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

pickledpepperRN · May 9, 2005

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.

I did buy it. Here is the summary:

Vol. 288 No. 16, October 23, 2002

Hospital Nurse Staffing and Patient Mortality, Nurse Burnout, and Job Dissatisfaction

Linda H. Aiken, PhD,RN; Sean P. Clarke, PhD,RN; Douglas M. Sloane, PhD; Julie Sochalski, PhD,RN; Jeffrey H. Silber, MD,PhD

JAMA. 2002;288:1987-1993.

Context The worsening hospital nurse shortage and recent California legislation mandating minimum hospital patient-to-nurse ratios demand an understanding of how nurse staffing levels affect patient outcomes and nurse retention in hospital practice.

Objective To determine the association between the patient-to-nurse ratio and patient mortality, failure-to-rescue (deaths following complications) among surgical patients, and factors related to nurse retention.

Design, Setting, and Participants Cross-sectional analyses of linked data from 10 184 staff nurses surveyed, 232 342 general, orthopedic, and vascular surgery patients discharged from the hospital between April 1, 1998, and November 30, 1999, and administrative data from 168 nonfederal adult general hospitals in Pennsylvania.

Main Outcome Measures Risk-adjusted patient mortality and failure-to-rescue within 30 days of admission, and nurse-reported job dissatisfaction and job-related burnout.

Results After adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics (size, teaching status, and technology), each additional patient per nurse was associated with a 7% increase in the likelihood of dying within 30 days of admission and a 7% increase in the odds of failure-to-rescue.

After adjusting for nurse and hospital characteristics, each additional patient per nurse was associated with a 23% increase in the odds of burnout and a 15% increase in the odds of job dissatisfaction.

Conclusions In hospitals with high patient-to-nurse ratios, surgical patients experience higher risk-adjusted 30-day mortality and failure-to-rescue rates, and nurses are more likely to experience burnout and job dissatisfaction.

Author Affiliations: Center for Health Outcomes and Policy Research, School of Nursing (Drs Aiken, Clarke, Sloane, and Sochalski), Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics (Drs Aiken, Clarke, Sochalski, and Silber), Department of Sociology (Dr Aiken), Population Studies Center (Drs Aiken, Sloane, and Sochalski), and Departments of Pediatrics and Anesthesia, School of Medicine (Dr Silber), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; and Center for Outcomes Research, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pa (Dr Silber).

fergus51 · May 10, 2005

Self serving makes me laugh when ALL nurses and patients in California get to benefit from the ratios, not just union ones.

Nancy2 · May 21, 2005

Self serving makes me laugh when ALL nurses and patients in California get to benefit from the ratios, not just union ones.

CNA is definately self serving! Just take a look at http://www.notinourhouse.org. and http://www.stopunions.com to see some of these self serving tactics. Take a look at how they spend the dues money.

Do they ask their members if they want to contribute $10,000 dollars to the LABOR Party? Did their members vote on that one. They lie when the tell you "you are the union"

fergus51 · May 21, 2005

CNA is definately self serving! Just take a look at http://www.notinourhouse.org. and http://www.stopunions.com to see some of these self serving tactics. Take a look at how they spend the dues money.
Do they ask their members if they want to contribute $10,000 dollars to the LABOR Party? Did their members vote on that one. They lie when the tell you "you are the union"

Yes, actually we can decide whether or not to support the political activities of CNA. There are nurses who choose not to for various reasons. Some people have philisophical and religious reasons not to support a union and they are not forced to. I don't know if you've ever worked in a union job or not, but from what I understand that is a national rule.

The self serving comment strikes me as funny because their activities benefit all nurses in California, not just union members. If they only cared about themselves, they would have just put staffing ratios into their contracts, not worked to get them put into legislation.

Nancy2 · May 21, 2005

Yes, actually we can decide whether or not to support the political activities of CNA. There are nurses who choose not to for various reasons. Some people have philisophical and religious reasons not to support a union and they are not forced to. I don't know if you've ever worked in a union job or not, but from what I understand that is a national rule.
The self serving comment strikes me as funny because their activities benefit all nurses in California, not just union members. If they only cared about themselves, they would have just put staffing ratios into their contracts, not worked to get them put into legislation.

So why would the CNA insist on "union security" or "union shop" if they don't mind RNs not paying dues to support them? If it is a choice, why not leave it an open shop for RNs to choose. You can file a religious objection to union dues, but not a political one that I'm aware of. And you must do this in writing by certified mail, then you may opt for the same amount of money as dues to go to a non-religious charity instead of CNA, but you still are forced to pay someone. What about the nurses who just want to keep their hard earned money? NOT AN OPTION IN A "UNION SHOP". So why is CNA insisting on forced union dues. They claim it is for "patient advocacy" I am unable to understand how paying the union money is related to patient advocacy. Frankly, I'm a little insulted that they are insinuating that anyone who doesn't want to pay dues is not a patient advocate. By the way, you still didn't answer my question about whether members get to vote on how their money is spent? Do they?

fergus51 · May 22, 2005

No, members can't vote on how their money is spent anymore than citizens get to vote on how our tax dollars are spent. You get to elect the people who get to decide. It would be pretty impractical to have members vote on how every dollar is spent don't you think? I think you can have a political objection and only pay for union activities not related to politics. One of the nurses I work with pays less because she doesn't want her money to go to political activities. Yes, it involves some paperwork but I don't think it's that big of a deal.

The reason nurses in a union shop can't just choose to keep all their money is because it wouldn't be fair to those who do pay union dues since everyone gets to benefit from the contract. My current hospital voted in CNA a few years ago and before they did, they were one of the lowest paid and most abused bunch in the area. Now the wages are competitive and the staffing is set by the contract. All of the nurses and patients benefit from that, so it would be ridiculous to say that only some nurses should pay for all the union expenses. Unions don't come unless the nurses there vote them in. If the nurses don't want to pay union dues or give money to a charity, they can always vote with their feet.

Sheri257 · May 22, 2005

Every organization is self serving, including the union. I'll agree with the union opponents on that.

But don't tell me that stopunions.com or these other anti-union groups aren't self serving either.

They want to enjoy the benefits of the ratio law and other CNA sponsored legislation without having to pay for it.

Talk about self serving.

:rolleyes:

Sherwood · Jun 24, 2005

Every organization is self serving, including the union. I'll agree with the union opponents on that.
But don't tell me that stopunions.com or these other anti-union groups aren't self serving either.
They want to enjoy the benefits of the ratio law and other CNA sponsored legislation without having to pay for it.
Talk about self serving.
:rolleyes:

How can you give all the credit for what nurses have accomplished entirely to the CNA nurses? How dare you imply that only union nurses fight for nurses rights or patient safety!

Do you truly believe that only nurses who support the California Nurses Assocation are writing our Governor, our Congressman and our State Assembly? The union nurses only represent a small fraction of dedicated, hardworking professionals on the front line of patient care. Just because the California Nurses Association chooses to grab headlines and make a mockery of the hard work and dedication of all the heroes of nursing who choose to work quietly behind the scenes in the support of each other and of our patients.

How can we attract young people into the field of nursing when their perception of nurses are the ones they see yelling and screaming in the streets holding picket signs and drowning out the speeches of our Governor just because we disagree with him. I teach my kids to listen carefully, decide, and then take action without all the self serving drama.

PMHNP10 · Jun 24, 2005

How can you give all the credit for what nurses have accomplished entirely to the CNA nurses? ...Do you truly believe that only nurses who support the California Nurses Assocation are writing our Governor, our Congressman and our State Assembly? Just because the California Nurses Association chooses to grab headlines and make a mockery of the hard work and dedication of all the heroes of nursing who choose to work quietly behind the scenes in the support of each other and of our patients.

Here's an opportunity for me to learn. I wasn't in CA in the late 90s so I thought based upon what I read that it was the lobbying, protesting, palm greasing efforts (or whatever) of the CNA that got the ratios passed through the govt.; and the same entity who questioned the govenor's efforts to halt the ratios this year and ultimately achieved the goal of keeping them active. So how much credit, if any, does the CNA deserve for the passing and upholding of the ratio laws? Was it common knowledge amongst nurses that the CNA was attempting to get the Ratio law passed and they (the CNA) pleaded to every nurse in the state to write their congressperson to tell them the importance of such a law? Or, does the CNA deserve none of the credit for getting the laws passed--i.e. it was the combined letter writing campaign of average Joe and Jane RN that pushed the laws through the legislature? And was it those same Joe and Jane RNs who took Arnold to court to decide the fate of the ratio laws? If so, that's quite amazing that they were able to unite for one cause in a non union manner and accomplish what they did. My hat is off to the individual CA nurses who worked so hard to get the ratios passed. I only wish a whole lot of individual nurses in TX would write their reps. and get the ratio laws passed for TX.

How can we attract young people into the field of nursing when their perception of nurses are the ones they see yelling and screaming in the streets holding picket signs and drowning out the speeches of our Governor just because we disagree with him.

I'm sure a few young people watch the news and see these nurses acting as they are and immediately dismiss nursing as a future profession based solely on that; however, I'd bet that a far more significant reason for the nursing shortage (which is in reality not a shortage of nurses, rather a shortage of nurses willing to work at the bedside) is the working conditions combined with not enough faculty available to educate the hopeful nursing candidates. I hear and read on this board of all kinds of 2, 3, 4+ yr waiting lists to get into a nursing program, so to me it sounds like the image of nursing hasn't adversely affected the interest in nursing as a career until they actually pass boards and start working as a RN at the hospital bedside, at which time the image of nursing is rapidly flushed down the toilet with the assistance of the rude doctors, cannibalistic fellow nurses, profit driven administration, unsafe working conditions, and disrespectful patients. Of course this is JMHO.

fergus51 · Jun 24, 2005

I don't think it was ONLY CNA nurses that got the ratios into law, but let's face it, they were the primary reason, the most vocal group and they are the only ones taking Ahnold to court to maintain them.

I don't know any non-union group that does as much as CNA does on a practical level like with the ratios. If anyone does, maybe they could post a link so all nurses who are interested in a non-union, but still organized group could join?

Sheri257 · Jun 26, 2005

How can you give all the credit for what nurses have accomplished entirely to the CNA nurses? How dare you imply that only union nurses fight for nurses rights or patient safety!

I'm really getting tired of this. Again, this is a cheap shot and totally out of context. If you take another quote of mine out of context, I will report it to the moderators.

Let's review what I said again since you can't seem to read or, at least, comprehend what you are reading.

Every organization is self serving, including the union. I'll agree with the union opponents on that.
But don't tell me that stopunions.com or these other anti-union groups aren't self serving either.
They want to enjoy the benefits of the ratio law and other CNA sponsored legislation without having to pay for it.
Talk about self serving.

I was referring to the RATIO LAW which CNA deserves full credit for. Have non-union nurses paid to defend the ratio law in court multiple times? NO.

If CNA hadn't hired the lawyers and paid for that litigation multiple times there would be no ratio law today.

No CNA = No Ratio Law.

:angryfire

Geeg · Jul 2, 2005

CNA has been successful in getting the ratio law passed in California. The ANA has more money and membership and has failed to accomplish anything close to the magnitude that CNA has accomplished.