50,000 visas for foreign nurses! Is this really a good thing for us Americans? - page 13

I just read about these new immigration laws passed in the senate and I'm wondering what the changes will mean for us Americans as far as finding and keeping a job goes. I don't have anything... Read More

  1. by   Rep
    Quote from suzanne4
    Unfortunately, that number is not going to clear up the retrogression. There are many more than the 10,000 who are waiting..............Those that are forward in the line will be those whose applications are in the final stages like yours.. This also will not clear up things immediately. Immigration still needs to put a protocol in place as to how they are going to handle this......
    This 50,000 is in addition to what is allowed per year, so it will help........but it is not a real fix. Nothing has been stated about the date at all as of yet.

    Remember that this number is for three very large countries.........
    I agree. Mr. Shusterman, an immigration lawyer, www.shusterman.com, even said that this is temporary. By October 2005, the retrogression will come back. 50,000 visas are not enough for three countries.
    Last edit by Rep on May 12, '05
  2. by   suzanne4
    It isn't that it is going to come back, it isn't over yet, and won't be for some time.........This is only a temporary break in it. 50,000 visas isn't going to cover all that are waiting right now. Remember that the date was pushed back to 2002. Figure on how many are processed and approved per year, this
    is only going to cover a small amount of the total............and probably only those that are already in the midst of being processed. At least these visas are in addition to the yearly amount normally available.

    This should at least cover you and your family...............
  3. by   Sheri257
    Quote from madwife2002
    Is the Shortage of Hospital Registered Nurses Getting Better or Worse? Findings from Two Recent National Surveys of RNs

    Peter I. Buerhaus; Karen Donelan; Beth T. Ulrich; Linda Norman; Robert Dittus

    www.medscape.com/viewarticle/502805?src=mp

    This makes very interesting reading.
    Unfortunately that link doesn't work but, I have read that study, and it is very interesting reading.

    For the longest time, people of this board kept saying that if 100,000 RN's would come back to work, the shortage would end.

    Well, they did. And we still have a shortage.

  4. by   sunnyjohn
    Quote from lizz
    Unfortunately that link doesn't work but, I have read that study, and it is very interesting reading.

    For the longest time, people of this board kept saying that if 100,000 RN's would come back to work, the shortage would end.

    Well, they did. And we still have a shortage.

    CAn you guys post the article... Or another link. I would like to read it.
  5. by   kid80
    Quote from suzanne4
    It isn't that it is going to come back, it isn't over yet, and won't be for some time.........This is only a temporary break in it. 50,000 visas isn't going to cover all that are waiting right now. Remember that the date was pushed back to 2002. Figure on how many are processed and approved per year, this
    is only going to cover a small amount of the total............and probably only those that are already in the midst of being processed. At least these visas are in addition to the yearly amount normally available.

    This should at least cover you and your family...............
    DEAR SUZZANE //U SOUND CORRECT//IN JULY 2005 VISA BULLETIN WHAT IS THE LIKELY ROLL BACK IN RETROGRESSION THAT IS FROM JUNE 2002 TO WHEN( my pd is august 2004 AND FILE IS IN NEW DELHI EMBASSY )out of three years how many months are going to be chipped off //good day
  6. by   Sheri257
    Quote from sunnyjohn
    CAn you guys post the article... Or another link. I would like to read it.
    Ah ... finally found a link that works. Here it is:

    http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi...aff.w4.526/DC1

  7. by   madwife2002
    [QUOTE=sunnyjohn]CAn you guys post the article... Or another link. I would like to read it.[/QUOT

    I will try
  8. by   madwife2002
    Is the Shortage of Hospital Registered Nurses Getting Better or Worse? Findings from Two Recent National Surveys of RNs

    Peter I. Buerhaus; Karen Donelan; Beth T. Ulrich; Linda Norman; Robert Dittus

    Introduction
    During the 1990S, hospitals experienced two national shortages of RNs. The first occurred in 1990 and 1991 and was marked by an increase in the hospital RN vacancy rate (the percent of unfilled, full-time RN positions which hospitals are actively trying to fill) to a national average of 11% (Buerhaus, 1995). The duration of this shortage, however, was brief: by 1992, the shortage had ended and observers of the nurse labor market declared that the demand and supply of RNs would be in balance for the foreseeable future, with some even predicting an oversupply in the near future (Pew Health Professions, 1995).

    Only 5 years later, in 1998, hospitals began to experience the second shortage of the decade. Initially, reports of the shortage were confined to intensive care units and operating rooms, but by 2000 the shortage had spread to general medical and surgical units (Buerhaus, Staiger, & Auerbach, 2000). In 2001, the national average hospital RN vacancy rate was estimated at 13%, and nearly one-fifth of hospitals reported vacancy rates averaging over 20% (American Hospital Association, 2001). A survey conducted for the American Hospital Association found that 126,000 full-time RN positions were unfilled in 2001 (First Consulting Group, 2002). A year later the federal government reported that 30 states were experiencing shortages and estimated that demand for RNs exceeded supply by 110,000 in 2002 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2002). State and national surveys reported that nurses felt "burned out," stressed, and many were not satisfied with their jobs (Aiken et al., 2001; Buerhaus, Donelan, DesRoches, Lampkin, & Mallory, 2001; Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard School of Public Health, 1997). Unlike the shortage of hospital RNs that occurred in the early 1990s, this shortage did not resolve quickly. In 2005, the current shortage entered its 8th year, easily becoming the longest lasting nursing shortage in half a century.

    Findings of a recent analysis of the U.S. nurse labor market suggest that this long-lasting shortage may be easing. National employment data showed that hospitals raised RN wages substantially (5% above the increase in inflation in 2002, and 1.8% above inflation in 2003) and hired an additional 185,000 RNs from 2001 to 2003. This unusually large increase in employment was supplied by RNs over the age of 50, foreign-born RNs, and younger RNs under age 35 (Buerhaus, Staiger, & Auerbach, 2004). This sudden expansion in RN employment resulted from a combination of wage increases, a weakening national economy that threatened the employment and earnings of many RN spouses, rising public awareness of both the shortage and the opportunities afforded by a career in nursing, and increasing enrollment and graduations from nursing education programs.

    Although the nurse labor market has been the subject of extensive analysis, few studies have sought the input and perspective of national, random samples of RNs. The recent increases in employment and earnings of hospital RNs raise several questions regarding how RNs perceive the shortage. Do nurses think the shortage is easing? How do RNs perceive the shortage is affecting nursing practice and hospitals? Is the workplace environment in hospitals improving? What do RNs think are the causes and solutions to the ongoing nursing shortage? These questions and other issues concerned with the nursing shortage are addressed by comparing results of two national surveys of RNs. The first was completed in 2002 during the height of the current shortage, and the second survey was conducted in 2004 following the increase in earnings and employment of hospital RNs.



    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 1 of 4 Next Page: Methods



    In 2001, NurseWeek and the American Organization of Nurse Executives (AONE) employed Harris Interactive to conduct a national survey of RNs to learn more about the nursing shortage from the perspective of nurses. RNs were surveyed on their perceptions of the shortage and its impact, experiences in their work environment, and their career plans. The survey was conducted from October 24, 2001, through March 13, 2002, among a nationally representative sample of 7,600 RNs who were randomly selected from a list of all RNs licensed to practice in the United States. Respondents were invited by mail to participate in the survey and given the option of completing the questionnaire either on paper or via the Internet. The questionnaire took approximately 20 minutes to complete. Respondents were offered two different incentives to participate: continuing education credits valued at $35; and the opportunity to be entered into a lottery drawing for one of three travel vouchers for work-related travel. A total of 4,108 RNs completed the survey for a response rate of 55% (177 of the 7,600 were determined to be ineligible).

    The 2004 national survey of RNs was funded by Johnson & Johnson and Nursing Spectrum (the latter had acquired NurseWeek ) and Harris Interactive was once again employed to conduct the survey. The survey contained many of the same questions used in the earlier NurseWeek /AONE questionnaire, and included several new questions aimed at exploring new areas and probing certain aspects of the workplace environment in greater depth. The survey was conducted from May 11 through July 26, 2004, among a nationally representative sample of 3,500 RNs who were randomly selected from a list of all RNs licensed to practice in the United States.

    Respondents were invited by mail to participate in the survey and given the option of completing the questionnaire either on paper or via the Internet. The questionnaire took approximately 20 minutes to complete. Respondents were offered 2 hours of complimentary continuing education units (CEUs) from Nursing Spectrum/NurseWeek's online course offerings in exchange for participating in the survey. As an additional inducement to participate, respondents who completed the survey were entered in a drawing for one $1,500 travel certificate. A total of 1,783 RNs completed the survey for a response rate of 53% (108 of the 3,500 were determined to be ineligible because they were deceased, no longer licensed to practice, or otherwise unable to complete the survey). Institutional review boards at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Massa chusetts General Hospital ap proved the investigators' secondary analysis of the de-identified survey data.

    Statistical Analysis
    The data in both surveys were weighted by respondent age and region of the country using demographic data from the 2000 federal government's National Sample Survey of the Population of Registered Nurses to reflect the national distribution of nurses in the United States. SPSS version 11.5 (SPSS, Chicago, IL) was used to analyze the data and calculate descriptive statistics and t tests for differences in proportions.

    All surveys are subject to sampling and nonsampling error and thus results may differ from what would be obtained had the entire population of RNs been surveyed. Sampling errors in a population of this size can be said, with 95% confidence, to have a maximum margin of sampling error of plus or minus six percentage points. Possible sources of nonsampling error include nonresponse bias, question wording, and ordering effects. Efforts to minimize nonsampling error included pretesting, checks for internal consistency and reliability, review of the instrument by multiple experts, and use of instruments and questions tested previously for other studies.

    Sample Characteristics
    This analysis is restricted to RNs who reported their current nursing position was in direct patient care in hospitals in 2002 (n=1,442) and in 2004 (n=657). Sample characteristics are presented in Table 1 and show that, in both samples, most RNs are white and female, and the majority are married and working in hospitals located in urban and suburban areas. More than two-thirds (69%) of RNs were over the age of 35, with more RNs between 35 and 49 years of age than any other age category; the average age in both surveys was 41. More than 70% of RNs in both surveys perceived their health as excellent or good. Essentially the same percentage (38%) reported an associate or baccalaureate degree as the highest nursing degree received; fewer (11%) RNs in 2004 compared to 2002 (19%) reported a diploma certificate as their highest nursing education. The majority of RNs worked 3 or more days per week, and in 2004 the mean number of hours worked per week was 36.3, with overtime averaging 4.4 hours per week. The average hourly wage in 2004 was $27.10, and most RNs reported total income working as a nurse between $25,000 and $75,000 (see Table 1 ).
    RNs were asked about their perceptions of the supply of RNs working in patient care in the communities in which they practice. In both surveys, most RNs working in direct patient care positions in acute care facilities reported that the supply of RNs was less than demand. In the 2004 survey, however, RNs perceived a decrease in the size of the imbalance between supply and demand. As shown in Figure 1, 29% of RNs in 2004 compared to 43% in 2002 perceived that supply is much less than demand. In addition, more RNs in 2004 (55%) than in 2002 (44%) perceived that the supply of RNs was somewhat less or equal to demand.



    To assess the seriousness of the shortage, the most recent survey included a new question asking RNs if, during the past year in the hospital where they worked, there had been a shortage of RNs. In 2004, 23% observed the shortage was very serious, 64% a somewhat serious shortage, and only 13% of RNs perceived there had been no shortage in the past year.

    Reasons for the Shortage and its Impact on Nurses, Patients, and Hospitals
    RNs in both surveys were asked about their views concerning the main reasons for the nursing shortage. As shown in Table 2 , in some areas the perceptions of RNs changed significantly in 2004 compared to their views 2 years earlier. For example, the percent of RNs who identified salary and benefits as a main reason for the shortage dropped from 58% in 2002 to 41% in 2004. Similarly, in 2004 fewer RNs (32%) than in 2002 (44%) perceived more career opportunities for women, undesirable hours (27% vs. 38%), and a negative work environment (15% vs. 29%) as main reasons for the nursing shortage. In addition, the 2004 survey contained new responses for RNs to consider as main reasons for the shortage: a little more than one-quarter agreed that nursing is not seen as a rewarding career, 17% perceived nursing is not a respected career, and 11% perceived faculty shortages as a main reason for the shortage (see Table 2 ).

    Most RNs continue to perceive the shortage as a major problem affecting nurses. Figure 2 shows the majority of RNs in both surveys perceived the shortage as a major problem for the early detection of patient complications, maintaining patient safety and, to a lesser degree, the time for collaboration with teams. Even stronger majorities (above 75%) of RNs in both surveys perceived the shortage as a major problem for the quality of their own work life, quality of patient care, and for the amount of time to spend with patients (see Figure 2).



    RNs have observed other problems associated with the shortage. In the most recent survey, RNs were asked if, in the past year, they perceived the nursing shortage had resulted in problems for hospitals and physicians (see Table 3 ). A clear majority perceived the nursing shortage had resulted in delayed responses to pages or calls, increased staff communication problems, increased patient complaints about nursing, reduced number of hospital beds, increased patient wait time for surgery or tests, and delayed discharges from the hospital. A little more than half felt that the shortage had increased the workload on physicians, and 43% perceived the shortage had resulted in hospitals discontinuing or closing patient care programs.

    Strategies for Recruiting and Retaining Nurses, and Use of Overtime
    To respond to the shortage of RNs, hospitals have initiated various strategies to recruit and retain nurses. In the 2004 survey, RNs were asked whether they had observed any of seven different recruitment and eight different retention strategies and, if they had observed a strategy, to indicate whether it was effective or ineffective. As shown in Table 4 , although most of the strategies were perceived as effective by at least half of the RNs who had observed them, the strategies were not widely observed. Specifically, among recruitment efforts, providing tuition benefits was the most frequently observed strategy and also was perceived as effective by a large portion (72%) of RNs. Although observed by fewer RNs, recruitment efforts such as offering signing bonuses, increased advertising, sponsoring career fairs or community outreach programs, providing flexible work schedules, and increasing salaries were generally perceived by the majority of RNs as effective. The least frequently observed recruitment effort, outreach to foreign nurse graduates, was perceived by 65% of RNs as an ineffective approach to recruiting nurses (see Table 4 ).

    Compared to recruitment strategies, efforts to improve retention (the bottom of half of Table 4 ) were generally less widely observed by RNs. Only one retention initiative was observed by more than half of RNs, mentoring programs for recent new graduates, a strategy that also was perceived as effective by three-quarters of nurses. A majority also perceived continuing education as effective, but less than half of RNs (47%) reported they had observed this strategy. Efforts by hospitals to improve retention by reimbursing for conference fees, improving work performance assessment, and offering nurse recognition events were observed by roughly one-third of RNs; offering career development programs and financial incentives for quality im provement were observed by even fewer RNs. However, these strategies were perceived as effective by roughly half of the RNs who had observed them. The least frequently observed strategy, offering online scheduling bidding, was observed by only 12% of RNs but was perceived as an ineffective approach to recruiting nurses by a considerable majority (77%) of RNs.

    In addition to recruitment and retention efforts, hospitals have tried various approaches to increase nurse staffing, including the use of overtime. In both surveys, RNs were asked whether the amount of overtime had increased, decreased, or remained the same during the past year. Data in Figure 3 show that hospitals relied on overtime less in 2004 than in 2002. Specifically, the percent of RNs who perceived that overtime had increased dropped noticeably in 2004. In addition, more RNs in 2004 than in 2002 perceived overtime had remained the same or decreased. Because RNs can feel pressured to work overtime hours, questions about the type of overtime worked were included in both surveys. Figure 4 shows that from 2002 to 2004 more RNs perceived the amount of "strictly voluntary overtime" had increased, "voluntary but feels like it is mandatory" overtime decreased, and that "required" overtime also had decreased (see Figures 3 & 4).




    Solving the Shortage and Future Plans and Expectations
    RNs were asked to indicate their agreement with strategies to help solve the nursing shortage (see Table 5 ). Improving the work environment, increasing salaries and benefits, and raising the status of nurses in the hospital were the strategies agreed to most often by RNs in both 2002 and 2004. Better hours, financial aide, increased capacity to educate more RNs, and using support staff also received support from roughly one-third of RNs in both surveys (see Table 5 ).

    When asked about their employment plans for the future, more RNs in 2004 than in 2002 indicated they had no plans for leaving their nursing position (see Figure 5). Similarly, fewer RNs in 2004 reported they planned to leave their nursing position within the next 3 years. Of those planning to leave their present position, better staffing and higher salaries and benefits were the two most frequently identified changes that would cause RNs to reconsider their plans (see Figure 6). Next came more respect from management, administration, and front-line management, followed by more flexible schedules. Having more autonomy ranked last as a change that would cause RNs who were planning to leave their nursing position to reconsider their plans.





    When RNs in the 2004 survey were asked about what they expect the current nursing shortage will lead to in the future, results shown in Table 6 indicate that RNs do not hold positive expectations. Virtually all (98%) perceive the shortage will increase stress on nurses, and more than nine in ten (93%) believe that quality of care will be lower and that nurses will leave nursing for other jobs. Eight in ten (81%) perceive that other staff will perform some nursing patient care activities, and less than half (48%) believe their pay will rise in the future. Only one-fifth (22%) perceive that working conditions will improve or that respect for nurses will increase (20%) (see Table 6 ).

    Finally, when asked who is responsible for solving the nursing shortage, nearly all RNs (93%) agree that hospitals are the responsible party (60% strongly agree, 33% agree somewhat). Eight in ten RNs either strongly or somewhat agree that the federal government (78%) and nursing professions (77%) (namely, the American Nurses Association, American Organization of Nurse Executives, American Association of Colleges of Nurses) are responsible for solving the nursing shortage. Nearly two-thirds (63%) either strongly or somewhat agree that the medical profession is responsible. More RNs hold a neutral opinion (33%) toward private industry though 57% either strongly or somewhat agree that it is responsible for solving the shortage.

    The results of two recent national surveys of RNs that were conducted at a time when the nursing shortage in the United States was in full force (2002) and 2 years later (2004) were compared. Because many of the same questions were used in both surveys, it was possible to detect changes in RNs' perceptions on a variety of issues related to the nursing shortage over this period. The analysis was restricted to RNs working in direct care positions in hospitals. Overall, the findings provide a mixed assessment: on the one hand, there is evidence that the shortage has eased since 2002 and that there have been notable improvements in the lives of nurses; on the other hand, the shortage has had a negative impact on hospitals and nurses, and long-standing problems associated with the workplace environment remain.

    While the majority of RNs perceive the supply of RNs is less than demand in the communities in which they practice, the size of the shortage has eased as RNs perceived the magnitude of the imbalance between supply and demand has narrowed since 2002. This finding is not surprising given the huge increase in hospital employment of RNs in 2002 and 2003. What is surprising, however, is that nearly nine in ten RNs in 2004 continued to perceive a nursing shortage in the organizations where they worked. A 2004 national survey of physicians also found that most (81%) physicians perceived a national shortage of RNs in the hospitals where they admitted patients (Buerhaus, Donelan, Norman, & Dittus, 2005).

    That RNs perceived the nursing shortage is continuing could be accounted for by two explanations. First, despite the preceding 2-year surge in employment growth, many RNs in 2004 may believe that staffing did not increase enough to enable them to provide the amount and quality of nursing care they believe is needed by patients. Thus, even though employment of RNs rose considerably in the 2 years between the two national surveys, RNs may have perceived the increase as inadequate and, therefore, the shortage had not been resolved. Second, the demand for RNs may have been rising during the past few years, as was projected to occur by the federal government (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2002). Thus, the recent expansion in the size of the RN workforce may not have been large enough to close the gap caused by the concurrent rise in demand. In this case, RNs would still be reporting shortages even though more RNs were working. Both explanations may have been operating simultaneously.

    Although the recent increase in hospital RN earnings and employment were apparently unable to reduce RNs' perception of a nursing shortage in 2004, these developments may help explain several positive findings revealed in the surveys. From 2002 to 2004, RNs observed a reduction in total overtime and mandatory overtime, an increase in the amount of voluntary overtime, and fewer RNs perceived the main reasons for the shortage involved inadequate salary and benefits, more career options, undesirable hours, and a negative work environment.

    While the nursing shortage may be getting better in some ways, nevertheless, it has affected hospitals negatively as the majority of RNs observed reductions in the number of hospital beds, increased patient wait time for surgery or tests, delayed discharges, and increased complaints about nurses. The shortage is perceived as a major problem for nurses as well, particularly in detecting patient complications early, maintaining patient safety and quality of care, time to spend with patients, and in nurses' own quality of life. (A more comprehensive discussion of RNs' perceptions of the shortage on the quality of care will be provided in part four of this six-part series.) To a lesser extent, RNs also perceive that physician workloads have increased as a consequence of the nursing shortage. Unless the shortage is resolved, these negative effects will likely continue.

    To reduce the negative effects of the shortage, hospitals have implemented various recruitment and retention strategies. Although most strategies had not been widely observed by RNs, nearly all of the strategies assessed in the 2004 survey were perceived to be effective by at least half of the RNs who had observed them. Of the recruitment strategies, offering flexible work schedules, providing tuition benefits, giving signing bonuses, and increasing salaries were perceived as effective strategies by at least two-thirds of RNs. On the other hand, two out of three RNs did not perceive efforts to recruit foreign graduates as effective, a perception that might reflect RNs' opposition to this strategy rather than their perception of its effectiveness. Turning to retention strategies, those perceived as effective by the majority of RNs include mentoring programs for recent graduates, paying for continuing education, and reimbursing fees for attending conferences. Two strategies, providing financial incentives for quality improvement and offering online schedule bidding, were the least observed retention strategies, perhaps because they are relatively new methods and thus used by fewer hospitals. That nearly eight in ten RNs who had observed online schedule bidding perceived this as ineffective in retaining RNs suggests that hospitals may wish to exercise caution in implementing this strategy.

    The strategies to solve the nursing shortage drawing the most agreement in both surveys included improving the work environment, increasing salaries and benefits, and raising the status of nurses in the hospital. Because hospitals are unlikely to be able to raise RN earnings year after year, it may be more productive for hospitals to focus on addressing nonwage strategies. Undoubtedly, many hospitals have attempted to create a better workplace climate by implementing the recommendations of recent reports from the American Hospital Association (2002), Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (2002), and the Institute of Medicine (2004). However, because the organizational culture and working environment differ from one hospital to another, chief nurse and hospital executives should assess and continually monitor the work environment in their organizations to determine the specific areas needing improvement, and how these improvements can be achieved quickly and efficiently from the perspective of nurses. Similarly, hospitals should try to discover what nurses mean by "raising the status of nurses" and then proceed to make appropriate changes to address this deficit. More on the survey findings of RNs' perceptions of the work environment can be found elsewhere (Ulrich, Donelan, Buerhaus, Norman, & Dittus, 2005).

    The 2004 national survey of RNs makes clear the urgency with which hospitals and nurses need to work together to improve the state of hospital nursing as only one-fifth of RNs perceive that the current shortage will lead to improved working conditions or increased respect for nurses. Moreover, the vast majority perceive the shortage will increase stress, lower quality of care, lead to nurses leaving nursing for other jobs, and other staff will be needed to perform some nursing patient care activities. Less than half of RNs believe that wages will rise in the future or that respect for nurses will grow. Holding such negative perceptions of the future may indicate that many RNs have given up hope and believe their work life is unlikely to improve. Moreover, holding such pessimistic expectations about the future means that RNs may have less attachment and loyalty to the organization, and be less inclined to offer a positive recommendation about nursing to those who might be considering a nursing career. Thus, beyond focusing on improving the workplace climate, hospitals also might offer programs or resources that help RNs discover ways to achieve a better balance in their lives and cope more effectively with what is a difficult and challenging job (Borgatti, 2004).

    Although hospitals, nurses, physicians, nursing educators, and policymakers can take some measure of satisfaction that the current nursing shortage has eased and there has been some improvements in the workplace environment over the past few years, nevertheless, this study indicates that much work remains to be done if we are to build a solid and well-prepared nursing workforce for the future. Fortunately, the large increase in the number of RNs employed by hospitals since 2001 and the finding that more RNs in 2004 than in 2002 indicated they had no plans for leaving their nursing position within the next 3 years, may provide the time needed to improve the work environment and retain the workforce. It also may prevent RNs' negative expectations of where the shortage will lead to in the future from materializing. From the perspective of RNs, the most important changes that would cause a reconsideration of plans to leave their positions include better staffing and higher salaries and benefits, followed by more respect from management, administration, and front-line management, and more flexible schedules-all of which are under management's ability to address.

    In part two of this six-part series, the focus will be directed away from the nursing shortage and toward RNs' perceptions of the nursing profession itself, whether they are satisfied with being a nurse, and would recommend nursing to others. RNs' satisfaction with their job in general and on specific elements of their work experience, the quality of their relationships, and other dimensions of being a nurse will also be examined.

    Acknowledgements

    The authors appreciate Mamie Williams and Dr. Barbara McCloskey for their assistance in preparing the data and performing descriptive and statistical analysis, and to Brenda Cornett for providing editorial assistance.

    Funding Information

    The study was funded by a prior grant from Nursing Spectrum and a grant from Johnson & Johnson to evaluate the effectiveness of its national Campaign for Nursing's Future-a national initiative aimed at increasing the number of people becoming nurses in the United States, retaining nurses in clinical practice, and increasing the capacity of the nation's nursing education system.

    Disclaimer

    Johnson & Johnson played no role in the design and conduct of the study, analysis and interpretation of results, and preparation or approval of this manuscript.
  9. by   hope3456
    I just graduated with my ADN here in northern colorado. I will probably need to start looking elsewhere for a job - the local hospitals are not interested in new grads(or are hiring very limited numbers). However, since the local ADN program doubled admissions, this area will soon be flooded with us.

    The reason I am posting on this board is that a hospital in the neighboring town to where I live told me flat out they are not accepting applications from new grads. However, I know a couple people who work there and they told me that there are 10 travelers from South Africa there now working in the tele/ICU. I realize that to work in the ICU you need specialized training, but how are we supposed to get this training if we cannot even get our foot in the door?

    So if anyone knows of hospitals that are hiring new grads right now I would appreciate any leads - I would prefer to stay in the western U.S. However, if I have no luck maybe I will go to south africa! It seems that most hospitals only hire at certain times of the year so I may be a bit late in the game.

    Thanks!

    Tracy
  10. by   fergus51
    Thanks for the post Kay. Interesting article to be sure. IMO, and I know this isn't going to be popular, one of the biggest reasons nurses leave their employers isn't because of the employers it's because of their coworkers. Individual American nurses could greatly decrease the need to import foreign nurses just by being nice to the people they work with. I get paid a good wage and I like my specialty area, but some days the nurses are enough to make me look for greener pastures.
  11. by   JBudd
    Yes, we are. PM me if interested! We've hired several new grads directly into the ER, and have a 6 month orientation (I think, I know its a fairly long one). Also a relocation bonus.


    Quote from hope3456

    So if anyone knows of hospitals that are hiring new grads right now I would appreciate any leads - I would prefer to stay in the western U.S. However, if I have no luck maybe I will go to south africa! It seems that most hospitals only hire at certain times of the year so I may be a bit late in the game.

    Thanks!

    Tracy
  12. by   madwife2002
    You know I have been reading a lot of different kinds of threads recently trying to widen my knowledge of Nursing in US, trying to prepare myself for the future.
    I have come to the conclusion that the reason initially why i may not be able to defend my self or the nursing profession in US is because i would be afraid of getting 'the sack'. Here in the UK it is practically impossible to get rid of any body in the nursing profession, you almost have to kill a patient and then you would be under supervised practice. We have freedonm of speech so you can pretty much say how you feel and what you think should happen and if your not listened to you can take it higher.
    Reading lots of peoples gripes on allnurses.com I have come to realise that that doesnt seem to be the case over there and that you have to do awful hours, called in at last min, put up with bullying from staff and management, and if you dare to say anything or do anything you are shown the door by a security guard!!
    Is this the norm?
    So most foreign nurses dont want to be deported so say nothing maybe.
  13. by   Sheri257
    Quote from madwife2002
    Reading lots of peoples gripes on allnurses.com I have come to realise that that doesnt seem to be the case over there and that you have to do awful hours, called in at last min, put up with bullying from staff and management, and if you dare to say anything or do anything you are shown the door by a security guard!!
    Is this the norm?
    Not necessarily.

    I am a CNA and a nursing student and, according to this board, every RN would treat me badly, be totally rude, and eat me alive ... because that's what's routinely posted. Has that actually happened to me? No. Could it happen? I guess so, but I haven't seen it.

    When people are treated well ... be it by employers, RN's, whatever ... they don't post it because, well .... it's not as interesting or dramatic.

    That's not to say these bad things never happen either. But, I do think you get a distorted picture on this board because, pretty much only the bad things are posted ... kinda like the news tends to report crime and other extraordinary events. It actually happens in a small number of cases but, that's what's reported because it's more interesting and out of the ordinary.

    Last edit by Sheri257 on May 17, '05

close