No rehire !!!!!!!!!! - page 4

Can I ask everyone which hospitals in Dallas have the practice of labelling their employees as No rehire? If there is no offence on the part of the employee and they served their notice period but... Read More

  1. by   kbrn2002
    Quote from Yorker
    I agree that the hospitals spend a lot of money in orientation and training. Although the employee's track record is clean and highly appreciated and the employee left not because of a new offer but because of unsafe working conditions there should be no policy of "no rehire". If the hospitals spend the money on orientation they should also know to retain the good people rather than just labelling someone.
    That sheds some light. When you made it known that you were leaving because of unsafe working conditions I'm sure that's what triggered the "do not rehire." The hospital doesn't want to take the chance that you could come back to work there and report those unsafe work conditions to some regulatory body that could cost them money. I don't know what your unsafe working conditions were, but I do know that fines can be steep for failing to maintain minimum required nursing hours or failing to maintain safe equipment. Not to mention if state got involved at the least the hospital would have to face an inspection. As soon as they saw you as a threat to their bottom line you became somebody they don't want working for them.
  2. by   Wuzzie
    Quote from kbrn2002
    That sheds some light. When you made it known that you were leaving because of unsafe working conditions I'm sure that's what triggered the "do not rehire." The hospital doesn't want to take the chance that you could come back to work there and report those unsafe work conditions to some regulatory body that could cost them money. I don't know what your unsafe working conditions were, but I do know that fines can be steep for failing to maintain minimum required nursing hours or failing to maintain safe equipment. Not to mention if state got involved at the least the hospital would have to face an inspection. As soon as they saw you as a threat to their bottom line you became somebody they don't want working for them.
    I'm sorry but without a better description of the "unsafe working conditions" along with the cries of "that's not fair", "discrimination" (seriously?) and the overuse of punctuation in the title there's an undertone of drama that makes me a little skeptical Add to that the back-pedaling (first the OP led us to believe it happened to her then it was a friend who told her) and the lack of response to direct questions. It all adds up to decreasing credibility in my book. But I'm open to having my mind changed.
  3. by   JKL33
    Quote from Wuzzie
    I'm still mystified as to why people think it's unfair for a company/organization to determine who they do and do not want to employ. It's their company and outside of abject discrimination against protected classes they should be able to hire, or not, whomever they want. Nobody is owed a job.
    IMO it wouldn't have been such a huge deal before corporations started buying up everything they could get their hands on, such that one company is now effectively able to blacklist someone in good portions of a an entire state or region. The tactics used to acquire all these properties are not out-in-the-open, above-board transactions. It's interesting how you say it's "their company" - - you do know that their holdings usually include properties that were once public? Like county/district and community hospitals/clinics? No one is owed the right to do that, either, but smaller governments/committees/councils/boards/etc are no match for huge corporations.

    The inequality in ethical expectations here is what bothers me, Wuzzie. Your ethics (and your loyalty, work ethic, commitment, etc) are expected to be impeccable (no real problem there), and theirs are not.

    My interest in this topic is not to defend nurses who display poor workplace ethics or work quality; I would be the last one doing that. My interest is because of the way all of this (^) ties into the workplace issues we can read about or see with our own eyes every day. It all has to be taken as a whole. There is simply NO incentive for hospitals to work on problems of culture. They affiliate with (or create) a pipeline to keep supplying new nurses, they apply financial penalty to those who don't stay [in the bad culture] and then take it one step further by making them very sorry they didn't "like it." They apply their tactics over large areas. Their MO is all sticks and no carrots. Because they can. I simply think that is an egregious way to deal with people who have invested in an education so that they could acquire an entry-level position caring for others.
  4. by   Esme12
    Quote from Yorker
    I agree that the hospitals spend a lot of money in orientation and training. Although the employee's track record is clean and highly appreciated and the employee left not because of a new offer but because of unsafe working conditions there should be no policy of "no rehire". If the hospitals spend the money on orientation they should also know to retain the good people rather than just labelling someone.
    I am so sorry this is happening to you. It is one of those things we learn growing up that there is actually very little protection for you under any law. Texas is a very strong "At Will" state.....This means they can pretty much do what ever they what when the "Will" it.

    Hospitals right now have no interest in retaining employees...there is no real shortage right now. Nursing has actually done this to themselves. All of the new "Get a year experience" and move on to the REAL paying jobs has hurt the profession.
  5. by   Cowboyardee
    Quote from JKL33
    Well by all means, let us defend the practice of seeking out those at a serious (financial) disadvantage and having them pay for the serious (and rather pervasive) problems in hospital work environments!

    I know, I know...that's their choice if they want a job!

    "It is what it is" ONLY because when nurses present arguments against it, they get this false dilemma thrown back at them. You want a job or not?

    Come on, people.
    Exactly where did you see me defending employment contracts for nurses? I only pointed out that other hospitals have more aggressive ways of enforcing retention than 'no rehire' lists to give the OP some broader context of the job market for RNs.

    My opinion of 'no rehire' lists is that they're a reasonable way for employers manage job candidates. Ive yet to see a decent argument otherwise. My opinion of employment contracts for new grads I kept to myself. You assume too much.
  6. by   Guy in Babyland
    Quote from not.done.yet
    Also note that in the DFW area and most of Houston, hospitals and other medical providers utilize Group One, a credit reporting agency that moonlights as a reference service. If you are marked as "Do not rehire" you can be blackballed through Group One and it will be incredibly difficult to find work in Texas.
    There are several threads on this site about Group One. It seems that once you get on their list, your career in that area is done. Seems that there have been hospitals/clinics that put people on the list out of spite instead of only putting people on the list that other hospitals need to be warned about.
  7. by   JKL33
    Quote from Cowboyardee
    Exactly where did you see me defending employment contracts for nurses? I only pointed out that other hospitals have more aggressive ways of enforcing retention than 'no rehire' lists to give the OP some broader context of the job market for RNs.

    My opinion of 'no rehire' lists is that they're a reasonable way for employers manage job candidates. Ive yet to see a decent argument otherwise. My opinion of employment contracts for new grads I kept to myself. You assume too much.
    My apologies; I read it in a different context and I understand your intent with the clarification above.
  8. by   3peas
    Quote from meanmaryjean
    Not just in Dallas, but 'they' can make whatever hiring policies 'they' want as long as it does not discriminate against protected classes.
    They can make whatever policies they want, but to deem someone not eligible for rehire based on those policies they have to have documentation. If they lack documentation they are not in compliance with their own policies and at risk for a law suit. Even in at-will state rarely will ex-employees be placed on these lists or given negative references due to liability unless there is gross negligence. Losing money on training a nurse is just part of doing business it's expected. Those hospitals that have an issue with it now have new nurses or graduates sign contracts to recoup their money.
  9. by   Wuzzie
    Quote from JKL33
    IMO it wouldn't have been such a huge deal before corporations started buying up everything they could get their hands on, such that one company is now effectively able to blacklist someone in good portions of a an entire state or region. The tactics used to acquire all these properties are not out-in-the-open, above-board transactions. It's interesting how you say it's "their company" - - you do know that their holdings usually include properties that were once public? Like county/district and community hospitals/clinics? No one is owed the right to do that, either, but smaller governments/committees/councils/boards/etc are no match for huge corporations.

    The inequality in ethical expectations here is what bothers me, Wuzzie. Your ethics (and your loyalty, work ethic, commitment, etc) are expected to be impeccable (no real problem there), and theirs are not.

    My interest in this topic is not to defend nurses who display poor workplace ethics or work quality; I would be the last one doing that. My interest is because of the way all of this (^) ties into the workplace issues we can read about or see with our own eyes every day. It all has to be taken as a whole. There is simply NO incentive for hospitals to work on problems of culture. They affiliate with (or create) a pipeline to keep supplying new nurses, they apply financial penalty to those who don't stay [in the bad culture] and then take it one step further by making them very sorry they didn't "like it." They apply their tactics over large areas. Their MO is all sticks and no carrots. Because they can. I simply think that is an egregious way to deal with people who have invested in an education so that they could acquire an entry-level position caring for others.
    Although it may seem like it I don't disagree with you but your point, while completely valid, is tangential. A business, be it a conglomerate or a mom & pop company, has the right to hire or not hire whomever they please as long as it does not violate federal law and a prospective employee has the right to accept or decline an offer. I do not see how this has anything to do with ethics. The OP or her friend or her neighbor did not get fired for being a whistle-blower... they quit. They walked out by their own choosing. That is our right as employees. They were not terminated and that's the difference. A big difference. Not only that but the OP had declined to expand on the "unsafe working conditions" while repeatedly letting us know what an exemplary employee the affected individual was. For all we know she could just as well have been a miserable co-worker and her ex-employer views her as less than stellar. She also later admitted that she wasn't sure that she (or whomever) was actually put on a do not re-hire list she just heard about it from a "friend". I just don't feel like she is being forthright with us and therefore am hesitant to offer up my full support. As I said before, I'm willing to have my mind changed but I need more information.
  10. by   FolksBtrippin
    Quote from Yorker
    OMG, Hold on, neither am I trying to get a job in the same organization nor am I listed as a "not eligible for hire". I heard from one of my friend and was reading on it.
    It sounded unfair to me that's when I posted this topic to know everyone else's opinion.
    I don't think you understood my question.

    You are not eligible for rehire with this organization. Correct?

    My question is, is that problem preventing you from getting another job?

    For example, is this organization sharing that info with potential employers, causing you to have a negative review?

    If that is happening you should get a lawyer.

    In the future do what you can to avoid being put on this list. Before I left my old job, I called HR to find out what I needed to do to leave on good terms. 2 weeks notice was all that needed to happen. No big deal.

    If the terms are unbearable, at least you'll know what you are getting into.
  11. by   not.done.yet
    Quote from Yorker
    How do u find out that you are on that list?
    If you are referring to Group One, you have to request your "credit" report from them. There is a charge to obtain this unless you got notice that your file was utilized to make a negative finding against you due to the report. It works exactly like a credit report, because they operate under the rule of a credit reporting agency. You can do an Internet search and find their web page if you have more questions about them.
  12. by   Yorker
    I agree that everyone has to work hard to be entitled for employment and that's fair , there is no right for employment , I get it. But my point here is that you cannot just label anyone not eligible for rehire unless there is a serious error/ warning or anything like that. That means just because management/recruiter doesn't like someone they can be listed as not eligible for rehire.
  13. by   Yorker
    Wuzzie , I don't think you are getting the concept right. Yes, it s the company's right to decide to give the job to a particular candidate and no one owes a job. What I am trying to say is that , listing someone as "not eligible for rehire " without any concrete evidence gives the employer an upper hand and that gets misused .

close