Attention CHP Ohio RN's

Julia RN · Mar 10, 2008

I posted a news article about this vote in the CB discussion before seeing the post here.

Why is this illegal? Isn't this what's known as a "neutrality agreement"?

From the articles I saw, 6 categories of workers will vote separately, including RNs, whether or not to join. Even if the other workers vote for SEIU, the RNs can stay out if the majority vote no.

Too bad NNOC and SEIU couldn't have worked something out so NNOC would have been on the ballot for the RNs and SEIU for the other workers.

RN Power Ohio · Mar 10, 2008

This workers did not choose SEIU the corporation did.

pickledpepperRN · Mar 10, 2008

I once worked at a wonderful Catholic hospital. I gave my resignation notice when Tenet was buying our hospital.

Soon SEIU did the same thing.

Only a couple of my former colleagues even voted. They voted "yes" because of a promised pay increased.

Now the hospital is closed.

If you work at one of the facilities please find out all you can and VOTE!

Perhaps RN Power Ohio can answer. I think the vore is a majority of those who vote.

If so it is VERY important to go vote!

I would NEVER be part of a partnership.

Management has the power as they do now.

With a partnership you don't really have a union.

Julia RN · Mar 10, 2008

I don't understand.

Some of the workers must of asked for SEIU to get management to agree to a neutality agreement, right? Maybe not nurses, although one article reported that it was nurses that had originally asked for SEIU in 05.

From:

http://www.limaohio.com/story.php?IDnum=49952

"The SEIU has been working to help unionize employees at St Rita's for more than two years. In March 2005, a group of nurses met with the organization about the possibility of unionizing."

Another article does not specify that it was nurses.

From:

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/search/content/oh/story/news/local/2008/02/29/sns022908unioninside.html

"The Columbus-based SEIU made its first appearance in Springfield in February 2005 when about 45 Community Mercy employees announced they were seeking to unionize."

I'm usually in agreement with CNA's positions, but this one is complicated. Will these nurses have another chance to be represented by a union if they say no? Can't CNA try to get on the ballot instead of taking an anti-union position in this?

SEIU is for staffing ratios. I don't know what was agreed to in order to get the agreement with management- the big question, I'd think. Will it be worse then what those nurses and patients have now? IMO- there's little hope for real improvements with no union and hope for the future with one.

I would like to see a nurses union on the ballot though- CNA, or even ONA- where are they on this?

pickledpepperRN · Mar 10, 2008

I think this union does not understand patient advocacy.

The secret deal worked out between SEIU bosses and nursing home owners denies union members the right to speak out, strike, or protect patients
…On the SEIU's side of the 2003 bargain, the union agreed to use its clout with Democratic legislators in Sacramento to accomplish three goals of interest to nursing home owners:
The SEIU pledged to use its lobbying muscle to pass a 2004 bill increasing MediCal subsidies to nursing homes by more than $2 billion over four years, according to patient advocates. The bill passed, creating a windfall for nursing home owners.
The union also agreed to attempt to pass tort reform legislation that would have limited patients' right to sue in the event they were neglected, raped, abused, or killed.
(The union's tort reform lobbying efforts were put on hold, however, after a 2004 SF Weekly story led union members and advocacy groups to complain.)
The SEIU also pledged in the 2003 pact to staunch any efforts by patient advocates to push for legislation or regulations requiring nursing homes to provide enough staff to keep patients safe and healthy, unless the nursing home companies agree to such reforms in advance. The SEIU will "oppose any long-term-care-specific staffing and reimbursement legislation or regulation that fails to meet mutually agreed objectives," the agreement states….
http://www.sfweekly.com/2007-04-11/news/union-disunity/print

pickledpepperRN · Mar 10, 2008

This is from the SEIU web site.

I cannot trust a union that partners with CEOs and dismisses the concerns on workers.

Especially against RNs right to advocate for our patients instead of for the employer.

Standing with the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies and national labor and civic leaders, SEIU on Feb. 7th helped launch a historic, new cooperative effort--Better Health Care Together--with the goal of fundamentally changing the nation's broken health care system....
http://www.seiu.org/media/health_partnership.cfm

pickledpepperRN · Mar 10, 2008

RNs are threatened with discipline by their union if they blow the whistle about unsafe patient care or criticize the employer. They did get a nice pay increase.

CNA Kaiser RNs make even more and retain their right to union representation when they advocate for their patients.

Kaiser signs historic deal with 29 labor unions
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2005/09/26/daily33.html

RN Power Ohio · Mar 11, 2008

I don't understand.
I'm usually in agreement with CNA's positions, but this one is complicated. Will these nurses have another chance to be represented by a union if they say no? Can't CNA try to get on the ballot instead of taking an anti-union position in this?
You are right this is a very complex issue. One that becomes very scary when you learn that CHP has filed for this election and NOT SEIU. This is a bad deal for not only the RN's but also the other workers. Most people did not find out about this election until 7 days ago leaving little time to make a good decision.
It is true that the votes need only be the majority of those who vote and not the majority of the workers.
The way this is being set up- it is literally a return of the "company union"!

fred456 · Mar 13, 2008

The nurses at CHP have been working with SEIU for three years. When they first started the process three years ago, angry feeling develop between staff and hospital, and the nurses back off. From my understanding, the hospital did not want SEIU in. It has taken three years to get CHP to agree on letting the nurses vote. How can SEIU be charge with being pick by management. SEIU has done a great job for the nurses in the Napels area in Florida. Improving patient care is main concern.

pickledpepperRN · Mar 13, 2008

Obviously there are significant progressive elements within SEIU. Many of them are working to oppose Andy Stern and the guys from D.C. in their drive to centralize power.

You can read more from SEIU members here:

http://www.ReformSEIU.org.

http://www.reformseiu.org/search/label/about

I have never heard of an employer filing for a union election.

A little more information:

Ohio RNs for democracy:

“Ohio nurses want to be part of a professional nurses organization, not SEIU.

Ohio nurses and patients desperately need safe staffing ratios in each of our hospitals, something that would never happen with SEIU.”

Terry Gallagher, RN

EMH Regional Medical Center, Elyria, Ohio

NNOC Ohio member

http://www.calnurses.org/nnoc/ohio/rns-for-democracy/

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/rns-denounce-sham-election-in-nine-ohio-hospitals-hospital-chain,308966.shtml

http://www.seiu.org/media/health_partnership.cfm

samanthaRN · Mar 13, 2008

check out this other thread on allnurses: [color=#003399]https://allnurses.com/forums/f323/cna-s-union-busting-ohio-open-letter-288194.html#post2710433

it is much more positive about what the chp nurses tried to do over the years. :specs:

i think i have read about these nurses and their organizing with seiu many times in the past. how sad that they aren't getting to vote. i do not understand how this could be a good thing for them or for nurses. we all need more unionized nurses to have more of a voice in our profession and this seems to mean less unionized nurses. how sad. :cry: