ANA - why not? What have they done etc?

[CEN35]

Recently, there has been so much talk about the ANA. Mostly because people relate it too, the only possible organization that could unite and back up nurses (well that opinion varies obviously). So I have a question for all of you out there.

Are you or are you not a member of the ANA? If so why or why not?

My response? I started ER right out of school. I thought for sure that's what I wanted to do. I did and still like it...but have my bad nights. I'm straying oooopppps, back to the subject. Well I thought it best to always keep my Avenues open. I did know I had a drive to specialize and try and be the best, at whatever I did.

Well the ANA came out with a new stand on specialties about this time. Like after a certain date, ADN/ASN/degree program nurses would not be eligible after a certain date, for the CNOR, CNS, etc etc. they said the requirement would be a BS minimum, to specilaize through certification. This really struck me hard. It made me feel inferior, and discriminated against. I could not see how they could discriminate, without loosing a lawsuite. Of course........I was not wasting my money on that either. I looked at this statement, as the ANA's way, of seperating, and dividing nursing more than it already been. My choice? Clearly, never be part of an orginization, that disrupts an allegedly commen goal and/or discriminates openly.

Rick

[nurs4kids]

Originally posted by Jenny P:

Teaching was also a female-dominated profession, but they were able to get their act together and do what needed to be done for their profession. Why are nurses so different?

[This message has been edited by Jenny P (edited April 27, 2001).]

You're suggesting teachers are respected and paid what they're worth???

[cmggriff]

I'm an ADN and I belong to the ONA. Here in Oregon the ONA is the bargaining entity for nurses. I grant you, there have been and will continue to be problems with the ANA. I think one of Nursing's darkest hours was when the ANA sided with the American Hospital Association in claims that "Nurses must work smarter not harder." But times change and so has the membership of the ANA.

We all agree that real chages in the treatment of nurse's in the hospital will only come with unified effort on the part of nurses. So why reinvent the wheel? The ANA is an organization that already exists. Its infrastructure is in place an working now. The ANA already has lobbyists and political action committees at work. This could be like a corporate take over. All we need is for another 10% of the working nurses to join their SNA. Suddenly we are the majority.If we want to change something we vote and make it so.

We want more nurses like us to join but they say it is too expensive? We lower the annual dues.

We want a bigger say in how Nursing Service is administered in each hospital? We call for a general work slow down by our membership which is now 50% of all nurses.

We want to get the attention of politicians? We threaten to spend our money somewhere else.

All the things we want to do for nursing we can do through this organization. We just have to take control. KATN Gary

[Jenny P]

quote:

"You're suggesting teachers are respected and paid what they're worth???">>

Nurs4kids, I'm suggesting that teachers are thought of as being professionals; and nurses are not. We may be thought of as trustworthy, but the general public does not think of us as professionals.

[nurs4kids]

CMGRIFF,

I agree with your post, but can't understand your math. Other posters on this bb have agreed that only 6% of nurses belong to the ANA. So how do manage to get 50% belonging if another 10% join their SNA?

[Tim-GNP]

QUOTE:

"You're suggesting teachers are respected and paid what they're worth??? "

If they're anything like the idiots that teach in the local district where I live.... They're paid TOO MUCH. They recently went on strike [the greedy pigs], and their salaries were listed in the local newspaper [no names, just positions]. A school year is 180 days- or half the normal work year. Salaries ranged from $50-90K- how many nurses out there make that???

Some teachers ARE worth that, I will agree, but the majority that I have met [including my recollection of them from my school experience] aren't worth the room they take up.

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

Tis with our judgements as our watches, none go just alike, yet, each believes his own.

-Alexander Pope

[Jason-ACNP]

I'm suggesting that teachers are thought of as being professionals; and nurses are not. We may be thought of as trustworthy, but the general public does not think of us as professionals.

An excellent point.

[-jt]

Originally posted by cmggriff:

I'm an ADN and I belong to the ONA... This could be like a corporate take over. All we need is for another 10% of the working nurses to join their SNA. Suddenly we are the majority. If we want to change something we vote and make it so. [Q]

I am an ADN and an ICU RN in NYC. And an ANA member. Direct-care RNs (in other words, Staff RNs) already ARE the majority of ANA members - and that majority are unionized staff RNs,too. The problem in the past was that they didnt go for the leadership positions. So while WE ARE the majority of the membership, the majority of the leadership positions within the organziation were sought out by non-direct-care nurses - and they had different priorities than the bedside nurse.

There has been a restructuring of the ANA & change in leadership over the past 3 years. With the creation of the UAN division, ALL of the leadership positions will be held by collective bargaining staff RNs & the other leadership positions within the ANA are still available to be held by staff RNs. All they have to do is go for them. There are efforts to increase staff nurse involvement & to encourage them to take these positions.

We already are the majority of the membership. We already vote. We are being heard within the organization & thats why there has been an entire division created to focus solely on the staff nurse needs & why a new leadership was been put in to replace the previous, less responsive one.

You know, isnt it curious.... all the heated talk about the ANA in this place when everyone keeps saying how small it is & how no one belongs to it & how ineffective it is... yet its all over the place - making gains for nurses everywhere. & non-ANA nurses cant stop talking about it! If its so small & ineffective, why does everyone spend so much time talking about what its doing?

lol. ; )

[Jason-ACNP]

You know, isnt it curious.... all the heated talk about the ANA in this place when everyone keeps saying how small it is & how no one belongs to it & how ineffective it is... yet its all over the place - making gains for nurses everywhere. & non-ANA nurses cant stop talking about it! If its so small & ineffective, why does everyone spend so much time talking about what its doing?

Aaahhhhhhhhh......

[Q.]

Ok here's my little opinion.

For one, I don't belong to the ANA. I didn't really see any direct benefit for me to join. I do, however, support Tim's views on belonging to a professsional organization, hence, I belong to AWHONN (Association of Women's Health, Obstetric, and Neonatal Nurses)

I feel it keeps me up to date on current literature - which is important to me and very interesting.

I am all for extra certifications, etc, simply because I believe any form of continued education is good for our profession (which is why I support the BSN minimum requirement) however, my personal view of certifications is that I think they are mainly money-makers by the credentialing centers. Until institutions and the general public see the value in these certifications, and compensate us appropriately for them, I do not believe in them.

I could easily get "certified" in electronic fetal monitoring. I could pay a couple hundred dollars, get the title, and get paid squat for that accomplishment. Instead, if named in a lawsuit, that "certification" could be used against me as "knowing above and beyond" what a standard obstetrical nurse would have known. No thanks, too risky for me.

[Tim-GNP]

Back where I come from we call this practice 'beating a dead horse.'

ANA does speak for all nurses- they speak of the common problems that are experienced by all nurses-even if approximatley 93.1% of them don't belong.

What is ironic is that the math does say something--- it says that most nurses are apathetic dinny's. Before you all go ape sh**, consider my evidence:

1. Based on the fact that only approximately 6.9% of nurses belong to ANA, it stands to reason [mathematically, of course] that 93.1% of nurses don't.

2. If 93.1% percent of nurses don't belong to ANA, they, reasonably, belong somewhere else.

3. Statement number two must be inaccurate since there is no 'competetive' organization fighting against ANA for membership as the resprentative for all nurses, is there?

4. Ergo- there are a lot of apathetic dinny's who sit around and b**** but belong to no collective voice.

Pretty sad.

[PeggyOhio]

I agree it is time to unite together as nurses, somewhere. The MNM seems to have crashed and burned. The ANA has disenchanted many of us in the past but seems to have the crediblility with the media and as such may be our best avenue of change. However the California Nurses Association may become a viable alternative to the ANA. The California Nurses Association's effort to ban MOT in their state has passed it's first hurdle. Seems like they are getting results. http://www.calnurse.org/press/

I'd like hear more input from nurses from California. Why haven't we heard from you (California Nurses who have experience with the CNA) in this discussion?

And Massachusetts nurses who have struck out on their own. This is an excerpt,

"In fact, immediately after the vote, the MNA will meet with the California Nurses Association and the Pennsylvania Association of Staff Nurses and Allied Professionals, to begin discussions about the building of a new nurse association that will include staff nurses and nurses who support them; providing a forum for these organizations to push their agenda on the national stage. "

Read the entire article at this site.

http://www.calnurse.org/cna/press/32401.html

and now Maine nurses.

http://www.allnurses.com/bb/Forum1/HTML/002501.html

Why not beat your drum here a little and let us know what you have to offer nurses nationwide? I for one would like to get all sides of the picture before I decide who will get my support.

[This message has been edited by PeggyOhio (edited April 28, 2001).]

[Mijourney]

Hi CEN35. I'm not a member of the ANA, and I've considered this over the years. I've joined other associations and have never been too shy about contacting those who I feel may be in a position of some influence.

Although, I don't support the notion that BS nurses are better than nurses with other nursing backgrounds, I do support standardization of entry level into nursing practice for the reasons that Jason outlined.

I still yet don't know if the ANA would be for me. I wonder if the ANA state associations had completely unionized early on, if things would have been drastically different? I wonder if one large nursing organization having power through recognition and especially money could have made a huge difference?

There is a growing nationwide shortage of teachers and police despite unions because of other career or job opportunities for a more peaceful and profitable existence. These groups plus nurses are needed to maintain a civil, healthy society. It may ultimately take more than a single association working on its own to get things in order.

I did read a disappointing comment by Mary Foley, president of the ANA in a LTC magazine. She was discussing the impact of staff shortages in LTC and her experiences as an administrator, and she was recorded as saying that "it's not about the money." I don't know if the way this comment was written was accurate or not, but I don't think it completely captured all the concerns that nurses have. I believe the article was in a magazine called LTC interface.