Administrator's Salaries

wildtime88 · Dec 29, 2001

Jt, I have pretty much kept my mouth shut up until know about this topic. But this goes over the top.

I do not care so much about how you feel about other nurses jumping in and taking away chances at the union getting more, because of them. Even though you condone the ANA and even support the legislation to bring in a mass amount of new nurses who will limit your bargaining power and replace nurses.

But to blatantly post something like this that says nurses will let patients die is out of line. You have gone way to far here in your insinuation and agreement with this by posting this.

Many of these nurses are regular staff at other hospitals or the same agency nurses who work day after day.

This was way out of line to even post something that suggested that a nurse does not care if someone lives or dies.

-jt · Dec 29, 2001

Soooo........ youre saying your sensilbilities have been offended by a poem written by the husband of one of the RNs who have been on strike for 4 weeks in NY?

You mean you dont appreciate reading anything that you personally find offensive or insulting? Thats funny.

This board is full of insults and comments that some people find offensive and others apparently do not. The solution is simple:

Dont read what you dont like.

A poster asked me for the latest info on that strike. That poem & the link to the website was the latest. I dont think I need your permission to post here & I am not really concerned with your opinion of somebodys husbands attempt at poetry or your assumptions about anyone who reads it.

To Grouchy:

heres more on the NYSNA strike:

Hospital: Strike Hasn't Hobbled Us

St. Catherine's, nurses still in talks

by Barbara J. Durkin,

Newsday,

December 22, 2001

LilgirlRN, ADN, RN · Dec 29, 2001

I can see both sides of this story. I can understand how the striking nurses would be upset with the strike breaking nurses, however I think the "scabs" may actually be doing them a service. It costs a lot to hire agency nurses to replace the regular and reinforces the pay issue...if the hospital is willing to fork out 1.5 to 4 times the pay of the regular staff, why not just up the regular staff's salary so they will come back to work. I know that money is not the only issue here. Money is not the key to happiness, but it sure does pay the bills, that's why the scabs are there in the first place. I have a coworker (now flexi-pool) that works strikes and makes up to 60 dollars an hour, she's using the money to build a house in Florida.

As far as the CEO's salary goes, how much money does one person need to make? You reach a point where there is so much it doesn't really matter. If I made 1/2 a million a year would I run outta money? No, so what's the point in paying him over a million a year?

wildtime88 · Dec 29, 2001

No Jt, what I am saying is that YOU posted something that says that nurses are not concerned if a patient directly under their care lives or dies.

YOU posted this here and not someone's husband.

YOU posted this knowing exactly what it said. Not someone else but YOU.

So you must be in agreement with it by taking the time to post this here your self.

Like I said, I can understand your resentment about nurses coming in and limiting your bargaining power, but this was way out of line.

Just how low will you sink in order to push your own agenda. Will your next post be about these nurses intentially killing the patients they are directly caring for?

Remember these are nurses. Some of these nurses work regular staff at in other parts of the country. Some of these nurses are agency nurses who actually work in the same facility when there is not a strike. Some of these nurses are also the regular staff that chose to cross the picket line.

Maybe you should be a little less pro union and a bit more pro nursing.

You are really giving unions a bad name here by showing what you and they will resort too by saying that other nurses would purposely allow people to die and then not care.

-jt · Dec 29, 2001

I think youre falling in love with me, W.

If I remember correctly, didnt you just post the other day, 12/25, I think, that you never tell anyone how to act or what to do???

LOL!

:cool:

wildtime88 · Dec 29, 2001

That I did JT, but I thought I would never see another nurse post something that said that other nurses were actually not concerned if patients die while under their care.

YOU did.

I could never fall in love with anyone who would stoop this low.

prn nurse · Jan 3, 2002

You wrote you do not mind congress voting themselves a liitle raise...a new law was written in 1994,,,, they all receive a raise every year,,, they can vote to refuse it if they wish, and in this year of crisis and war, and recession, they could have voted last week to refuse it. they did not. there was a huge article last week on the front page of the local newspapter about it. anyway, by 2004, they will have doubled their salaries in ten years....with their "little salary increases " every year. How many of us nurses will double out salaries from 1994 levels? And we do not have anywhere near the benefits and perks the elected characters have.....these are worth $$$$

Mijourney · Jan 4, 2002

Hi prn. The context of that quote you took from my post dealt with the original post about the exorbitant salaries made by hospital or health care administrators. Some of these administrators are amassing what seems to be huge fortunes in in the millions in light of not only a worldwide nursing shortage, but a shortage of many healthcare workers in general as well as an increasing presence of managed care, increasing healthcare costs, increasing insurance premiums and decreased health care benefits.

I share your concern about increases in government spending or congressional salaries. But to try to look at it from their perspective, members of Congress cover alot of territory in their representation of the public, frequently more so than a hospital CEO. Like in healthcare, the issues that Congress confront have become increasingly complex, so I'm guessing that the salaries were upped to try to compete somewhat with the private sector for those few good men (or women) and to make their salaries reflect their job responsibilites.

PRN, you know you don't have to convince me about the inadequacy of nurses' salaries. I just hope that you've taken the time to contact your various "leaders" regarding the plight of nurses and patient care.

Burden of Proof · Jan 4, 2002

"If CEO's are about greed and we, as nurses, think they should sacrifice some of their income because they manage a healthcare industry, then shouldn't we do the same?"

This is the kind of brainless "reasoning" that KEEPS nurses locked into performing work under slave labor conditions that ultimately destroys us - exposure to AIDS, patients who physically attack us, high stress levels, etc. HOSPITAL ADMINISTRATORS ARE NOT EARNING THOSE OUTRAGEOUSLY INFLATED SALARIES: IT'S THEIR "REWARD" FOR PAYING NURSES LESS! If you believe the above quote, the hospital administrators are laughing AT YOU - all the way to the bank.

The truth is also found at: http://www.revolutionmag.com

RNed · Jan 4, 2002

Burden of Proof: Brainless reasoning might be a bit strong. I understand their are some who blindly believe what they are told. Or it may be they want to believe it. I don't know.

However, the quote is meant to bring to light that we should be fighting for higher nursing compensation and we should be cautious of what we use in that fight.

If there is a moral cause to limit or reduced CEO incomes, just because they run healthcare systems, then by default, we are establishing a moral cause to maintain low nursing incomes.

I personally don't care what CEO's make, nor, do I believe a reduction of CEO salaries will cause an increase in nursing wages.

I do believe nurses should be compensated more and I believe supply and demand will be the biggest factor in making this change.

If Hospital adminstrators are laughing it is most likely because they recognise we are without leadership and without leadership " brainless reasoning" overcomes strategic planning. It is interesting that hospitals have five, ten, and fifteen year strategic plans and at the same time those nurses working in the facility are planning for the next union negotiations one, two or three years from now. Does anyone see a problem with this ?

Just food for thought !

wildtime88 · Jan 4, 2002

Rned,

You are on the right track.

Here is something else that I have seen.

Nurses come away from a strike with a 3% raise cheering about it. A 3% annual raise does not even keep up with inflation. A 15% raise over 3 years is 5% a year and that barely keeps up with inflation.

They have the sense that they actually won something. The Hospital on the other hand does not think that have lost a thing. And actually they haven't. You see the prices set for services will be raised to meet the price of inflation. Also the hospital goes into negotiations with an understanding on how much they are already willing to relinquish, but they know if they just concede that amount without a fight that the next time the union will ask for more. So they put up a fight on the outside the whole time laughing on the inside. The fight is more about power and control than anything else. Eventually the nurses back down and settle for less while the whole time the original demand was already preapproved as an acceptable concession on the hospital's part.

I remember recently talking with someone at one of the hospitals I used to work that just went through a strike. She is in administration. She said the hospital had already preapproved much more than the nurses actually settled for. She said the original demands were less than half of what was preapproved. These were here exact words at the end of the conversation, "If nurses had better leadership and did not value themselves so low, then we would all be much farther ahead." Maybe I forgot to mention I used to work side by side with her when she was a staff nurse.

WashYaHands · Jan 4, 2002

Sounds to me like this administrator who is a nurse and once was a staff nurse let her nurses down in a big way by not allowing the preapproved larger pay raise to go through. Talk about pitting nurse against nurse. Sounds like she is the ineffective leader when she blocks a better pay raise for her facilities nurses simply because they were union members and asked for less. A good leader in that position would have advocated for the staff nurses and let the preapproved bigger pay raise take effect rather than punish the staff nurses for being union members. If the facility already had a preapproved plan for pay raises, why didnt they present the offer before the strike? It doesn't make sense to me.

She said the hospital had already preapproved much more than the nurses actually settled for. She said the original demands were less than half of what was preapproved.

Linda