[HM2Viking]

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.

[jeolsz]

Originally Posted by HM2Viking

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!

[HM2Viking]

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/op...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/op...=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...cs_morton.aspx

Full report with charts at: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Fil...ics_morton.pdf

[jeolsz]

"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.

[Woodenpug]

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.

[HM2Viking]

Originally Posted by jeolsz

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.

[pickledpepperRN]

Per my seniority is measured by years of acute care experience as a registered nurse. Because I was an LVN here for several years before earning my RN nurses who were hired after me have more seniority.
I was able to move up the clinical ladder to a higher paying classification, I believe due to my experience and familiarity with the hospital.
At 25 years of service nurses get an additional 1 time increase.
If I decide to go to day shift and others also want the slot it will be our managers decision. She always goes by who asked (in writing) first so long as the nurse has been on nights at least a year. Our contract does not mention such transfers because it was not as important to us as patient care provisions and a lift team.

[jeolsz]

Originally Posted by HM2Viking

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.

First off, if you have good management, why do you need a union? I differ on being demotivated by a shift change.. People often need to work a certain shift, either due to health reasons, family or social reasons. And I don't mean to be insensative to other's needs, but if you can't be there to work for whatever reason, it's not fair to others who are there. Bottom line is the job should go to who is most deserving. And as far as loyality goes, ask loyal employees, who gave a good portion of their lives to an organization, only to get laid off, how they feel about that issue. I would be less than honest if I did not admit that I , as are most people,am driven and motivated by what is good for myself, my significant others and of course my children, not what is good for the rest of the nursing staff. Sorry if that sounds selfish, but my children's needs come before anyone else's at work.

[K98]

I have been a union worker for my entire working life (30 years). I am also a gun-owning, Life NRA, right wing, pro-life republican. Unions can be a nuisance, but I see them as a good thing in nursing. The one thing I noticed when I became a nurse was the lack of any type of unity among nurses. Divide and conquer. That is how hospitals keep wages low and workloads high. The union at our facility negotiated staffing ratios and a no mandation policy. We may be the only facility in an area saturated with hospitals that have these agreements in place to protect RNs. There is a reason why it doesn't happen at the others.

[pickledpepperRN]

To me it is important for my children and family for nurses to work for us all to do better.
For safe staffing, the right as well as the responsibility to advocate for the best interests of our patients. The right to choose whether to work overtime.
And the ability to remain a loyal nurse for my community by reporting my hospital if they make decisions that harm patients.

I believe my kids benefitted from a mother who did not have to comprimise ethics and morals in order to earn a living.

During the first many years before my hospital was sold there was no need for a union. When the for profit corporation laid off 30% of the RNs (replacing them with unlicened and uncertified people who never chose patient care) and laid off 50% of our pharmacists WE knew we had to act.

THEY decided to begin writing up nurses for giving meds late and WE began meeting with each other for a voice and respect for nursing work.