What in the world does the ANA do?

Spyder, I am with you on the Illinois Professional Lic. Board of Nursing...
You are absolutely on target with their business agendas that go nowhere.
They do, however, collect a fine paycheck and benefits package which includes retirement benefits that make those of us who work at the bedside look like parking meter money.
I have never been too impressed with national organizations....some may start out with a good vision statement....but along the way, the statement changes and things get lost in translation.
As for political agenda, (ingelien), I don't think spyder was sneaking anything in at all....he was making a point of how things can get slanted one way or another, depending on the audience and source....
I just read something on this very subject....about a well known journalist who made up a mental disorder...and a subsequent medication to cure it...Havidol (Have It All)....people, even doctors were buying into it....and wanting to know how they could get there hands on it!! It shows the sway that others can have on one's opinion and even common sense.
So you see, there is a level of gullibility that some organizations play off of...
And while they may believe they are doing all of us a favor by their existence, there's a large base of evidence that would beg to differ with that belief about themselves. If they are soooo fantastic and beneficial, why do we hear the same problems existing now that existed 20 or 30 years ago? I would hope that we could get more bang for our buck, (ie dues) and see some real movement on things....
To be fair, the AMA has a much larger more financially blessed community....and the drug companies court them right and left.....so they get support....
No one wants to take us out on a date! Plain and simple....we don't have drug companies offering to support our cause....they could care less about us....
So, the ANA has many strikes against it before it ever gets it's collective feet in the door...
The real issues of nursing are overwhelmed by the tidal waves of hospital administrations and associations, and the ANA is really over powered, out numbered, and under sold by them.
I don't think dumping more money into it will solve the problem, either...
I don't think requiring the nursing profession to get entry level master's degrees will make a difference...
We are fighting a system and mindset that was burned into the braincells of medica long ago....we are subordinate beings in their eyes....and to some, not even beings....
You cannot change one hundred years of thinking in even 40 years....
The way to effect change???
Work on the divisions we have created amongst ourselves....(you don't see Drs. who belong to the AMA grousing about the education of the person sitting next to them...)
Work on grass root senators and congressmen and women who have a PERSONAL connection with nurses and the nursing profession....
(Senator Grassley is one....) When you vote for a candidate....consider their voting record for or against big business health care issues, etc...
These are small steps...but they pay off in the end...
I liked what Spyder said, about not making us into little mini-docs....we have our contributions and our knowledge, and we do a skillful and wonderful work....but we still are nurses...not little doctors...

That statement says a lot about the entitlement attitude so many people have now. It reminds me of someone who doesn't vote, but is constantly critical of the governments actions. Nurses especially, seem to have this weird dicotomy of both wanting an active, involved orginization (ANA, a union, professional association) that represents their views, but they don't really want to waste any of their precious time participating so that their views are known. How come the AMA is so powerful? Because they get a lot of money from their members, and those that choose to participate, get to make the decisions for those that don't. Those decisions are mostly supported by the membership. That's not to say there aren't doctors who disagree with the AMA's decisions. There are! But not many of those are calling for the boycotting or the dis-membering of the AMA because they didn't represent their views. If you are concerned about something that affects your professional practice, do something about it besides blow hot air. If you think you can organize a group of like-minded nurses to represent your views, go for it! If you want another organization to replace ANA, start the process. If you want to change the direction and organizational views of ANA, get involved. Part of being considered a professional is self-governance. If nurses want to be treated as professionals, they need to start acting likes ones.

I have just finished this research project on the ANA. You all make some valid points. I do like some of the bills and causes they stand for - not all but I would say about 60-70% of them. Some interesting facts I discovered that were not mentioned were:

They have 150,000 members nationally - however, keep in mind that there are around 2.7 million nurses. They represent only 5% of the nursing workforce - yet they say they are nursing's voice???

I think a lot of this has to do with dues - they vary from state to state - so lets do a comparison.

Indiana - $261
Ohio - $352 - $507
Michigan - $560
Illinois - $523 - $574

Now - considering our yearly wages - this is pretty salty I think. How much do you think the physicians are paying annually to received AMA membership and a "voice" considering their wages???

Anywhere from $210 - $420


The ANA appears to have going through a restructuring back in 2003 and has formed an intricate network of partnerships with many other organizations. Which appears to be a good thing.

Unfortunately, I could not obtain an annual financial report for 2005 or 2006. There doesn't seem to be much transparency as to where all the money is going towards. I did find an abbreviated financial from 2004 - so I used that. It appears they get most of their revenues from the membership dues. As far as expenses, personel expenses were the most costly for them - however, administrative costs were up there too being the 2nd most costly service at about 25% of their expenses.

Bring down the cost of dues a bit and you might just find more membership and more nurses willing to show their power in numbers. They could make more $$$ from the increased volume in membership (it's all about price, supply & demand)...

If the ANA reports themselves to the IRS as a PAC or a non profit, they are REQUIRED BY LAW to disclose all their finances to the public.
hmmmmm.
Why so opaque do you suppose?
This is REALLY interesting....and why does Illinois pay nearly double what everyone else pays?
150,000 members at $500 a pop??? That's 112.5 MILLION DOLLARS.....

I was very involved with the Oregon nurses association, when I lived there...I even testified before the state legislature on a bill being introduced to allow cross trained hospital workers, non-RN's draw blood one day....and maybe work as a janitor the next....(no kidding) It was sponsored by the hospital association in that state....my testimony along with others, kept the bill from passing....so, I don't necessarily think I have any "entitlement" attitude when it comes to joining and then expecting a return on my "investment".....
I think for me, it's all about honesty...and where does the money go...
In Oregon, when our nurses went on strike, and we had paid dues for many years, we were all very disappointed to discover that although we paid over $400 per year in dues, there would be no stipends for those of us who chose to strike. We didn't strike for higher wages, by the way....we struck for better patient safety issues and staffing ratios...
I was out of work the WHOLE summer...and the ONA gave me NOTHING....I had two kids to support and a car payment...
I drove to RENO to work a 24 or 36 hour straight on a weekend to keep food, shelter, and car for myself and kids....
No one in Oregon would hire us as temp nurses, because we were on strike...
When I asked the ONA for an accounting of where does all my money go.....they didn't want to say....but relented...
Interestingly, the attorney they have on full retainer makes over $500K a year....and that was back in the 1990's....I am sure it's well over a million dollars now....
I never recovered financially from that summer....our patients were safer.....but the nurses did it on their backs...the ONA really didn't do much except "bargain" for us at the table....which, was done more by individual delegates within our own hospital than the ONA...
They claimed since they were/are considered a "bargaining unit" and not a union, they do not make provision for strikes for their nurses....
I opted out of the ONA after that....because I felt for $400 per year, there wasn't much that they were personally doing for me....what was done was done by my co-workers.
On a side note....after I testified, I was black balled at that hospital for the next three years...I recieved a series of suddenly bad work performance...and was denied raises because of it...I took it to the ONA, and they did nothing.
I opted out, which they allowed us to do, and donated the $400 to the local medical flight company so someone who may need a flight to a higher tertiary care hospital could get it if their insurance didn't cover....
I felt I was doing more good that way...
Thanks for the thread...it's mind provoking, anyway.

I don't know why they do not share their annual financial report on their website freely. Heck, organizations that are for profit have them posted - I really don't understand.

They only way to effect change is either start your own professional non-profit organization that really stands for something in nursing. Or perhaps there is one out there that can take over the ANA because as of this point in time - I really do not see the "value" they add in my career as a nurse by joining. They will not get my money that I work very hard for as a nurse to live all high and mighty yet do nothing to better the nursing industry.

I agree wholehearedly. I have always felt that the ANA was, as we say in Brooklyn, are about as useful as tits on a bull. They serve no useful purpose, but to perpetuate themselves, what is wrong in nursing.

Where was the ANA when hospitals instituted all of the, "care redesign" ten years ago? Where were they when nurses were laid off by the hundreds, and replaced with unlicensed HS dropouts? Where are they now, with the continued short staffing, and the de skilling and deprofessionalizing of the nursing profession, that was and is going on with their "good housekeeping seal of approval"?

The entire group, along with the State BON's, need to be dismantled, and taken over by nurses who are looking out for the nursing profession, and our patients. I would vote for the NNOC, an arm if the California Nurses Association, the only State BON, who has done anything noteworthy for the nursing profession. I rest my case, and my NY $0.02.

Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN
Spokane, Washington

Tell us what ya got and maybe we'll start something new.

Let's do this on a national basis. The weakness of the ANA is that it's a support system for bargaining units in some states and it's in a perpetual search for itself in others.

Let's make it dirt cheap so everyone can afford to join, say $15/year, with $10 going back to the local chapters. $9/year for associate members, with $6 going back to the local chapters.

Let's admit RNs and LPNs as equal voting members--the issues facing both groups are identical. The role differences in some places are nearly nonexistent.

Let the political pragmatists consider that RNs alone aren't a big enough voting bloc to get the desired changes--barely. They're just enough in California. So how much of a numerical nudge would it take in other states?

Let's agree that RNs and LPNs need each other. Let each group consider what a day at the hospital would be like without the other.

And about those associate members: I'm thinking we should target CNAs, RTs, PTs. If we're suffering from staffing probs, aren't they? Pay probs? Worker and pt safety probs?

So tell us what ya got there.

many of the active participants in state nursing organizations are nurse executives (read chief nursing officers, directors of nursing, etc.). There is a lot of politics in the ANA/state orgs. They really are much more enthusiastic about educating more nurses, not keeping the ones they have at the bedside. The ANA doesn't endorse nurse-patient ratios as the answer to staffing issues, as it doesn't allow for individual judgment of staffing issues, pt. acuity. The ANA doesn't have anywhere near the power of the AHA , because of money/membership. The ANA has never really embraced bedside nurses due to the BSN vs. ADN issue, etc. Go to a state meeting. All the members usually work in public health or are administrators in the hospital. The ANA aligns itself with democrats because the dems are the only ones that will consider legislation for safe staffing. Just so you know, the American Assoc. of Nurse executives (all the nsg. administrators, chiefs, directors) is an arm of the American Hospital Assoc., not the ANA. So, our own administrators are not on our side (no kidding).

ANA and their state affiliates are nothing but political whores bowing to the highest bidder.

As we say in Brooklyn, they are about as useful as tits on a bull!!

Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN
Spokane, Washington