Has Anyone Worked A Strike? - page 6

Just wondering what it is like. Anybody have anything to say about the specific companies?... Read More

  1. by   hogan4736
    eddy, you only present ONE point of view:

    first: you say that you are right, and admin is wrong...SHOCKING that's would you (as a striking nurse) would say. There are always 2 sides, and not for you (as an impartial participant) to decide.

    second: as a non-nurse patient, I doubt he'd think about which hospital he'd go to w/ chest pain...You post assumes everyone knowingly has stake in the hospital politics.

    sean
  2. by   James Huffman
    Originally posted by lpnga
    yes. my mother in law checked into a travel company that had a hosptial on strike in California and they paid $5000 a month but you had to work 12 hour shifts almost everyday you only had one day off a week
    OK, maybe I'm missing something ...

    12 hour shifts, 6 days a week means she was working 72 hours a week.

    Let's say an average month has 4.5 weeks in it. That means she was working 324 hours a month. $5,000 a month means she was working for approximate $15.43 an hour.

    I guess I just hope the benefits were really, really good. ;-)

    Jim Huffman, RN

    www.NetworkforNurses.com
  3. by   eddy
    Originally posted by hogan4736
    eddy, you only present ONE point of view:

    One point of view from a non union member that works agency full-time. That's me, I'm shaded for sure. hehe

    first: you say that you are right, and admin is wrong...SHOCKING that's would you (as a striking nurse) would say.

    Not a striking nurse, not even a staff nurse. Just know what's right.

    There are always 2 sides, and not for you (as an impartial participant) to decide.

    There are indeed two sides. I would beg to differ on your assumption that it isn't for me (if I WERE a union member on strike, but I'm not) to decide. If I were a union member, it is IN FACT for me to COLLECTIVELY decide with my fellow union members. Accordingly my elected union reps would then try to negotiate with the hospital management. Those are the two sides. The fact that we have an incredible shortage of nurses already proves that management is NOT fixing the situation nor does it care (if it means spending any money). That leaves only the nurses to stand in to make a bad situation better.

    second: as a non-nurse patient, I doubt he'd think about which hospital he'd go to w/ chest pain...You post assumes everyone knowingly has stake in the hospital politics.

    Sean, you asked ME what I would do. I told you. You're right I certainly can't say what another person would do... and I didn't. So what's your point exactly?
  4. by   hogan4736
    my point is, you know what the point is...I was speaking of the "collective you," asking you for an intelligent answer...we all know union nurses wouldn't go to the ER in a striking hospital...If I was a landscaper, 55 years old, w/ chest pain (living in a large urban city, w/ a hospital every 2-3 miles), would you (as a picketer) tell me to go down the street to a non striking hospital...What is your plan for that guy??? Because we are all waiting by our monitors with your "right" and all knowing plan...
    ...
    ...
    ...


    and YOU alone (along w/ your co-workers) are unquestionably right? according to whom??
    The angry father thought he was right when he killed his son's killer...same logic applies...being right is SUBJECTIVE!

    your egocentric thinking is, however, entertaining...I can see you telling admin in a bargaining meeting "But we're right!!"

    admin: "would you care to tell us WHY you are right?"
    you: "well...uhhhh, because we ARE right...That should cover it, right?"
    Last edit by hogan4736 on Mar 12, '03
  5. by   hogan4736
    oh, and eddy, you stated: "The fact that we have an incredible shortage of nurses already proves that management is NOT fixing the situation nor does it care (if it means spending any money). That leaves only the nurses to stand in to make a bad situation better. "

    So it's the (collective) responsibility of every administration of every hospital in the country to ensure that the country has enough nurses??

    Really??

    :roll
    :roll
    :roll
  6. by   caroladybelle
    Originally posted by hogan4736
    jt,
    you stated: "They boycotted the hospital, pulled their students out, made arrangements for clinicals at other facilities - some not so nearby and not so convenient to get to but the students did it."

    of course students did it...what other choice would they have??"

    interesting debate though...Is it selfish of the instructors to jump in (they don't work there technically), as their #1 priority should be the students.

    sean
    As responsible Instructors representing Nursing to a group of students - and teaching responsible nursing - if the strike was being held for reasons such as mandatory overtime (a practice that endangers staff and patients), inadequate staffing, MD or administrative abuses (see previous comment), inappropriate staffing situations (such as "PCT 3" starting IVs and giving meds)- being instituted - then the responsible act is to respect the picket line.

    These instructors are protecting the safety of patients and nurses - by protesting untenable conditions. And by supporting the strike, they are demonstrating that the students are their #1 priority by protecting the conditions under which those students will eventually have to work.

    Also, how well are students going to learn in a short staffed/replacement staffed hospital? It is obviously not the optimal learning situation - something that students deserve (elaborated on in latest student nurse thread).
  7. by   hogan4736
    "But we're right!"

    eddy
  8. by   hogan4736
    paramedics have been starting IVs for years...are PCT 3s a threat?

    Sean, RN
  9. by   caroladybelle
    Appropriately performed nursing research, etc. has demonstrated clear dangers of understaffing of RNs to good pt outcomes. Therefore, unless management can convince the public (death d/t understaffing is a preferable outcome) otherwise by citing adequately performed research, then most of the public would agree that appropriate licensed staffing ratios are "right". And that there have been numerous studies done on increases in errors related to number of hours worked (I believe the hours that were noted as optimal was no more than 10 1/2).

    As far as PCT 3 being a threat, well I reiterate (as in the PCT thread) that quality facilities owe it to patients to have adequate numbers of licensed personnel to perform invasive procedures. And if they choose not to, then nurses have a choice to make - stay or leave - I personally would vote with my feet.

    But, hey, if you want to risk your license...well that's your decision.

    And soldiers start IVs in the battlefield - it doesn't mean that every retired soldier should be starting the IVs that I give chemo through.
  10. by   hogan4736
    I would disagree that my license covers them...They are certified, and thus fall under their own certification, and fall alone in that respect of liability (though the HOSPITAL might be partially liable, but NOT the RN)...

    I'm not sure what your "soldier" blast means...My only point is that medics/firefighters start them (75% of blood given in traumas are given through IVs that a prehospital medic started, then changed w/in 24 hours), and it seems possible that an appropriately trained person could help us...Let's be real, IV starts aren't much "taught" in school, just on the job training...So how many IV starts should a newly licensed person have to perform (in practice, just not on me right?) before other RNs don't become outraged?

    I would kill to have someone else (other than the RN, because he/she is likely swamped) start my IV. while I am preparing chemo.

    sean
    Last edit by hogan4736 on Mar 12, '03
  11. by   caroladybelle
    PCT' s are not always CNAs - sometimes only have in hospital training.

    When you go to court - you will find out that certification means little - what matters is that you "delegated" this procedure to an unlicensed individual. The questions usually include "Did you adequately assess this individual's skills prior to delegating this procedure?"

    Certification is not a license, and frequently the RN is held responsible for the CNA's acts.
  12. by   hogan4736
    so a medic's certification is useless?

    if I as a medic attempt an intubation, and am unsuccessful, who then would you have be responsible?

    the prehospital coordinator (usually an RN), or the MD who is the prehospital medical director...
  13. by   hogan4736
    in Arizona, a PCT, MA, CNA, etc., ALL (skills) fall under the MD's license...as these people arent ASSESSING patients...

    No RN liability...as a matter of fact, in my experience, the hospitals have been quite clear on this fact...

    I suppose it may be different in your respective states, but please do us a favor and check...

close