Nurses outraged by plan to strip health professionals of overtime pay - page 6

Some nurses are outraged over a quiet move by the U.S. Department of Labor that could strip registered nurses and other health professionals nationwide from overtime pay. South Florida... Read More

  1. by   OC_An Khe
    It never ceases to amaze me that some people continue to beleive that educated professionals don't belong to Unions and that if you are an educated professional it is somehow unprofessional to belong to a Union. There isn't a profesion that I can think of that doesn't have some of its practicioners also hold membership in a Union. Professionalism and Unions are not mutually exclusive.
    On a second point, even if these proposed changes take effect I will not lose overtime. My union contract will continue to protect my ability to collect overtme. Unions not only help you fight to gain something new they also protectwhat you already have.
  2. by   geekgolightly
    Originally posted by ainz
    Thus the root of the issue concerning unions and labor relations. If we view ourselves as "common hard workers" then that is how we will be treated. I do not consider myself a common hard worker nor do I consider other professional RNs common hard workers though they may conduct themselves as such. I can tell you that most healthcare organizations' administrative teams do view nursing as "common laborers," paid by the hour, expendable, and an expense that erodes profits. If they could find a way to rid the organization of nurses for cheaper labor they would do it in a heartbeat. Why? Because nursing has not demonstrated how they bring revenue into the organization and actually make money for organization. Physicians are held in high esteem because it is clear how they bring revenue into the organization--they are the only ones (ultimately) that can admit patients and order interventions that generate revenue. It is all about the money!!!!! Nursing is viewed as an expense, not a revenue generator. Our system is not set up to recognize the contributions of RNs. We need to change that.
    This post made me think in a new way. Thank you for that.

    xxgeeeek
  3. by   jnette
    Agree. That's just so very true ! So where do we start making the big "change" ? Let all the docs do the nursing for awhile, and the hospital administrators, and the budget planners... for just ONE year ! Let them see how long they all survive without nurses... I know that's so easily SAID and great fun to think about, but seriously... how DO we make the CHANGE ? And something HAS to change.. and SOON !
  4. by   Enabled
    I agree that many of us have stuck our neck out while others have in some cases reaped the benefits unjustly. Any RN where I worked who was not in the union was receiving the same pay and benefits as the union RNs. We were required to fill out forms in duplicate because so many got "lost" But the staff moans and whines as someone has already said but won't fill out the forms. I was told that if I didn't float one evening I could find the front door and not return. I wish I did when I was given the chance as I was union but the union never did anything with admiinistration about staffing and safety of staff and patients. All that matters to them is the bottom line whether it is black or red. Usually, if a nurse was floated we would then get bonbed with admissions and transfers and we said no but the moment we turned around the patient was there. The supervisor was of no help what so ever and the only time one in particular showed up was a code. She would not return even calls for hours.
    It could even get more ugly in Florida. Florida law says that a patient has to be assessed by an RN once every 24 hours. All each unit would need would be three RNs who each would divide the unit and do the assessments and that person would have to remain on the unit at all times as the super ain't gonna cover.
    Our individual state nurses association should be doing something about getting unions and wages and recognition for the profession we are in. On several occasions the indiscretions of Florence were thrown in my face as if I had the same lifestyle. I couldn't do anything about it as there were no witnesses and I had been known to question things. I think it was just to get a rise so that they could say bye bye. The state associations should also have various types of insurance in the event of an injury that doesn't meet all the financial responisibilities
  5. by   Hellllllo Nurse
    Originally posted by Enabled
    I Any RN where I worked who was not in the union was receiving the same pay and benefits as the union RNs.
    That is how unions are made impotent by the laws of "right to work" states.

    In these states a union is not truly a union.
  6. by   Enabled
    Unfortunately, Florida is a right to work state and many employers more than take advantage of it. If someone just mentions someplace else they are out the door as there is a glut of people who would do the job probably for less salary. When I was terminated for health reasons rather than the absenteeism they had on the form my reps weren't even present or at prior meetings and they (administration and HR) knew it was a violation. I didn't find out about some of the laws until I started taking classes for my BSN but by that time filing anything had long gone by. I talked with the state nurses association twice and was blown off by them also. I really do want to work but it will have to be part time with flexibility. I doubt if a union is available that I will join from being burned by my colleagues. Besides, the fee is over $200 a year and on my current disability it is impossible. However, they send information soliciting monies.
  7. by   arkierns
    Overtime is one of those "Hot button" topics that gets everybody worked up and rumors run wild. The fact of the matter is that the overtime rules are sorely outdated, montrously complicated and hopelessly confusing. Every administration since the Carter administration has tried to amend these rules. What little they have done before has only muddied the waters.
    These new rules will actually help 1.7 million workers attain overtime pay and strengthen the rules giving o.t. pay to 10 million workers. It will help more lower paid employees.
    This bill will not affect you unless you are in an administrative position with hiring/firing capabilities or that you personally can affect the finances of the company you work for. This bill also does not affect companies that are represented by a union. It will give people the choice of taking o.t. or comp time. There will not be a mandatory comp time.
  8. by   Milehighnurse
    Originally posted by arkierns
    These new rules will actually help 1.7 million workers attain overtime pay and strengthen the rules giving o.t. pay to 10 million workers. It will help more lower paid employees.
    This bill will not affect you unless you are in an administrative position with hiring/firing capabilities or that you personally can affect the finances of the company you work for. This bill also does not affect companies that are represented by a union. It will give people the choice of taking o.t. or comp time. There will not be a mandatory comp time. [/B]
    Oh my this is so far from reality. The proposed changes WILL affect a lot more than 1.7 million people. Please reference the following:
  9. by   Milehighnurse
    I posted the above hyperlink on another BB but apparently it's not working. If you want to see info on all the bills, go to the AFL-CIO's web page and look for the "Overtime Pay" section.
  10. by   -jt
    Last edit by -jt on Jul 14, '03
  11. by   arkierns
    Reality? Is the AFL-CIO the only place you get your information from? Look at the link that was posted to see if there might be some bias there ...attack.cfm#bush. I will be the first to say President Bush has done several things that were bad for the country but this isn't one of them. And I didn't say it would only affect 1.7 million people, I said it would help 1.7 million people attain o.t. pay who weren't eligible before. Have you read the rules and regs about o.t.? They are mammoth in proportion, confusing and needlessly ponderous. Like all other government regulations you could say. These regulations need reformation and anyone saying differently has another agenda.
  12. by   OC_An Khe
    The AFL-CIO site is not the site that I got my obtain information from. Yes these regulation are in need of updating. No one argues with the proposed change that would expand lower income salaried people from obtaining OT. In fact if that were the only change no one would be posting here. It's the redefinition of who can be elegible to receive OT that has people upset. This is not a completely Union non Union fight. If these requlations pass those that have OT covered in their contracts will continue to receive OT. THose that don't have contracts, read non union, may lose their ability to get OT at ther employers discretion. Don't know many employers who wouldn't want to cut costs be continuing to require OT (They can legally do that in almost all states and professions) but at a 50% reduction in Labor costs. Do you know of any?
    This will probably come up for a vote in the Senate ths week. If you don't want your employer to have the abilty to reduce your ability to work OT and get fairly compensated for it then you need to contact your Senators now. Of course if you want this change you should also contact your Senators also.
  13. by   Milehighnurse
    Originally posted by arkierns
    Reality? Is the AFL-CIO the only place you get your information from? Look at the link that was posted to see if there might be some bias there ...attack.cfm#bush. I will be the first to say President Bush has done several things that were bad for the country but this isn't one of them. And I didn't say it would only affect 1.7 million people, I said it would help 1.7 million people attain o.t. pay who weren't eligible before. Have you read the rules and regs about o.t.? They are mammoth in proportion, confusing and needlessly ponderous. Like all other government regulations you could say. These regulations need reformation and anyone saying differently has another agenda.
    I would recommend that you re-read what the DOL and GWB are trying to do; pick your own source, it does not make one bit of difference to me where you get your information- try the DOL's own website, it's all right there in black and white. The source that I referenced above simply breaks it down so that one is not having to review 39 pages of the DOL's rhetoric plus all the other changes that the Bush adminsitration is trying to push through. If you wish to hang onto the thought that this will "help 1.7 million people" more power to you, but I would caution you on such restrictive thinking.

close