Calif RN disagrees with CNA in many ways. Am I alone?

U.S.A. California

Published

Hello! I am new to this site but felt compelled to ask the question. Am I the only RN in Calif that disagrees with CNA's "teamster tactics" regarding important health care and nursing issues? These people do not represent me. I am NOT a memeber nor do I want to be. I have made job decisions based on whether I would have to belong to CNA. I find the leadership self-serving and power-drunk and I have since moving to Northern Cal in 1991. When CNA made the split with ANA it became very clear to me that CNA did not have my professional well being in mind. The union affiliations CNA have sought and gained make no sense to me. The hiring of Rose Ann DeMoro was the clincher. Anyway, I would love to hear from others who feel the same way since CNA has been successful in getting all over the press and running down the image of nurses as highly educated, skillfull and professional people.

As far as the general public, Schwarzenegger's approval rating is down 20 points since CNA began their campaign and protests. If the general public was really "turned off" his approval rating would be up, not down.

I don't think the general public has a problem with CNA.

:coollook:

I think we should have a poll on the public opinion of CNA when they do these polls on the governor

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Do you belong to ANA? Are you active? Do you write your congressmen/women with information that is factual and shows common sense? If you want results from your organization, then participate!

Not anymore. I did briefly as a new nurse back when I bought into the power of the ANA and the duty of every nurse to belong to her professional organization. After a while I became a little more practical. I saw the results of unions in Canada and here in the US. Now that I belong to CNA, I participate with them instead. I feel like they have much more ability to directly affect my working environment since that's how my contract is negotiated. Getting ratios passed sealed the deal for me. That was one of the main reasons I chose to move to California.

ANA seems irrelevant to me. I know that isn't the pc answer, but I just don't see why I should spend my money on the ANA. Lobbying and all that sounds great, but I'm more concerned with my time at the bedside than what the ANA can't get done in Washington. I know, they would probably be more powerful if all nurses joined. But as it is, they represent a tiny minority.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
I think we should have a poll on the public opinion of CNA when they do these polls on the governor

Actually, as far as I know, CNA doesn't do polls. The polls I was referring to were done or commissioned by other groups or, at least, that's what the newspapers are reporting.

The governor's approval rating is down. This has been widely reported in the news so, again, I don't think people have a problem with CNA. Yes, teachers, firefighters and policemen have also been criticizing the governor, but CNA was out front and started the ball rolling, and they've gotten the most publicity.

:coollook:

Up Vote Up Vote ×
The ANA is very professional, I'll give them that. I just don't know how effective they are and I want results.

I am a former resident of California, and feel qualified to answer this question.

ANA has not done anything, that was the point of seceeding form the ANA. ANa did nothing for anyone, when Care Redesign took hold all over the country. Staffing was cut drastically, the profession has been de- skilled, and since then patient care and safety have sufferd dramatically. Where have you been?

I also put blame on the Boards of Nursing for the selling off of our professional practice to the highest bidder. It is one thing to allow un-licensed assitive personnel to give bed baths, etc. It is quite another to allow them to take over a professional practice, like giving meds. If I decided that I wanted to do brain surgery, and took a 6 week class on the "how to's of doing it", I would think/hope that the AMA and the State Boards of Medicine would put a stop to it. Where is the ANA and the State Boards of Nursing? Why is it OK to dumb down RN profesisonal practice to unlicensed personnel, and not OK to dumb down the practice of medicine? Or for that matter Physical Therapy, or Occupational Therapy?

Do you see my point? Their State Boards, and National Governing bodies (equivalent to the ANA), advocate for their members. They hold onto their professional practice like glue. Can you say that about the ANA? They abandoned the entire nursing profession with the upheaval that has ensued since then. I put full blame for the whole mess on the regulating agencies that oversee the practice of nursing, including, by the way, JACHO. I wish that ALL THE STATE NURSES ASSOCIATIONS would withdraw from ANA. That would send a message! Wouldn't it?

Lindarn, RN BSN ,CCRN

Spokane, Washington

Cal State Long Beach BSN, 5/87

Up Vote Up Vote ×

Do you remember the RCT squabble? The AMA came up with this brilliant idea that they would invent registered care technologists to "help" the nursing shortage without asking nursing for its input. ANA went to the AMA's national convention and demanded to be heard. "Thanks, but no thanks." The docs heard us loud and clear--no RCTs.

ANA has also managed to negotiate nursing school scholarships from the federal governement--an effort to get people into nursing and ease the shortage. ANA has testified endlessly in the regulatory process for research funds, privileges for advanced practice nurses, preventive care for the poor, etc, etc, etc. ANA attempts to help individual states with major problems that they realize may become national issues, i.e. licensure, education, reciprocity, and practice encroachment.

In the 1992 presidential election, ANA was the third largest PAC contributor in the health care field--behind only the AMA and the dentists. We contributed more than even the hospital association.

ANA is the professional organization for ALL nurses, across the country, across practice lines. Instead of belonging to a dozen professional organizations, I can belong to just one and know that my voice will be heard in Washington and the world (ANA also belongs to the International Council of Nursing).

Up Vote Up Vote ×

No RCTs? Maybe, but we have UAPs everywhere. A rose by any other name.... It's was CNA that put ratios into law specific to RNs.

Scholarships? Good. Even better if it doesn't bring up the old ADN vs BSN as entry to practice thing.:D Ahnold is even putting money into nursing scholarships, despite his disputes with CNA.

Testifying? Good if it gets results, otherwise it's completely wasteful. The new OT laws are an example. It's something that has to be done, but I don't see why state BONs couldn't do it as well.

Third largest healthcare contributor to PACs in 1992... Ok so they gave more than the hospital association and.... I don't know who else (I can't even think of another big health care group right now). Am I the only one who doesn't really care too much about what they did 13 years ago? I was in high school at the time.

I'm just more simple minded and practical than that. I want to know when I go into work tomorrow, how would being an ANA member affect my job and the care I provide to my patients? The answer is clear with CNA. I can even see the obvious applications of belonging to a specialty organization. I just can't see it with ANA. I see a toothless tiger when I think of them.

As far as representing ALL nurses, I thought ANA was an RN only association? I work with LVNs and call them nurses too.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

The CNA sponsored AB 394, enabling legislation for the ratios also placed legal restrictioms on unlicensed assistive personnel. This is the Board of Registered Nursing advisory:

http://www.rn.ca.gov/practice/pdf/npr-b-29.pdf

Up Vote Up Vote ×
No RCTs? Maybe, but we have UAPs everywhere. A rose by any other name.... It's was CNA that put ratios into law specific to RNs.

Scholarships? Good. Even better if it doesn't bring up the old ADN vs BSN as entry to practice thing.:D Ahnold is even putting money into nursing scholarships, despite his disputes with CNA.

Testifying? Good if it gets results, otherwise it's completely wasteful. The new OT laws are an example. It's something that has to be done, but I don't see why state BONs couldn't do it as well.

Third largest healthcare contributor to PACs in 1992... Ok so they gave more than the hospital association and.... I don't know who else (I can't even think of another big health care group right now). Am I the only one who doesn't really care too much about what they did 13 years ago? I was in high school at the time.

I'm just more simple minded and practical than that. I want to know when I go into work tomorrow, how would being an ANA member affect my job and the care I provide to my patients? The answer is clear with CNA. I can even see the obvious applications of belonging to a specialty organization. I just can't see it with ANA. I see a toothless tiger when I think of them.

As far as representing ALL nurses, I thought ANA was an RN only association? I work with LVNs and call them nurses too.

Sorry you feel the way you do. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. That's the great thing about our country, right?

Up Vote Up Vote ×
The CNA sponsored AB 394, enabling legislation for the ratios also placed legal restrictioms on unlicensed assistive personnel. This is the Board of Registered Nursing advisory:

http://www.rn.ca.gov/practice/pdf/npr-b-29.pdf

Ah ... very interesting.

Thank you Spacenurse!

:coollook:

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Critical Care/ICU.

I also put blame on the Boards of Nursing for the selling off of our professional practice to the highest bidder. It is one thing to allow un-licensed assitive personnel to give bed baths, etc. It is quite another to allow them to take over a professional practice, like giving meds. If I decided that I wanted to do brain surgery, and took a 6 week class on the "how to's of doing it", I would think/hope that the AMA and the State Boards of Medicine would put a stop to it. Where is the ANA and the State Boards of Nursing? Why is it OK to dumb down RN profesisonal practice to unlicensed personnel, and not OK to dumb down the practice of medicine? Or for that matter Physical Therapy, or Occupational Therapy?

This is a great post. Thank you Linda.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Cardiac Critical Care, Trauma, Neuro..

The California Nurses Association's self serving actions have done nothing to advanced the profession of nursing. The actions of the CNA only embarrass the professionals it boldy claims to serve.

The politics of the CNA are also alarming. While they did not endorse a political candidate in the 2004 presidential election, in 2000 the CNA actively endorsed Ralph Nader. The CNA also promotes a policy of "Universal Healthcare" otherwise known as socialized medicine. This extremely expensive policy only further alienates those it claims to help by increasing taxes and creating long waiting lists for procedures and visits to specialists.

The California Nurses Associations Executive Director is also NOT A Nurse. Rose Ann DeMoro is a former grocery store checker and Teamster.

For more information visit http://www.onevoice-ourvoice.com and http://www.stopunions.com these websites and your own independant search will confirm what I have already stated.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
The California Nurses Association's self serving actions have done nothing to advanced the profession of nursing.

If by self serving you are referring to self as the CA RNs, then you are only half correct. The ratios that the CNA fought so hard for serve the needs of the patients as well. I provide much safer, caring care to 6 patients on a m/s floor vs 10-12 patients. It's even better now that it's 5:1. I would think the same would hold true for the patient lift teams. Furtermore, both concepts serve both pts and nurses on more than one level. On the basic level, lower pt:nurse ratios protect patients directly; this law also serves nurses because it has brought thousands of nurses to the state of CA, and it is a step towards bringing back/keeping nurses in the hospital setting where they we are desparately needed. The lift teams in theory would cut down on the number of back injuries which would keep nurses working. Again, I could care less how they accomplished this, or what others perceive as their true motives. Bottom line for all the concrete thinkers out there is that fewer patients = better outcomes. Check the studies and you will see that what I say is true.

http://www.icn.ch/matters_rnptratio.htm

NOTE: The study I'd like to post was conducted by JAMA, but in order to post it on here I'd have to purchase it, which I'm not inclined to do.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Add a Comment