[menetopali]

Herring...

i almost completely agree with you...

we have regularly scheduled elections to ensure all citizens have a voice...

we as nurses should be politically active...

we should form a group that advocates for thing that are important to our profession...

advocate politically for transparency in health care operations (including hospitals, insurance companies, medicaid, and medicare), we should advocate for funding nursing school faculty positions, codifying evidence based practices, concentrate on funding for preventive care services instead of procedural codes, and true choice and responsibility for decision should be in the hands of the patients instead of the government. all of these things must be addressed by government entities.

that does not equate to a union, workplace harassment, "us" v. "them" though

and i happen to believe that one nurse can make a difference in patient safety, because i've seen it and i've done it. as a staff nurse i did a study on barriers to reporting medication errors and changed the reporting procedure resulting in an increase in reports and changes in pyxis medication stocking and dispensing in 2005. as a staff nurse in 2006 i led a change in inter-departmental transfers from the emergency department to tele that improved nurse to nurse communication making it a safer process. as a manager i routinely blocked beds when staffing was down [which sometimes meant having a head-to-head with the house supervisor], adjusted assignment to ensure safer patient distribution, i advocated for premium labor [contract and travelers] to up staff in the winter and for going live with a new charting system [which put us in a crunch in other areas, but those are choices that must be made], i counseled and relieved unsafe practitioners, and yes i took patient assignments when we were short. if their had been a union contract i wouldn't have been able to do any of those things without eight miles of red tape.

a single nurse can effect change if they are committed to understanding how to do it effectively and they are persistent. it isn't easy and you don't always get the change you want but saying it can't be done is just plain false.

just my humble opinion though.

[♪♫ in my ♥]

Originally Posted by menetopali

preventing school choice and home schooling is hardly in the interest of the student, it is only for the benefit of the union.
OK but totally unrelated to what I said about a teacher being fired because a prominent parent doesn't like them for whatever reason.

abandoning patients and assaulting nurses who pick up your abandonment isn't good for patients, it only benefits unions.
It's not abandonment if your intentions to execute a work-stoppage are made perfectly clear ahead of time.

airline pilots are limited by statute to what age they can fly. the company didn't can him because of age, the FAA did (that would be a good reason for a professional organization to pressure congress, not for a union to act against an employer)
Sure, pilots lose their ATP at age 65. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about a pilot being terminated because s/he's a senior guy who can replaced by a cheaper model, perhaps an Air Force buddy of the Chief Pilot.

the police and firefighter examples are good examples of a poor relationship between employers and employees that unions frequently exacerbate and as public service occupations they both have political recourse. if you don't like how a public entity is run you can change it through political action instead of extortion.
That's the point, my friend -- unions ARE political action.

nurses have a lot of clout to change hospitals through the JCAHO, CMS, and of course public disclosure of hazards.

Yes, an the organization has the option of retaliating against you. Sure, you might be able to get them back in court but then again, you might not.

as a free individual you can choose where you want to work (unless of course it is a closed shop) and don't have to work in poor conditions. you always start your own company or change employers.

That's nice to say but not always true. I have been in a position where my choice was: Work for a dishonest, petty dictator and toe the line or be out of work at a time when I could ill-afford it. Yeah, I had a choice but it was a choice between two very bad options.

i can say definitively that as an at-will nurse in a right-to-work state, when i say there is a safety problem, i'm taken very seriously.

It sounds like you work for a good organization. Be grateful -- there are many that aren't.

in contrast before i became a nurse i did temp work; on one job painting safety rails i was criticized for "working to fast" because "it makes us look bad", the next day i was 're-assigned' by the temp company to a job moving cars at an auction - my guess is the union didn't want anybody with a work ethic in their shop, making them look lazy. is that really what you want for nursing, protection of the mediocre and dangerous?

You're very quick to think the worst of the nursing profession while at the same time

the "contracts that guarantee due process" tie the hands of employers and prevent hiring the best and brightest in favor of the most senior and family/friends of the union bosses and they make it almost impossible to fire a bad employee - taking years to go through the process.

And the lack of a contract give the individual no power at all. Unethical bosses can fire people for things that have nothing to do with their performance. Saying that the jobs will go to friends/family of the union leaders is not correct -- there's nothing in the CNA contracts that give the union a voice in who is hired.

You, my friend, are free to seek employment in non-union hospitals and I fully support your right to do so. Others are free to seek employment in union hospitals if they think that's better for them. Both types of facilities exist -- each can choose for their own self which is better for them.

.....

[herring_RN]

Originally Posted by menetopali

Herring...

i almost completely agree with you...

we have regularly scheduled elections to ensure all citizens have a voice...

we as nurses should be politically active...

we should form a group that advocates for thing that are important to our profession...

advocate politically for transparency in health care operations (including hospitals, insurance companies, medicaid, and medicare), we should advocate for funding nursing school faculty positions, codifying evidence based practices, concentrate on funding for preventive care services instead of procedural codes, and true choice and responsibility for decision should be in the hands of the patients instead of the government. all of these things must be addressed by government entities.

that does not equate to a union, workplace harassment, "us" v. "them" though

and i happen to believe that one nurse can make a difference in patient safety, because i've seen it and i've done it. as a staff nurse i did a study on barriers to reporting medication errors and changed the reporting procedure resulting in an increase in reports and changes in pyxis medication stocking and dispensing in 2005. as a staff nurse in 2006 i led a change in inter-departmental transfers from the emergency department to tele that improved nurse to nurse communication making it a safer process. as a manager i routinely blocked beds when staffing was down [which sometimes meant having a head-to-head with the house supervisor], adjusted assignment to ensure safer patient distribution, i advocated for premium labor [contract and travelers] to up staff in the winter and for going live with a new charting system [which put us in a crunch in other areas, but those are choices that must be made], i counseled and relieved unsafe practitioners, and yes i took patient assignments when we were short. if their had been a union contract i wouldn't have been able to do any of those things without eight miles of red tape.

a single nurse can effect change if they are committed to understanding how to do it effectively and they are persistent. it isn't easy and you don't always get the change you want but saying it can't be done is just plain false.

just my humble opinion though.

You are right. Sometimes a single nurse can effect positive change IF management allows. I worked at a hospital that was so excellent in truly supporting patient care so assertive nurses actually got the extra staff, the education, and other needed changes.
Then they were sold to a for profit corporation.

When management proves through its actions that they care only about the bottom line, when they order nurses to float to an area without the competence to care for the patients, when they tell you to learn to manage your time because you stay over to chart after doing the near impossible with too many patients then THEY have forced an "us" versus "them".

And it was a union that acheived ratios that protect patients in all hospitals. Non union too.

[menetopali]

there are no guaranteed ratios in tele where i work - so the union certainly can't claim credit for that.

if management where you are is that bad, leave. generally people leave bad management, not bad jobs. as a manager i had no voluntary turnover - zero, zip, nada; and that is in a very competitive market for nurses.

we all make choices and i believe we all deserve that right. if you don't like your working conditions, leave. the claim that it is too tough to leave a bad job illustrates the difficulty that we all face in life, but that does not make it impossible to leave a bad situation. if you choose to work in a bad situation instead of leaving because it is difficult to leave - fine that is your choice, don't cry about it.

there is a difference between a professional association and political lobbying, and a union and economic extortion. the former is voluntary and brokers in the art of persuasion and free exchange of ideas while the latter is compulsory to have real clout and brokers in economic threats and extortion. striking against an employer is not a political action, it is an economic one. abandoning patients (yes, even with notice it is still unethical to abandon a patient without the nurse ensuring continuing safe care) is not political action, it is extortion on the back of those we serve - the patients.

i would gladly join a professional nursing association, but will never support the bully tactics that i have seen in unions (pay a kick-back in order to work, assault people who pick up the slack when a union strikes, 'not my job' claims of staff when help is needed, miles of red tape to respond to immediate needs, and inability to remove unsafe practitioners for fear of violating a convoluted contract that protects bad nurses). when we can form a professional association without the union bullies, i'll sign up in a heartbeat. until then, i will continue on my way making my patient's lives better one at a time representing myself in negotiating where i work, who i work for, and the rate of pay that i will accept in non-union shops, as an at-will employee, and in right-to-work states (unless of course i must help protect patients from union strikes).

[herring_RN]

WE didn't leave because WE wanted better for our patients.
Nursing has a long history of social activism.
The hospital is an excellent place to be a patient and to work.

I worked at another hospital per diem and also did registry at many many hospitals. The budget trumps safe staffing wherever they can get away with it.

I have experienced the "not my job" from non RNs at other hospitals. A big strong man refused to help me put the patient in bed after he returned from radiology. He was only a transporter. The patient was SOB lying flat. He stood there waiting for me to find help so he could take the cart back to his department. The charge nurse helped me.

Management can and does do what they think is best or whatever they want.
They fire whoever thay want to. If it is truly without just cause the RN is actively represented. This can take too long.
And if the RN is at fault for unsafe nursing care, repeated lateness, or such the best the union can do is ensure the process is followed. Usually unsafe nurses don't even ask for representation.
But to terminate a fine nurse for one med error after that nurse reported unsafe and illegal patient care situations at a staff meeting? That nurse deserves and gets strong representation.

They are supposed to "meet and confer" about changes but don't do so. They have the power.
With some of the software that co$t lots and made things worse I think it would have been better to get the nurses input.
But they didn't and it co$t.

Did you read the link where the fact that on CNA strikes the nurses are in uniform ready to come in and work if the nursing management asks.
But usually they staff with replacements and lock the nurses out.
Rather than go to the bargaining table.

WE nurses have the responsibility for nursing care. We must do all we can to ensure that we have sufficient staff, supplies, and equipment to do so.
And we stopped the unsafe practice of assigning a float RN to telemetry patients when that nurse does not know rhythms or ACLS.
Years ago they were told, "Someone else will do the monitor." How unsafe is that?

[HM2Viking]

MNA is pushing the MN Legislature to pass a safe staffing bill for all hospitals so gains won by the union in MPLS/St Paul can be shared by all nurses state wide.

As expected, the Minnesota Hospital Association has come out in full force against the Staffing for Patient Safety bill. MNA limited the number of our testifiers to be respectful of legislators’ time as we went late into the night before our bill was heard. But that didn’t stop the Hospital Association from lining up 3 RN Managers, 1 CEO and 1 Staff RN to speak against the need for Staffing ratios and taking well over 24 minutes of the committee’s time. 2 RN managers and the Staff RN were from the non-MNA contract facilities of Mayo Clinic and Gillette Children’s. The CEO was from Riverview Health Care in Crookston. 1 RN Manager was from Fairview Northland’s Birth Center in Princeton who also happened to be related to Committee Member, Senator Betsy Wergin.
Their arguments, as expected, were that staffing ratios will take away nursing’s autonomy, hurt patient care by putting hospitals on divert, and of course, limit the flexibility that is necessary to meet patient’s unique needs. Most troubling were comments from Sen. Betsy Wergin (R-Princeton) that some nurses really care for their patients and will do anything to provide care, not decline caring for them. Implying that MNA nurses did not care for their patients. This prompted our author Sen. Erickson Ropes to remind legislators that all nurses care about their patients and that we need to refrain from this type of finger pointing.

http://www.mnnurses.org/index.asp?Ty...1-0D27885F510E}

[HM2Viking]

The hospital in Buffalo Mn was recently organized at http://www.mnnurses.org/index.asp?Ty...C-9B7E2297E966}:

The third time’s a charm. Or in this case it was number four. At least according to the more seasoned nurses, this is the fourth attempt to form a union at Buffalo Hospital, the only remaining Allina-owned hospital to be organized by MNA. After a long day of voting on February 28, which ending with snowy treacherous roads, the nurses at Buffalo won their union election. With 76% turnout the nurses voted by a 9-1 margin to form their union with MNA. "This was the right time," said Gale Syverson with 22 years at Buffalo Hospital.
This is the third organizing victory in as many years for MNA. It follows Hennepin County Medical Center (over 1000 nurses) and Unity Hospital in Fridley (over 500 nurses). For Allina nurses this is a significant milestone. Now, the 140 Buffalo nurses will join more than 5,500 nurses employed by Allina who are members and represented by MNA.
This election was made possible through an expedited process negotiated between MNA and Buffalo Hospital known as a "Consent Election." The relationship that exists between MNA and Allina enabled MNA to negotiate an agreement allowing the election to proceed smoothly and swiftly. Among other things, Allina agreed to not challenge the status of Staff Nurses who work Charge and agreed to not seek to classify them as supervisors. The atmosphere was "not threatening at all," said Sandra Gail, RN. In exchange, MNA organizers agreed to not disparage Allina and to convey their views about unionization in a positive and factual manner. This agreement only applied to the organizing of Registered Nurses at Buffalo Hospital.

An agreement to treat each other with dignity and respect was established by MNA and management.

[HM2Viking]

Furthermore union members usually receive substantial membership benefits through discount clubs etc.



http://www.unionpriv.org/#

[HM2Viking]

[quote=menetopali;2814520]

Originally Posted by HM2Viking

federal employees who by choosing to work for a government entity in a security environment have chosen to give up certain rights during their period of service. that group should be treated like the military (as should ICE and Border Patrol), or do you think unionizing the Marine Corps is a good idea too?

I can think of a variety of reasons that homeland security agencies should be allowed to be organized. Chief among them is that they are civilian agencies NOT uniformed services. The Posse Comitatus act essentially forbids using the armed forces as law enforcement with the narrowly drawn exceptions of the Coast and National Guards. (FWIW military members have huge due process protections as a matter of right. Plus each member is enlisted under a legally binding contract between the member and the government. The US military is the worlds first functional socialism.)

[HM2Viking]

"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."

Abraham Lincoln (Thanks to RN4Mercy for the quote!)