Did You Know?
allnurses is the largest community for nurses on the web. We now have over 388,090 members! Join today to network with other nurses, laugh, share, and much more.
| No. 10 | 
Jun 19, 2008, 07:52 PM
 Re: Mandatory Overtime Agreement in New York!
In the paper it states that this law will be enacted before they leave this sesssion, but that it won't be effective for a year. This will allow institutions to get ready staff wise. Is this correct?
 | | Advertisement Sponsored Links | | | | No. 11 |
Jun 19, 2008, 10:41 PM
Updated
Jun 19, 2008 at 10:44 PM by 1199SEIU RN
Re: Mandatory Overtime Agreement in New York!
Amen on the idea that we'll take no mandation for starters and work on the rest!  You have to start somewhere, or you end up crying into your diet soda.
| | No. 13 |
Jun 19, 2008, 10:59 PM
Re: Mandatory Overtime Agreement in New York! Originally Posted by kcochrane  They do that now. A few months back the county decided they needed to save money. So now we can work -2 on the day shift before they will bring in agency or mandate. It is a rare that we are fully staffed. Now they are looking at the night shift to see if they can justify only having one LPN on our unit.  Someone needs their head examined at my facility.
Although I agree we need a ratio law...I'll take no mandation right now. I prefer not to have to work another 8 hours after working 8 hours short. 
Amen to that!
| | No. 14 |
Jun 20, 2008, 01:37 PM
Re: Mandatory Overtime Agreement in New York!
Doesn't mandatory overtime occur more often when short staffed on the next tour? In which case, it would be an exception, as in #4 (underline, numbers, and bold font are just mine for emphasis)... In particular, the legislation will prohibit health care facilities from requiring nurses to work more than their regularly scheduled work hours, but does not place a specific cap on the number of hours that can be worked per day or week. The bill contains exceptions to the mandatory overtime prohibition for the following situations:
1. Natural or other types of disasters that increase the need for nursing services,
2. A federal, state or county declaration of emergency,
3. A nurse engaged in an ongoing medical or surgical procedure,
4. When necessary to provide safe patient care where no other alternative staffing is available; and
5. A nurse voluntarily agrees to work overtime. http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/press_0619084.html | | No. 15 |
Jun 20, 2008, 09:37 PM
Re: Mandatory Overtime Agreement in New York! Originally Posted by Talino Doesn't mandatory overtime occur more often when short staffed on the next tour? In which case, it would be an exception, as in #4 (underline, numbers, and bold font are just mine for emphasis)... In particular, the legislation will prohibit health care facilities from requiring nurses to work more than their regularly scheduled work hours, but does not place a specific cap on the number of hours that can be worked per day or week. The bill contains exceptions to the mandatory overtime prohibition for the following situations: 1. Natural or other types of disasters that increase the need for nursing services, 2. A federal, state or county declaration of emergency, 3. A nurse engaged in an ongoing medical or surgical procedure, 4. When necessary to provide safe patient care where no other alternative staffing is available; and 5. A nurse voluntarily agrees to work overtime. http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/press_0619084.html
Here is a link to the actual bill language, which may make it clearer than the Governor's press release does: http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A11711&sh=t
An important consideration is the following bill language:
"FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS
38 PARAGRAPH, "EMERGENCY", INCLUDING AN UNANTICIPATED STAFFING EMERGENCY,
39 IS DEFINED AS AN UNFORESEEN EVENT THAT COULD NOT BE PRUDENTLY PLANNED
40 FOR BY AN EMPLOYER AND DOES NOT REGULARLY OCCUR;"
So, aside from disaster type emergencies, an emergency is "an unforeseen event that could not be prudently planned for by an employer and does not regularly occur." So, if the next shift is regularly short staffed to the point that nurses are mandated to stay--that will have to change by law. If the employer has left an unfilled hole in the schedule--that does not meet the definition for an unforeseen event.
As for the specific hours a nurse can work, nurses typically work shifts of 8, 10, or 12 hours usually, so a capped work day of 8 hours is not set in this bill. Neither are nurses prohibited from voluntarily working overtime. They are, of course, responsible for their own safe functioning.
I hope that is helpful.
| | No. 17 |
Jun 21, 2008, 08:27 AM
Re: Mandatory Overtime Agreement in New York! Originally Posted by Talino When an employer already anticipates short staffing on a given day/shift and willfully left the schedule as it is, the intent is to leave you short, primarily to cut cost. Mandating an overtime when that day comes is nothing but pure incompetence and not cost effective. So, before I rebuke the employer for mandating the overtime, is it because of an unforeseen event or is it because of a known understaffing practice? But then again, without the nurse/patient ratio law, "understaffing" can just be rebutted in many different ways. Shouldn't that have been passed first?
No, because mandation is how they would have reached the staffing numbers.
| | No. 18 |
Jun 21, 2008, 09:30 AM
Updated
Jun 21, 2008 at 09:35 AM by loricatus
Re: Mandatory Overtime Agreement in New York! Originally Posted by Talino When an employer already anticipates short staffing on a given day/shift and willfully left the schedule as it is, the intent is to leave you short, primarily to cut cost. Mandating an overtime when that day comes is nothing but pure incompetence and not cost effective. So, before I rebuke the employer for mandating the overtime, is it because of an unforeseen event or is it because of a known understaffing practice? But then again, without the nurse/patient ratio law, "understaffing" can just be rebutted in many different ways. Shouldn't that have been passed first?
I agree with you 100%.
I just left a place that never mandated OT; but, when short would just double a nurses' district from 6 patients to 12. No OT needed from the prior shift and an effective cost cutting measure that placed the nurse in jeopardy of losing his/her license. Mandatory ratios are far more important than the OT law because this type of abuse will run rampant once the OT law passes; and, the high ratios will then be blamed on the OT law, rather than management manipulation. Personally, I think that management must have lobbied to make the OT law happen, because it seems to be more beneficial for them than it is for the floor nurses.
BTW, the ratios I described was at a 1099 facility.
| | No. 19 |
Jun 21, 2008, 12:48 PM
Re: Mandatory Overtime Agreement in New York!
I think it really depends on the facility. My facility loved to use mandation and used if freely and still the ratio levels were horrendous - especially for the CNAs and LPNs when they did patient care. I work in LTC, but my floor is really subacute. Try passing meds to 20 patients that have trachs, g or j tubes and are polypharmacy. You have no techs to do bgs, vital signs and other procedures. Added on are dressings, trach care and other procdures that need to be done because they can't afford to hire a treatment nurse. And you have to chart on every one of those patients. Now do that for 16 hours, no thanks.
We need to start somewhere. I'll take this and hopefully I can get my RN soon, joins a nurse's union and help fight for a ratio law.
Now a heated question. :lol Couldn't a ratio law make if worse for nurses, especially in the hospital setting? I heard a lot of facilities make up for the lower ratios by getting rid of techs/CNA so nurses had to do everything? Or was that rumour?
And how do ratio laws effect LTC or do they?
|
| 345 members
2,803 guests 3,148
| 1 | | | 11 | | | 2 | | | 9 | | | 17 | | | 11 | | | 14 | | | 16 | | | 37 | | | 14 | | | 20 | | | 23 | | | 19 | | | 24 | | | 10 | |
|
Nursing News