Blacklisted from HCA

londonflo · Sep 13, 2020

22 hours ago, nursingsprettycool17 said:

I understand now that this practice is perfectly legal and I just have to either get over it or try and strike a deal with HR.

I am probably the one who was hardest on you. But maybe some good will come out of this discussion.

I think you have really helped the new graduates who are considering starting at HCA. Nothing helps like someone who has been in the trenches and knows the real state of the job. HCA does not have any hospitals in my state but I will know to dissuade any graduate from jobs in neighboring states.

When you decide to pursue a practice-based graduate degree, you know now to avoid any program that has clinical experiences in their facilities before you apply. Even as a student your name is floated by them with the student roster.

Best wishes on the future, especially in your graduate studies.

JKL33 · Sep 13, 2020

8 hours ago, RosesrReder said:

Respectfully, I read your original post and it did not state you paid off the 10k; therefore, it would make perfect sense to be black listed.

It would be normal to make the inference that the OP would not be surprised about being blacklisted if s/he had not repaid the prorated owed monies as, in that case, s/he would expect to be blacklisted for that reason. I think it was fairly clear that the blacklisting came as a surprise because the money had been paid.

8 hours ago, RosesrReder said:

Lastly, there is not and has never been a nursing shortage. It's some fantasy that has been made up by pop up schools for the longest time to pump out nurses. Hence, for years, new grads have found it difficult to find jobs in many parts of the nation. There is however a shortage of nurses willing to put up with the current workforce climate. We are a dime a dozen.

Agree, except I would amend first sentence to say "...never been a widespread nursing shortage" [at least while I've been a nurse]. Agree with the bolded portion for sure.

7 hours ago, myoglobin said:

So why were RN’s being offered jobs where they had to “pay if they quit or were fired for training” rather than bonuses?

Simple: The employer is big enough to do exactly whatever they want to do, and is a major player in very large regional markets. They have a sustained need for nurses (probably due to the bolded reason above) and utilized this idea of a new grad residency to take care of their needs. Places that treat nurses poorly and don't care about actually good patient care do have needs for a steady supply of nurses so that they can still do business despite their revolving door culture. AFAICT that is why something like a special "residency" just for new grads is instrumental--and it won't cost that much if the new grads are contractually obligated to offset the costs of the pipeline...

4 hours ago, Rose_Queen said:

Nursing seems to be one of the very few professions where graduates don't expect to have to consider relocation for work.

And part of that is because it serves schools' purposes to claim that the shortage is widespread and everywhere. Another part of it is the fact that we actually are needed in such a multitude of places and settings...it isn't like nurses will have to relocate where there is something like a huge headquarters in a major metropolis in order to accept some 9-5 high-level-salary gig for which they were recruited. Rather, we come out of school as entry level workers who (as a profession) are needed in almost every locality that is big enough to have a stop light (sometimes even smaller). I often hear this charge implying that nurses are wrong for not expecting to have to move....but that doesn't really make sense.

1 hour ago, Hoosier_RN said:

I live near a small hospital that I call Country Bumpkin General. Over 5 years ago, I gave my 2 weeks, never had a write up or anything incidental. But because the current CNO, who was a staff nurse on my floor when I left, doesn't like me personally, I'm on an unofficial do not hire list. I have applied to a couple of jobs there since I left, and friends told me that CNO told them that I was a no go because she didn't feel like I was a good fit for their culture. Is it nice? No. Is it legal? Totally

Well, this is your situation on steroids, since HCA is not CBG (Country Bumpkin General ?). If CGB has one crotchety person, well...that's one place you can't work. But, disappointing as that may be (especially if one were really tied to that particular local area), it's nothing like the havoc that can be caused by a conglomerate that controls large regions.

1 hour ago, londonflo said:

I think you have really helped the new graduates who are considering starting at HCA.

Hopefully. ??

londonflo · Sep 13, 2020

6 minutes ago, JKL33 said:

And part of that is because it serves schools' purposes to claim that the shortage is widespread and everywhere.

I have spent almost the whole of my career teaching in nursing programs. Never has a school I was affiliated use a concept of 'nursing shortage' in advertising or school related materials. If a parent asks "will their son/daughter get a job after graduation?" I do say probably or yes. If I am asked if there is a nursing shortage I will say there are areas of nursing that are hiring and that is the truth where I live/taught. We had a blip in the late 80s where hiring was tight for a year or two.

As long as I can remember prospective employers want to come out to the college and talk to students in their last semester. The 2 hospitals have a Summer employment program that is very selective. Do the employers need the Summer help? No, but they are hoping for a deep connection to be made between the students and them.

Locally there are nursing "clubs" for high school students to learn and experience local nursing programs. The same exists for the locale medical school. We are kind of a health care town and always seem to be hiring except for now.

Hoosier_RN, MSN · Sep 14, 2020

2 hours ago, JKL33 said:

Well, this is your situation on steroids, since HCA is not CBG (Country Bumpkin General ?). If CGB has one crotchety person, well...that's one place you can't work. But, disappointing as that may be (especially if one were really tied to that particular local area), it's nothing like the havoc that can be caused by a conglomerate that controls large regions.

CBG is owned by St Vincent, which has quite a few hospitals in Indiana, and a couple in other states. It's put me on the list for all of them. Buuuuuttttt, since I never want to work in a hospital ever again, it really doesn't matter. My point was that anyone can be put on a do not (re)hire list, official or unofficial, at any time for any reason. As long as it's not a protected class regarding discrimination, not much can be done about it. It stinks for those that it messes up their career options. The only things I know about HCA are what I've read on here. They sound that a first class crap organization

myoglobin, ASN, BSN, MSN · Sep 14, 2020

41 minutes ago, Hoosier_RN said:

CBG is owned by St Vincent, which has quite a few hospitals in Indiana, and a couple in other states. It's put me on the list for all of them. Buuuuuttttt, since I never want to work in a hospital ever again, it really doesn't matter. My point was that anyone can be put on a do not (re)hire list, official or unofficial, at any time for any reason. As long as it's not a protected class regarding discrimination, not much can be done about it. It stinks for those that it messes up their career options. The only things I know about HCA are what I've read on here. They sound that a first class crap organization

I would argue that these "do not hire" lists are ripe for challenge on some (or more) of the following grounds:

1. They often amount to slander or libel and the victim has no ability to even know who their "slanderer" is or what they have said.

2. They may have "disparate impact" that meaning intentionally or not they hurt protected classes such as women, minorities and those with disabilities more than the rest of the population. Also, since someone doesn't have the knowledge or "due process" afforded by a more open process they may provide "cover" for discrimination on the basis of protected class. For example my wife was "told" by another manager that she was put on a "do not hire list" by Florida Hospital simply because she aggressively challenged the fact that as a new grad I was offered a bonus and a higher rate of pay than she was with three years of ICU experience (in an ICU no less and we applied at the same time. At the time it was widely felt that Florida Hospital preferred white males in the hiring process and she felt that her experience exemplified this as being the case.).

3. They may represent "monopolistic abuse of power" especially when the hospital in question is one like HCA the largest for profit hospital system in the world. Also, this is especially the case when they start imposing Grapes of Wrath type policies where in spite of working there you owe them money if you leave.

Only when these practices are challenged by nursing organizations like the ANA, nursing unions (as part of their contracts), and class action lawsuits along with informal "boycotts" by RN's looking for a new place to work will this process diminish. If you want more exploitation of children then keep subscribing to Netflix, and if you want more exploitation of nurses then keep applying to HCA. Sometimes, Netflix may be the only way to get "TV" and HCA may be the only option for a job, but when you have a choice I would argue that it makes sense to find one that is more optimal.

Hoosier_RN, MSN · Sep 14, 2020

1 hour ago, myoglobin said:

I would argue that these "do not hire" lists are ripe for challenge on some (or more) of the following grounds:

1. They often amount to slander or libel and the victim has no ability to even know who their "slanderer" is or what they have said.

2. They may have "disparate impact" that meaning intentionally or not they hurt protected classes such as women, minorities and those with disabilities more than the rest of the population. Also, since someone doesn't have the knowledge or "due process" afforded by a more open process they may provide "cover" for discrimination on the basis of protected class. For example my wife was "told" by another manager that she was put on a "do not hire list" by Florida Hospital simply because she aggressively challenged the fact that as a new grad I was offered a bonus and a higher rate of pay than she was with three years of ICU experience (in an ICU no less and we applied at the same time. At the time it was widely felt that Florida Hospital preferred white males in the hiring process and she felt that her experience exemplified this as being the case.).

3. They may represent "monopolistic abuse of power" especially when the hospital in question is one like HCA the largest for profit hospital system in the world. Also, this is especially the case when they start imposing Grapes of Wrath type policies where in spite of working there you owe them money if you leave.

Only when these practices are challenged by nursing organizations like the ANA, nursing unions (as part of their contracts), and class action lawsuits along with informal "boycotts" by RN's looking for a new place to work will this process diminish. If you want more exploitation of children then keep subscribing to Netflix, and if you want more exploitation of nurses then keep applying to HCA. Sometimes, Netflix may be the only way to get "TV" and HCA may be the only option for a job, but when you have a choice I would argue that it makes sense to find one that is more optimal.

#1-if you can prove slander or libel, then there is legal recourse. Unfortunately, most of the time, the statement is a better candidate found, or something in that line. If you are on an official do not rehire list, the candidate usually knows why-attendance, terminated, quit without notice, etc. Unofficial do rehire, you have to prove it beyond a doubt. Most HRs and managers are smart enough to not directly set themselves up to be found out.

#2-this falls under discrimination, legal recourse can happen.

#3-again, HCA sounds like a garbage org. But, on the note of owing money upon quitting, if you signed a contract, you are liable, plain and simple, but sadly. Kinda like my mortgage. If I sell my house and move prior to my house being paid off, I owe the balance to the financiers, as there is a binding contract that I signed upon closing of my home. That's why all employees (not just nurses) should read what they are signing and fully understand what they are signing before they sign. While HCA may be the only, or main, game in town, no one was forced to sign the contract

nursingsprettycool17, BSN · Sep 14, 2020

4 hours ago, JKL33 said:

It would be normal to make the inference that the OP would not be surprised about being blacklisted if s/he had not repaid the prorated owed monies as, in that case, s/he would expect to be blacklisted for that reason. I think it was fairly clear that the blacklisting came as a surprise because the money had been paid.

Agree, except I would amend first sentence to say "...never been a widespread nursing shortage" [at least while I've been a nurse]. Agree with the bolded portion for sure.

Simple: The employer is big enough to do exactly whatever they want to do, and is a major player in very large regional markets. They have a sustained need for nurses (probably due to the bolded reason above) and utilized this idea of a new grad residency to take care of their needs. Places that treat nurses poorly and don't care about actually good patient care do have needs for a steady supply of nurses so that they can still do business despite their revolving door culture. AFAICT that is why something like a special "residency" just for new grads is instrumental--and it won't cost that much if the new grads are contractually obligated to offset the costs of the pipeline...

And part of that is because it serves schools' purposes to claim that the shortage is widespread and everywhere. Another part of it is the fact that we actually are needed in such a multitude of places and settings...it isn't like nurses will have to relocate where there is something like a huge headquarters in a major metropolis in order to accept some 9-5 high-level-salary gig for which they were recruited. Rather, we come out of school as entry level workers who (as a profession) are needed in almost every locality that is big enough to have a stop light (sometimes even smaller). I often hear this charge implying that nurses are wrong for not expecting to have to move....but that doesn't really make sense.

Well, this is your situation on steroids, since HCA is not CBG (Country Bumpkin General ?). If CGB has one crotchety person, well...that's one place you can't work. But, disappointing as that may be (especially if one were really tied to that particular local area), it's nothing like the havoc that can be caused by a conglomerate that controls large regions.

Hopefully. ??

yes I paid off my contract. every last penny.

JKL33 · Sep 14, 2020

4 hours ago, londonflo said:

I have spent almost the whole of my career teaching in nursing programs. Never has a school I was affiliated use a concept of 'nursing shortage' in advertising or school related materials.

I trust that has been your experience. Nevertheless, institutions of higher education benefit from the concept.

AACN seems to know about it....

https://www.aacnnursing.org/News-Information/Fact-Sheets/Nursing-Shortage

Keep in mind we aren't just talking about pre-licensure programs. I personally think that perhaps the biggest push on the schools' end (as well as other organizations) is to get more and more people interested in advanced nursing roles.

JKL33 · Sep 14, 2020

2 hours ago, Hoosier_RN said:

#3-again, HCA sounds like a garbage org. But, on the note of owing money upon quitting, if you signed a contract, you are liable, plain and simple, but sadly. Kinda like my mortgage. If I sell my house and move prior to my house being paid off, I owe the balance to the financiers, as there is a binding contract that I signed upon closing of my home. That's why all employees (not just nurses) should read what they are signing and fully understand what they are signing before they sign. While HCA may be the only, or main, game in town, no one was forced to sign the contract.

I know it is hard to make a perfect analogy but this one's too far off. The bank and the seller would have to be the same person. The purchase would have to be first-time home-buyer, sight-unseen, "as is" and additional penalties for not living in the house for [X] number of years even if you paid it off completely. Regardless if it turned out to be a sh*thole with truly dangerous defects! And then---! you would be barred from buying numerous other houses all over the region because the bank/seller secretly threw a ginormous.baby.fit that you didn't like the POS they sold you ?.

***

I think most of us do know that people should read their contracts. I'm betting a lot more people would think twice about them (or not so easily assume everything's going to be okay) if there was any degree of truthful disclosure whatsoever. Any prospective employee doesn't really know what these floors are going to be like--especially someone seeking their first job as an RN--and they damn sure don't know that "you must pay back a prorated amount if you leave before two years" actually means "you must pay back a prorated amount and we will throw a ginormous.baby.fit and you will not be able to work at these 20 other huge entities of ours all over this very large region, forever.

Is truthful disclosure legally required? No. But then implying that people should've known better or implying that they realistically had plenty of other choices is just...still off-kilter.

***

I have not signed this kind of a contract before. But this discussion has made me remember a couple of times that I've agreed to terms because taking the chance seemed reasonable. One example is a time I was signing a position where the plan was that I would work a certain shift. The manager was a great person who told me the unwritten realities of what I was signing, since I was completely new to the organization ("We could have you work any shift, but I can't foresee any reason at all that you would need to work a different shift [other than the one we're talking about]" and "The nurses usually have [x] number of patients. Maybe if something weird were to happen they would each take an extra patient, but I've been here 10 years and I think that has happened less than a handful of times...").

Okay, well that sounded reasonable, and besides, my choice was to take her at her word or say, "well, I will need you to put all of that on paper or I won't take the job..." Come on now...who regularly gets away with that? ?

In my case it worked out great...because the manager was straightforward and also not a liar. But that doesn't change the situation, which was that I still had to take some degree of chance.

These grads are being told certain things. If they weren't, it's quite possible that a heck of a lot less of them would be interested in these jobs to begin with.

This might be legally justifiable corporate behavior but it isn't ethically justified in my opinion. Call it "business" or whatever you want, but it is not ethical to misrepresent a situation so that someone will want to work for you.

Speaking of choices and what people are "forced" to do: No business is "forced" to behave this way. They certainly have the option of making their workplace one where people truly want to work and want to stay.

Hoosier_RN, MSN · Sep 14, 2020

7 hours ago, JKL33 said:

I know it is hard to make a perfect analogy but this one's too far off. The bank and the seller would have to be the same person. The purchase would have to be first-time home-buyer, sight-unseen, "as is" and additional penalties for not living in the house for [X] number of years even if you paid it off completely. Regardless if it turned out to be a sh*thole with truly dangerous defects! And then---! you would be barred from buying numerous other houses all over the region because the bank/seller secretly threw a ginormous.baby.fit that you didn't like the POS they sold you ?.

***

I think most of us do know that people should read their contracts. I'm betting a lot more people would think twice about them (or not so easily assume everything's going to be okay) if there was any degree of truthful disclosure whatsoever. Any prospective employee doesn't really know what these floors are going to be like--especially someone seeking their first job as an RN--and they damn sure don't know that "you must pay back a prorated amount if you leave before two years" actually means "you must pay back a prorated amount and we will throw a ginormous.baby.fit and you will not be able to work at these 20 other huge entities of ours all over this very large region, forever.

Is truthful disclosure legally required? No. But then implying that people should've known better or implying that they realistically had plenty of other choices is just...still off-kilter.

***

I have not signed this kind of a contract before. But this discussion has made me remember a couple of times that I've agreed to terms because taking the chance seemed reasonable. One example is a time I was signing a position where the plan was that I would work a certain shift. The manager was a great person who told me the unwritten realities of what I was signing, since I was completely new to the organization ("We could have you work any shift, but I can't foresee any reason at all that you would need to work a different shift [other than the one we're talking about]" and "The nurses usually have [x] number of patients. Maybe if something weird were to happen they would each take an extra patient, but I've been here 10 years and I think that has happened less than a handful of times...").

Okay, well that sounded reasonable, and besides, my choice was to take her at her word or say, "well, I will need you to put all of that on paper or I won't take the job..." Come on now...who regularly gets away with that? ?

In my case it worked out great...because the manager was straightforward and also not a liar. But that doesn't change the situation, which was that I still had to take some degree of chance.

These grads are being told certain things. If they weren't, it's quite possible that a heck of a lot less of them would be interested in these jobs to begin with.

This might be legally justifiable corporate behavior but it isn't ethically justified in my opinion. Call it "business" or whatever you want, but it is not ethical to misrepresent a situation so that someone will want to work for you.

Speaking of choices and what people are "forced" to do: No business is "forced" to behave this way. They certainly have the option of making their workplace one where people truly want to work and want to stay.

It is way off, but I was trying to think of something relatable. Because some buyers have signed horrid mortgages with terrible interest rates (think ARM mortgages) then scream later that they didn't know this was going to happen, and now they have to pay, can't pay the exorbitant new rate but really wanted the house, blah blah blah, credit ruined and can't buy another house, car, etc. Crappy situation, but the buyer should have read what they were signing.

I don’t agree with the practices either, but since I've only read about HCA and know what garbage operation they are, just from reading on AN, those in their neighborhoods should know from friends and family, nursingworld gossip, etc, I would think. Those out of towners can do a little research- I darn well would before moving my life! It's not like these folks only post on AN and it's a big secret. I'm sure some FB nursing groups are probably out there as well. Nowadays, too many avenues available to investigate how employers treat their employees. It's definitely not like 15+ years ago where you almost had to directly know someone working at a facility to get a truthful answer.

I agree that HCA is not somewhere that I would ever work, but also think anyone, not just new grads, should investigate any employment opportunity to avoid these situations. Again, many avenues to do so out there

JKL33 · Sep 14, 2020

1 hour ago, Hoosier_RN said:

Nowadays, too many avenues available to investigate how employers treat their employees. It's definitely not like 15+ years ago where you almost had to directly know someone working at a facility to get a truthful answer.

Sure it is! LOL. There's a lot more access to unofficial information but unless you have the inside scoop you will still know exceedingly little of the reality. Take this very thread. We're essentially discussing rumors....discussing an experience just about everyone has "heard of" someone having. And here comes an HR employee of the company dropping right in here to say oh dear, I'm so concerned to hear all of this because these things are not true....

Anyway.

Sorry. Guess I don't really have anything to say other than to repeat myself.

Hoosier_RN, MSN · Sep 14, 2020

10 minutes ago, JKL33 said:

Sure it is! LOL. There's a lot more access to unofficial information but unless you have the inside scoop you will still know exceedingly little of the reality. Take this very thread. We're essentially discussing rumors....discussing an experience just about everyone has "heard of" someone having. And here comes an HR employee of the company dropping right in here to say oh dear, I'm so concerned to hear all of this because these things are not true....

Anyway.

Sorry. Guess I don't really have anything to say other than to repeat myself.

Me too LOL. But that supposed HR person from HCA was trippy to say the very least. Maybe now, some will understand why we say no real pictures, or names. Who knows if that poster was for real, but just goes to show that eyes and ears are everywhere. That to me is alarming as well, makes me really never want to work there. ***Sigh***