higher pay for BSN grads? - page 18

by evans_c1 19,148 Views | 177 Comments

Quick poll here... Does your hospital pay BSN nurses more? If yes, how much? If no, what are your thoughts on this? On a side note: Does Magnet status tie into BSN nurses?... Read More


  1. 0
    [quote=evans_c1;1787666]Quick poll here...

    Does your hospital pay BSN nurses more?

    If yes, how much?

    If no, what are your thoughts on this?

    Yes. They pay $200 more a month. However, they give us $10,000 a year to continue our education. Not bad for only paying 2 grand for an ADN.
  2. 0
    Quote from ben123

    Yes. They pay $200 more a month. However, they give us $10,000 a year to continue our education. Not bad for only paying 2 grand for an ADN.


    $10,000 A YEAR!!!!!! That's awesome! My employer tops off tuition reimbursement at $2300/year. I've been using that and then some. $10,000 would be nice.
  3. 0
    Pay is the same ADN/BSN/diploma
  4. 0
    Quote from gerry79
    My ADN program had 480 clinical hours the first year. My point is that each program be it ADN, BSN, or Diploma, are different. I am sure there are some Diploma programs that surpass ADN and BSN programs in clinical hours. But in the eyes of the employer we (Diploma, ADN, BSN) are considered new grads with the same skill set and should be paid as such. In my opinion having a BSN allows more opportunities away from the bedside.
    480 the first YEAR? We do 1000 in SIXTEEN MONTHS.

    And I'm in an ABSN program.
  5. 0
    Quote from gerry79
    Melissa states: In a way, there are much tougher hurdles in the BSN program because not only are you expected to learn to care for your patients, but your are put in the position of making management decisions, solving staffing issues, doing research, ie things that make you think on a more global level.


    I must respectfully disagree with your comment. At the hospital I am employed at on my floor (a large teaching hospital) ADN,s are often charge nurse and must make the above decisions that you infer only BSN's can make. I am not trying to make this an ADN vs BSN thing, by my ADN program was quite challenging also. Many people with prior Bachelor degrees did not make it. And what do you make of the fast trac BSN programs for those with prior Bachelors. The nursing portion of the programs in my area are 18 months. So would it be safe for me to assume that one can actually finish a nursing education in under 2 years?
    1. Speaking for my program, I'd answer - yes. I haven't seen anything fast track about my program because I spent almost two years of my life taking prereqs (the same classes the "traditional" BSNers took at their respective universities in the same amount of time - two years), and I spent four years in college prior to that getting a BS degree. What's fast about that? The only reason they seem "fast track" is because when you read them on paper, you're only seeing the core nursing courses. You're not looking at the layout of the year of A&P, the semester of Micro, the year of Chemistry, and the other prereqs completed as a part of my first BS (year of sociology, year and a half of Psychology, semester of Statistics, etc)...

    2. Given that we complete more clinical hours in 16 months (1000) than what some folks on this board are saying they complete in two years - yes.

    3. Given that a so-called "traditional" BSN program is only about 18 to 20 months of CORE NURSING COURSES taken in the last four semesters of a four-year BS, YES. Technically speaking, a so-called four year BSN is actually only twenty months or so of actual nursing courses. Count them up yourself and you'll see I'm pretty much on target.

    Comparing my schedule to a so-called 24 month program is ridiculous, because I'm actually in school just as long as they are - the difference is they get summer breaks and I don't. I go straight from August to the following December. Not too much difference in count. "24 months" comes about because it takes two calendar years to complete. But check out summer breaks....subtract them out - and you've got between 16 and 19 months of actual nursing courses.

    13 month programs are what frighten me, and that's why I didn't accept my acceptance to one. I don't think their grads are unsafe - the whole concept just frightens me personally. So I didn't attend one. But if their formula graduated a bunch of folks who committed grievous errors, they'd be shut down - and since they're not, their way must also work.

    I wouldn't say a brand new ADN grad is any more or any less safe than a brand new accelerated grad - because as it's been pointed out, we have the same core knowledge to begin with because we've both passed the exact licensure exam. Safety depends on the individual person's practice, and not just how/where they were taught.
  6. 0
    Quote from ZASHAGALKA
    You have the mistaken belief that others, such as doctors or admin, would RESPECT a bach degree. If you can't see by now, with this issue about salary differential, that they simply don't care, nothing will convince you short of BSN-entry and still, no additional respect or pay to show for it.
    Timothy, I always love your posts. And I have nothing but respect for your opinions.

    But I think the reason they "don't care" is because they've never HAD to care. We don't know how a solid front BSN would be considered because it doesn't exist out there in the real world. We don't know because we're all still sitting here, squabbling over the question instead of going out and doing some hard research and getting solid answers with which to make an educated and informed decision on which way entry-level practice should go.

    I would bet doctors, all of whom have BS/BAs and all of whom place a premium on higher education, would consider it a WHOLE lot differently. I'd also be willing to bet that if you slapped a BSN on as requirement for entry to practice, and all of these other nurse designations disappeared, you'd find out that PATIENTS would have more respect for nurses as well.

    I don't know that BSN is the answer. But it certainly offers food for thought.
  7. 0
    Quote from carolinapooh
    Timothy, I always love your posts. And I have nothing but respect for your opinions.

    But I think the reason they "don't care" is because they've never HAD to care. We don't know how a solid front BSN would be considered because it doesn't exist out there in the real world. We don't know because we're all still sitting here, squabbling over the question instead of going out and doing some hard research and getting solid answers with which to make an educated and informed decision on which way entry-level practice should go.

    I would bet doctors, all of whom have BS/BAs and all of whom place a premium on higher education, would consider it a WHOLE lot differently. I'd also be willing to bet that if you slapped a BSN on as requirement for entry to practice, and all of these other nurse designations disappeared, you'd find out that PATIENTS would have more respect for nurses as well.

    I don't know that BSN is the answer. But it certainly offers food for thought.
    I still say it's an issue of which came first, the chicken or the egg? Will BSN status lead to higher wages? Or, will higher wages lead to BSN status?

    I think that if we buy the argument that with a BSN, then, and only then, "they" will respect us, that is a losing proposition. If we are so willing to transit to BSN status WITHOUT the respect that comes with higher pay, then why on earth would our employers expect that after the fact, they should dish out more money?

    If you want to transit to BSN and do so WITH the respect and pay you desire from such a transition, then that pay and respect must come WITH the transition, and not after. Otherwise, if TPTB can get that far without paying more, then why pay more then?

    Which came first, the BSN or the pay and respect? It has to be the pay and respect.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
  8. 0
    Quote from ZASHAGALKA
    I still say it's an issue of which came first, the chicken or the egg? Will BSN status lead to higher wages? Or, will higher wages lead to BSN status?

    I think that if we buy the argument that with a BSN, then, and only then, "they" will respect us, that is a losing proposition. If we are so willing to transit to BSN status WITHOUT the respect that comes with higher pay, then why on earth would our employers expect that after the fact, they should dish out more money?

    If you want to transit to BSN and do so WITH the respect and pay you desire from such a transition, then that pay and respect must come WITH the transition, and not after. Otherwise, if TPTB can get that far without paying more, then why pay more then?

    Which came first, the BSN or the pay and respect? It has to be the pay and respect.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Just to further the debate, in 1948 a national study called "Nursing for the Future" reinforced a then "growing feeling" that nurses should be educated at schools of nursing at colleges/universities rather than in hospitals. The feeling was there back then as well. I'm sure the "problem" was that nursing was a women's profession, and many women just didn't go to college back then. So why open more baccalaureate schools if building it wouldn't make them come, to be cliche?

    Also, in NC, in 1964, it was recommended that ADN programs be started at our then new community college system to address the nursing shortage of the time.

    And I didn't mean that a BSN was required for ANYONE'S respect - I don't think that at all. In fact, I find it sad that college degrees are practically OVER esteemed in this country (and by college degrees I mean BS/BAs). It doesn't matter how smart or talented you are anymore; all employers want is something that amounts to proof you're in debt and can pay attention for four years (yes, even though I will have two of them, that's really what I think four year degrees are - pieces of paper). It's been done to the point that, in many professions (and in the "real world" in general), a BS or BA is meaningless and you need a higher degree to advance.

    Yes, I'm sort of devil's advocating myself. The issue is too convoluted and difficult to NOT find yourself doing that.

    Question: why did pharmacy and PT do away with baccalaureate degrees and go on to PharmDs and DPTs? And what did that have to do with requirements for higher entry level of education and an increasingly demanding world of medicine? I don't know the answers but some research to find out would be interesting.

    Also - I challenge you with this - on this board I hear every day (and hear and sadly SEE elsewhere as well) how nurses feel they have been disrespected by physicians REGARDLESS of their education level (which admittedly the doc may not know by just looking at their badge). So many students and would-be students have said how family members and friends who have expressed disdain at their career decision - "oh, you're only going to be a nurse, how sad with your intelligence". Where was either the chicken killed or the egg dropped, and why? How did it happen? Was it ever truly universally there in the first place, despite countless polls that cite us as the "most respected profession"? What's up with that? And is or is that not tied to the fact that you don't really need a college degree of any type to be an RN - keep in mind how BS/BAs are stressed in this country....

    Sometimes I wonder if people really know what nurses do before they find themselves in the hospital.
    Last edit by carolinapooh on Apr 30, '07


Top