Published
AGAIN???
Sept. 4, 2014 report. Say it it ain't so.
Anyone read the ANA Smartbrief this morning?
They cite US BLS forecasts for a shortage of nurses, and recommend to spend more money (over $500 million more) to increase nursing school programs to meet the projected shortage. And, after all, "there are throngs of qualified nursing school candidates unable to obtain a seat in programs due to a lack of adequate space to accommodate them." (Loosely quoted from the article.)
I am most definitely not qualified to make rational, reasoned arguments for or against at this point, because I am at the moment...feeling rather emotional.
The ANA is a well funded union and lobby organization that seems to favor big government solutions for perceived problems.
I wish they would focus on better working conditions for nurses, period. Alas, most of the emails I receive from our state ANA affiliate seem to be promoting their political agenda. That irritates me.
The ANA is a well funded union and lobby organization that seems to favor big government solutions for perceived problems.I wish they would focus on better working conditions for nurses, period. Alas, most of the emails I receive from our state ANA affiliate seem to be promoting their political agenda. That irritates me.
I never have or will ever support the ANA for these reasons.
If they need more funding, then why don't they use that to help aid in increasing nursing instructor salaries?With the fiasco with for profit schools, what good would that money do unless used properly, and not just letting anyone in or ANYONE making a school???
I hope the Feds take a look at this before just giving the money away...
Madness.
This is a point that you will never see out in the open because the ANA/AACN lobbyists do their level best to snow politicians and journalists. They are quite successful at it overall. Not only do they want to keep their coffers full, they're ripping off taxpayers as new grads will either give up looking for a nursing job and/or default on their loans.
It's deliberate. There is lots of research out there that contradicts their cherry-picked statistics and they know it. They've deliberately ignored the plight of new grads and consistently shaken their money-cups for things like grants for Masters-prepared faculty to go back for their DNP or PhD when they are the ones promoting the DNP in the first place.
Sure the supply and demand situation is variable across the country but overall their desire is to mislead to make sure they're sitting comfortably in their feathered nests. Every time I think I can't get more angry with these people they top themselves. Unreal.
They aren't talking about increasing the nursing workforce by 1.1 million, they're talking about just replacing the 1.1 million nurses we'll be short compared to now by 2022. Those aren't numbers the ANA came up with or a university, those numbers come from the department of labor.I get that it 'feels' like there's a glut of nurses, but if you look at the numbers there actually isn't. The RN vacancy rate is hovering around 9%, which by itself defines a 'shortage'. The job placement of new grads, even ADNs, is still much higher than with other degrees, so I'm not sure where this claim there's a glut of nurses comes from.
Rather shocking that the ANA hasn't figured out yet that the department of labor is NOT a reliable source.
Vacancy rates tell us absolutely nothing about the number of RNs available, or whether or not there is a shortage of nurses and can not be (accurately) used to determine the number of nurses needed.
All vacancy rates tell you is how many jobs there are open, not how many nurses are available.
All one has to do to demonstrate there is not a shortage of nurses is to read the 2014 wage survey here on AN. If there weren't too many nurses there wouldn't so be many nurses making less than $20 an hour.
Does anyone need any further evidence that the ANA is not on the nurse's side?
I'm not aware of the ANA providing collective bargaining services. I don't think they're a union.
The ANA has numerous state based unions which it refers to as "affiliates" which is a bit misleading since they fall directly under the ANA. At least a few years ago, these combined ANA affiliates made up the largest nursing union in the US, although I seem to remember hearing that NNU surpassed them in recent years.
Here's a map where you can look to see if your state has an ANA union.
People, including me, claim that there's a glut because -- at least in this neck of the woods -- the ratio of applicants to openings runs about 7:1 - 10:1.New grad nurses, and even experienced ones, still have difficulty getting hired into stable, benefitted, FT positions.
If the concern is for the future then money would be much better invested in developing paid internships for inexperienced nurses to either break in to the field or to cross train into other specialities.
The only thing that *DON'T* need is to be graduating more nurses into a system which already cannot absorb them.
And BLS predictions are simply that... predictions.
7 to 10 applicants for open positions hardly suggests a 'glut'. About once a year I post for waitstaff or cooks and typically get 100+ applications. Fewer than 10 applications for a job as prevalent as nursing would suggest a shortage, not a glut.
Is the expectation that new grads should be guaranteed to get the best nursing jobs right out of school?
7 to 10 applicants for open positions hardly suggests a 'glut'. About once a year I post for waitstaff or cooks and typically get 100+ applications. Fewer than 10 applications for a job as prevalent as nursing would suggest a shortage, not a glut.Is the expectation that new grads should be guaranteed to get the best nursing jobs right out of school?
The expectation is that new grad should GET a job; not have to wait months and years to take a position.
When you have to wait months and almost years to take a position post nursing classes, there is a risk of difficulty transitioning to a novice nurse successfully; I know I had difficulty transitioning, versus when I was a novice LPN.
The difference? I had a job as soon as I was licensed; whereas I was still working as an LPN while I was licensed as an RN; as someone that needed to transition into the role of the RN, it certainly did NO favors working under my license; I FINALLY have gotten comfortable with my role as a RN, and I have been one for two years.
I'm not for anyone having a gap from post nursing classes to employment; I am in favor of transition programs; that would be a better way to ensure prepared nurses vs increasing seats, as well as increasing instructor and nurse educator salaries.
Nurses Schools, Salaries, and Job DataThey aren't talking about increasing the nursing workforce by 1.1 million, they're talking about just replacing the 1.1 million nurses we'll be short compared to now by 2022. Those aren't numbers the ANA came up with or a university, those numbers come from the department of labor.I get that it 'feels' like there's a glut of nurses, but if you look at the numbers there actually isn't. The RN vacancy rate is hovering around 9%, which by itself defines a 'shortage'. The job placement of new grads, even ADNs, is still much higher than with other degrees, so I'm not sure where this claim there's a glut of nurses comes from.
Maine
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TH=align: left]City and Area[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Median Salary[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Employees[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Job Density[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bangor[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$69,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,930[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+72%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lewiston[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$61,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,580[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+75%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Portland[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$60,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]4,800[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+21%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Maryland
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TH=align: left]City and Area
[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Median Salary[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Employees[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Job Density[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Baltimore[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$78,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]30,670[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+14%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bethesda[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$79,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]9,040[/TD]
[TD=align: right]-23%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Cumberland[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$58,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,350[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+111%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Hagerstown[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$66,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]2,050[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+11%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Salisbury[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$64,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,400[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+45%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Massachusetts
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TH=align: left]City and Area[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Median Salary[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Employees[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Job Density[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Barnstable Town[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$75,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]2,580[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+36%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Boston[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$93,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]48,240[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+35%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Brockton[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$79,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]2,320[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+36%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Framingham[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$76,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]2,990[/TD]
[TD=align: right]-7%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Haverhill[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$67,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,580[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+3%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lawrence[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$79,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,920[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+76%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Leominster[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$79,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,300[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+47%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lowell[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$71,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]2,360[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+2%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]New Bedford[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$73,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,560[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+31%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Peabody[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$68,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]2,320[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+19%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Springfield[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$71,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]6,610[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+10%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Taunton[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$78,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]760[/TD]
[TD=align: right]-4%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Worcester[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$83,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]7,510[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+49%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Michigan
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TH=align: left]City and Area[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Median Salary[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Employees[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Job Density[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Battle Creek[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$74,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,030[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+11%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bay City[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$65,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]730[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+31%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Detroit[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$68,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]18,160[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+33%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Flint[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$65,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]3,780[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+50%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Grand Rapids[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$60,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]7,550[/TD]
[TD=align: right]-1%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Holland[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$60,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,130[/TD]
[TD=align: right]-38%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Kalamazoo[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$63,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]3,290[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+25%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lansing[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$66,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]3,440[/TD]
[TD=align: right]-13%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Monroe[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$63,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]480[/TD]
[TD=align: right]-24%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Muskegon[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$59,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,780[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+76%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Saginaw[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$66,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]3,040[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+98%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Warren[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$68,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]19,430[/TD]
[TD=align: right]-12%[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Mississippi
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TH=align: left]City and Area[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Median Salary[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Employees[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Job Density[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Gulfport[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$59,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]2,550[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+24%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Hattiesburg[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$55,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,970[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+89%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Jackson[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$61,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]8,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+58%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pascagoula[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$59,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,400[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+70%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Missouri
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TH=align: left]City and Area[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Median Salary[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Employees[/TH]
[TH=align: right]Job Density[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Cape Girardeau[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$57,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,770[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+124%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Columbia[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$58,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]3,090[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+106%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Jefferson City[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$55,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]1,280[/TD]
[TD=align: right]-7%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Joplin[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$44,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]2,050[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+39%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Kansas City[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$65,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]21,760[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+4%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Springfield[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$55,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]5,690[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+50%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]St Louis[/TD]
[TD=align: right]$60,000[/TD]
[TD=align: right]35,270[/TD]
[TD=align: right]+28%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
For a few examples.....from a non nursing report
They aren't talking about increasing the nursing workforce by 1.1 million, they're talking about just replacing the 1.1 million nurses we'll be short compared to now by 2022. Those aren't numbers the ANA came up with or a university, those numbers come from the department of labor.I get that it 'feels' like there's a glut of nurses, but if you look at the numbers there actually isn't. The RN vacancy rate is hovering around 9%, which by itself defines a 'shortage'. The job placement of new grads, even ADNs, is still much higher than with other degrees, so I'm not sure where this claim there's a glut of nurses comes from.
The glut is when you know or hear of 100+ candidates vying for a job and even a night shift one! With that many people applying you can be really picky and is another reason BSN is getting so much attention as it can cut down on the field of applicants to sort thru! I guess you can thank all the nursing programs that have proliferated and for profits start ups esp in urban areas.
kbrn2002, ADN, RN
3,971 Posts
I have to agree with music in my heart. The RN job openings in my area tend to be on specialized units that want previous experience and/or multiple certifications that most nurses don't have unless they have already decided to focus training and ongoing education in those specialties. Other areas with openings offer such low pay that I would really have be desperate for a job to accept the wage, or the employer has a well known local reputation for being a terrible place to work.