their jobs. Then they just kicked them out altogether.

The nurses of St. Johns Mercy Medical Center were angered that their coworkers were terminated at the demand of the union. The union did not have to follow through with their termination, it could have allowed an open shop and then, if they were worth the price nurses would support the union. Instead the nurses decided to have a decertification election to remove the union altogether. The vultures at SEIU tried to court the nurses saying they could do better than their old union. St. Johns nurses had learned their lesson. They decertified the UFCW and voted against organizing with the SEIU.
Here is a link to their website and their story.

http://www.nursesfornursesfornone.com/

I was happy to help the grassroots effort form their game plan and get the website started.

Sherwood

[herring_RN]

May 6, 2008
Digest: Arbitrator backs union in hospital dispute

A third-party arbitrator has rejected the objections of Cypress Fairbanks Medical Center over a union election.

The decision, announced Tuesday, means nearly 300 registered nurses will be represented by the California Nurses Association....

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/5759715.html

[HM2Viking]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

The union demanded a contract that calls for any nurse to be terminated if he or she does not pay dues. It is called a "union security clause". In non right to work states this is automatic unless the nurses think ahead and demand that the union security clause be left out.

No. The members (Nurses of the hospital) who worked together to negotiate a contract with the employer were the ones who put the contract language in place. The local union is its members on site not some evil nebulous entity from the galaxy that you like to portray.

It was the EMPLOYERS responsibility to then implement the contract that it had signed with the local members of the union.

Right to work is right to work for less......

Rgds...

[Sherwood]

[quote=HM2Viking;2824454]No. The members (Nurses of the hospital) who worked together to negotiate a contract with the employer were the ones who put the contract language in place. The local union is its members on site not some evil nebulous entity from the galaxy that you like to portray.

It was the EMPLOYERS responsibility to then implement the contract that it had signed with the local members of the union.

Right to work is right to work for less......

Rgds...[/quote

And it was the EMPLOYER who stood up for its nurses, going to court in an attempt to prevent the nurses termination. It was the UNION contract that contained the language that the UNION ENFORCED, Demanding the NURSES TERMINATION.
It was the nurses who stood up for each other and decided to TERMINATE THEIR UNION.
Everyone in this country who wants to work deserves to work. A union or the members of a union should not be the ones who decides if I or anyone else should work. Poorly thought out and extremely short sighted union negotiated contracts is what has caused so many companies to take the jobs to other countries. So in the long run we all have lost. Where there were many jobs, there are few or none. Entire "union towns" now ghost towns.

[herring_RN]

Regarding the INCREDIBLE CNA/NNOC victory in Houston:

...The decision, announced Tuesday, means nearly 300 registered nurses will be represented by the California Nurses Association....

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/5759715.html

[HM2Viking]

One victory at a time.

In Solidarity.

[HM2Viking]

.........................