0.9 is not full time?! - page 3
by simvee 9,624 Views | 29 Comments
Our hospital just quietly transitioned to a new policy, wherein 0.9 FTE nurses (3 12 hour shifts) are not considered full-time. They reassure us that this policy only affects new nurses, and old 0.9ers will be grandfathered into... Read More
- 1Mar 28, '12 by CCRNDivaWell, nurses at my old hospital did not have a choice re: 12 hr shifts. 8 hr shifts were eliminated long ago. Only OR, PACU, or management are allowed to work 8 hr shifts. They even made all of the PCAs go to 12s. We earned less vacacation as a .9 employee. Funny thing is, we were required to work extra shifts whenever they decided "to meet the needs of the unit) whether FT, PT, or per diem. (Big part of why I no longer work there)
- 0Mar 29, '12 by snuggles49why is it so many people have such negativity toward thier employer ? (quote:the employer always finds a spin for a negative policy and they expect the employee to fall for it, hook, line, and sinkercaliotter3 .)(quote:hospitals sometimes try things that are not quite legal.sailornurse ) is it just healthcare facilities that peoplefind issue with or other places of employment also?? because it seems most feel hospitals tend to screw them over. hospitals are a business whether you like it or not . they have to make money in order to survive and keep people employed. benefits esp healthcare are very expensive for an employer to pay whether in health care or not.
my employer, acute care hospital (small rural, aprox 300 to 400 employees) considers 0.9 a fulltime position with benefits (health insurance, pension, life insurance, vacation, sick days, paid holidays, overtime for working holidays, overtime for anything over 12 or 8 hours in a shift and overtime for any hours over 40 in a week.) most nursing areas work 12 hour shifts, or 8 hour with on call pay. also, we employ pt with benefits. (quote:so they convince the employees that the 12 hours for 36 hrs with full time benefits is better in the long run.caliotter3 ) actually, working 12 hour shifts is better.. you work 3 days and have the other 4 off and if you do it right you could work a m-t-w and not come back to work until the following week f-sat-sun. you have a 8 day vacation and have used no benefit time to cover it. how can you beat that. i know one employee who works f-sat-sun-m-t-w and has two 8 day stretchs off so he can work occassional at another job..and he functions very well on a med surg unit with 6-7 patients doing primary care. doing 12 hour shifts you only work 12 days out of a month as opposed to 8 hour shifts working 20 days if you are an 80 employee of 18 for a 72 hour employee guess what most people pick???
last comment...how can .9 be considered pt when a 1.0 is only 8 more hours. do you know how they get these numbers...
for a .9 you divide the number of hours they work you ..in this case 72 by the number of hours in a typical work week of 8 hour shifts (80 hrs) by 80 and this equals your fte. if you are 80 hr bi-weekly you are a 1.0Last edit by snuggles49 on Mar 29, '12 : Reason: mistake in typing /not finished
- 1Mar 29, '12 by MN-NurseQuote from simveeI think the take home message is that I am thankful for my union and am going to do everything I can to fight the current union busting "Right to Work" garbage going on in my state.I think the take-home message here is "It's a bad economy, you're not going to find a job anywhere else, so eat it."
- 3Mar 29, '12 by MunoRN
- 1Mar 29, '12 by snuggles49Last edit by snuggles49 on Mar 29, '12 : Reason: typo
- 0Mar 29, '12 by chris_mndThree 12 hour shifts is kinda hard for some people, but I'm totally agreed that it's better for the patient. Think about it. You're practically living with the patient, and you can't get better continuity of care than that. Many changes and mistakes have been caught by continually-caring nurses rather than new ones. Remember that caregivers and nurses in the bad old rural days did live at their patients' bedsides.
Anyway, the reason I'm griping about the change is obviously that 12 hour shifts are our only option. Well, that's not entirely true, there's always wiggle room, but it's the standard. If it's standard to take on a new hire at three 12 hour shifts, then that should be considered full time. Can you imagine hiring a hundred new nurses and telling them "Well, 36 hours here is part-time, so you're ALL part time. Anyone who wants to be full time has to come in for another four hour mini-shift." That's incredible.
It also means that they're going to have practically no 1.0 nurses, which means they're just doing this to hide a benefits cost raise.
I really don't know how they're going to tell new nurses that they're all part-time, except that HR will be doing it and they can do nothing about it so it doesn't matter.
Why are people so negative about their employers? Because while I realize my hospital is a business, it treats nurses like a disposable resource rather than their main means of surviving and thriving.
- 1Mar 30, '12 by anotherone
- 0Mar 30, '12 by subeeDid those awful hours a lot in the 70's but I was really young. Was in NYC during the Libby Zion case and medical students, anesthesia students were mandated a 3 hour break in the 24 hours after her death. Of course, coffee breaks, meals counted in those 3 hours. Who can leave an OR and fall asleep for an hour knowing you have to get back to work? Worked 24 hour shifts until in my 50's...torture. I KNOW what happen when your way past tired.