The neutrality agreement the CNA and the SEIU obtained between Tenet Healthcare and the SEIU has been ruled as "Illegal Assistance to Unions" by the National Labor Relations Board. This precident was set after a suit filed by a Los Angeles area RN from Whittier Hospital Medical Center.
The Hospital has formally anounced that they will no longer recognize the CNA as the bargaining agent for the Registered Nurses at that facility. Talks with the SEIU have ended. The CNA has also agreed to REFUND union dues collected under this illegal agreement.
This affects Tenet and former Tenet employees who may have had dues collected illegally under this "Neutrality Agreement". If your hospital voted in the CNA and/or the SEIU under this agreement and the union won but not by a majority of the bargaining unit you may be able to have the results of the election overturned and your unlawfully collected dues refunded to you.
Specializes in Cardiac Critical Care, Trauma, Neuro..
CNA. like most organizaions, cannot support itself on voluntary contributions. Why? Because it takes money to run any organization, and cheap people like you, who want something for nothing, will not support it unless you have to. You complain, make haughty statements about, "NOT WANTING MY MONEY TO GO FOR POLITICS OR STRIKE FUNDS!!!" But as I just stated, I don't see you turning down the raises, better benefits, pensions, and better staffing ratios. Put your money where your mouth is and turn it down/give back all that has been won for you by CNA, and then whine about dues, etc. Then, and only then, will your complaints have an ounce of credibity.
Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN
Spokane, WA
Again with the name calling and accusations.
For the record, I am a staff Critical-Care Nurse and Trauma Clinician. I am not now or have any plans in the future to pursue my CRNA. I work by the hour and punch a timeclock.
I lead a successful campaign at my hospital to defeat the CNA. So, yes we chose to forego any perceived bebefits" of CNA forced "membership". We chose to rely on our known strengths as nurses and the power of our profession. It works for us here and it could work for you if you wanted it to.
We refuse to negotiate from the postion that we as college educated professional nurses are weak and do not have a voice. I am sorry that you and so many here do not believe enough in yourselves and your collegues to make it work for you.
For the record, I am a staff Critical-Care Nurse and Trauma Clinician. I am not now or have any plans in the future to pursue my CRNA. I work by the hour and punch a timeclock.
I lead a successful campaign at my hospital to defeat the CNA. So, yes we chose to forego any perceived bebefits" of CNA forced "membership". We chose to rely on our known strengths as nurses and the power of our profession. It works for us here and it could work for you if you wanted it to.
We refuse to negotiate from the postion that we as college educated professional nurses are weak and do not have a voice. I am sorry that you and so many here do not believe enough in yourselves and your collegues to make it work for you.
Sherwood, R.N., CCRN
This has been a very interesting thread. Thanks for all who are posting.
I think the answer to why we don't refuse to abide by the 5:1 patient ratio or any other benefits supposedly won by the CNA is because we can't - they are the law of the land. I can't take more patients than 5 - ain't gonna happen. So the idea that because I don't believe in being forced to give MY money to another party with whom I don't agree and who is using my money for things I am morally appalled by, that I then have to forfeit any benefits makes no sense. And in reality - I think it wasn't only CNA that won those benefits but the fact that nurses have been standing up and not taking it any more and some have opted out of nursing, creating a shortage, putting hospitals over a barrel . . . . maybe these benefits would have been won anyway.
Maybe in the metaphorical sense I could say I'd give them up . . . but in reality you can't.
How about those great changes that have been negotiated by non-union nurses who simply stood their ground, as individuals, and made changes that benefit all the nurses? Should pro-union nurses refuse to benefit because a non-union person won the benefits?
I don't think those are valid arguments.
There are actually places where you can opt out of a union and not pay dues.
Specializes in Cardiac Critical Care, Trauma, Neuro..
This has been a very interesting thread. Thanks for all who are posting.
I think the answer to why we don't refuse to abide by the 5:1 patient ratio or any other benefits supposedly won by the CNA is because we can't - they are the law of the land. I can't take more patients than 5 - ain't gonna happen. So the idea that because I don't believe in being forced to give MY money to another party with whom I don't agree and who is using my money for things I am morally appalled by, that I then have to forfeit any benefits makes no sense. And in reality - I think it wasn't only CNA that won those benefits but the fact that nurses have been standing up and not taking it any more and some have opted out of nursing, creating a shortage, putting hospitals over a barrel . . . . maybe these benefits would have been won anyway.
Maybe in the metaphorical sense I could say I'd give them up . . . but in reality you can't.
How about those great changes that have been negotiated by non-union nurses who simply stood their ground, as individuals, and made changes that benefit all the nurses? Should pro-union nurses refuse to benefit because a non-union person won the benefits?
I don't think those are valid arguments.
There are actually places where you can opt out of a union and not pay dues.
steph
Thank you so much Steph!
You made a point I was missing. Just because the CNA with their unprofessional conduct makes the press, does not mean they are the ones who deserve the credit for where nursing is today. Non-union nurses far outnumber union nurses everywhere. My own hospital is an example, we voted AGAINST CNA representation. When the dust settled our raises beat the local hospitals who voted in the CNA.
The voice of professional non-union nursing organizations have been left out of this thread and for that I apologize.
You are also right about places you can opt out of union membership AND not pay dues. They are the "Right to Work States". California is not one of them. In California you can opt out of membership but you still must pay dues, so much for freedom of choice huh? I would love to see legislation on making it the law in California. How many nurses would opt out of CNA membership then?
I think you can find a list of Right to Work states at http://www.NRTW.org. This site and organization helps so many people who suffer when unions rule the roost or are attempting to overtake their workplace.
This has been a very interesting thread. Thanks for all who are posting.
I think the answer to why we don't refuse to abide by the 5:1 patient ratio or any other benefits supposedly won by the CNA is because we can't - they are the law of the land. I can't take more patients than 5 - ain't gonna happen. So the idea that because I don't believe in being forced to give MY money to another party with whom I don't agree and who is using my money for things I am morally appalled by, that I then have to forfeit any benefits makes no sense. And in reality - I think it wasn't only CNA that won those benefits but the fact that nurses have been standing up and not taking it any more and some have opted out of nursing, creating a shortage, putting hospitals over a barrel . . . . maybe these benefits would have been won anyway.
Maybe in the metaphorical sense I could say I'd give them up . . . but in reality you can't.
How about those great changes that have been negotiated by non-union nurses who simply stood their ground, as individuals, and made changes that benefit all the nurses? Should pro-union nurses refuse to benefit because a non-union person won the benefits?
I don't think those are valid arguments.
There are actually places where you can opt out of a union and not pay dues.
steph
When I shop at Walmart, I can't tell them how to spend thier profit. I can't opt out of the part that goes to the Republican party even though I despise all that party stands for. I can't withold the money from my monthly bills that support politics I don't agree with. I AM FORCED to support ideas and agendas I despise. At least with the CNA I have a right to vote. I DO have a voice on where the money is spent. CNA leaders are VOTED in. Do I have any say on who the phone company supports, do I have any say on how they spend thier money on political causes? Why not a "Right to be a thoughtful consumer" state law. Thereby I can deduct from my Walmart bill, the amount of money they spend on supporting politics I despise. Synical names like "right to work" are simply ways of stiffling free speech and view points you may oppose. Unions are democracies. Join in and vote. But dont think Master Card will allow you to deduct from your bills the amount of money they sent to George Bush in the last election.
When I shop at Walmart, I can't tell them how to spend thier profit. I can't opt out of the part that goes to the Republican party even though I despise all that party stands for. I can't withold the money from my monthly bills that support politics I don't agree with. I AM FORCED to support ideas and agendas I despise. At least with the CNA I have a right to vote. I DO have a voice on where the money is spent. CNA leaders are VOTED in. Do I have any say on who the phone company supports, do I have any say on how they spend thier money on political causes? Why not a "Right to be a thoughtful consumer" state law. Thereby I can deduct from my Walmart bill, the amount of money they spend on supporting politics I despise. Synical names like "right to work" are simply ways of stiffling free speech and view points you may oppose. Unions are democracies. Join in and vote. But dont think Master Card will allow you to deduct from your bills the amount of money they sent to George Bush in the last election.
You can stop shopping at Walmart and therefore stop supporting them. You are not forced to shop there. You have many alternatives in which to do your shopping, so that argument isn't logical.
You can also choose a phone company based on how they run their business and find one you agree with. Phone companies now run the gamut from AT&T which supports liberal causes to one that supports conservative causes (can't remember the name - it is a smaller company with great rates).
You don't have to choose Mastercard - there are plenty of credit card companies out there and you even have a choice NOT to have a credit card, which is probably a good idea anyway.
The only real example is our federal and state income tax - there you would have a point. But we have a choice to vote or to move where the atmosphere is more to you liking. Some people recently posted about wanting to move to California and live in a more liberal city than they live in now. There are many businesses that left California due to high tax rates and huge increases in Workman's Comp prices. Therefore in reality you can move if you don't like where you live. But, in reality you will never be able to control where ALL your taxes go. It is too intricate.
I don't think "right to work" is a way to stifle free speech . .in fact if you read the stories on NRTW.org you will see that unions actually have been known to threaten people's free speech (I'm not saying all unions do this).
In my opinion, I should be able to make a choice about whether to join a union or not - and I can go look for another job if one is voted in, that is true.
I truly think the tide has shifted in nursing and it is a widespread change, not necessarily tied to unions. I see individual nurses just not being willing to be treated badly. And since hospitals are hurting for nurses, they are less willing to cut their own throats.
In my hospital, we were allowed to have a union (SEIU) come up and try to woo us . . . we had meetings at the hospital in the boardroom, where the bigwigs get to meet. We ended up voting it down by a majority. And we have changed things for the better at our hospital. The nurses and the managers and the DON and the CFO . . . .
EVERY union collects union dues from its members, including ANA. Strike fund money pays nurse if they have to go out on strike. Just for the record, HOSPITALS, force the nurse to go on strike, by refusing to negotiate in good faith. Just for the record, I do not live in California any more (I married someone who was active duty Air Force, and moved to Washington State), I do not belong to CNA, however, I lived, worked, and went to school in Southern California. Why do I support unions? Because it is the only tool that the little guy has to recieve just compensation, benefits, and adress workplace concerns. I lived and worked in Southern California at a time when Southern California was notoriously anti union. I lived through the nursing staff having their 12 hour shifts pay reduced because of the allegations that ICU staff nurses worked 36 hours a week, but got paid for 40. We had that taken away from us, and were made to work for striaght pay the last 4 hours of our shift. We had absolutely no recourse, because we had no union contract.
I have unfortunately experienced the unpleasantness of having a union represent the nurses, that was totally ineffective, powerless, and actually made it worse to have a union, than not have one. You should get down on your knees that you have a union that actually does something, instead of only collecting dues. You shuold come up her to Wadshington State, and see what the nurses have to put up with from the hospital administration, management the physicians, etc, and your only recourse is worthless "grievances", and a kangaroo court of hospital administrators and the union reps.
The nurse here in Spokane, have not gotten a raise in about ten years. The "raises" that the union negotiated for us, was always eaten up in increased medical benefits costs. Their last contract that was negotiated gave the nurse a 5% raise, but increased the cost of medical benefits 20%. As the nurses came in to vote on the contract, they put in their paperwork to get out of WSNA.
Don't want your money to go into a strike fund and politics? How nice. What other weapon do the nurses have to get their message across, and how much should they take before enough is enough? How do you expect CNA to influence politics with nurse and patient friendly legislation if they don't have dues money to fund it?
Don't want to get involved in the dirty end of life as a staff nurse? How nice. As you go off into the sunset into your CRNA career that you have control over, the rest of the nurses are facing miserable working conditions, fighting for raises and rewards for their years of hard work, and face the senior years with broken bodies and measly pensions, from all the backbreaking years that they endured as staff nurses.
All the while you collect your six figure salary as a CRNA, in the nice OR, or your private practice office. It is well known the amount of money CRNA's make, and you have the personal negotiating power that staff nurses don't. Not to mention the far nicer quality of life that CRNA's have over staff nurses. Which by the way, is why nurses are flocking to CRNA programs to get out of bed side nursing. Or any other way that they can get out.
They are powerless without a strong union, as the nurses are here in Spokane with WSNA have found out. I left bedside nursing four years ago, and I exclusively do Legal Nurse Consulting, partly due to the miserable working conditions, pay, and benefits that exist in Spokane. And lets not forget, the awful "representation" by the WAshington State Nursing Association. I will tell you what. How about you trade CNA for WSNA, and see how you like their representation. You all can go back to 10 patient assignments on the med surg floors, minus 15% wage increases, increases in your medical benefits, physicians who still think that "MD" stands for "mighty deity", a state board of nursing that gave their "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval", to "medication aides", in nursing homes and assisted living facilities. These individuals dont't even have to have a HS diploma, and they are allowed to pass meds.
Don't want to pay union dues? Fine. Then forfeit the raises that CNA has gotten for you, the improved pension plan, medical benefits, and last but not least, you can start to take 10 patients at work and the union nurses will get 5. But you don't want to, do you. And the patient ratios will not apply to you when you are a CRNA collecting your six figure salary will it? But the staff nurses will be left with it. Big business wants to run the country. It takes alot of money to fight them. Money doesn't grow on trees. If you want positve work place changes, it takes money. And if it comes out of union dues, so be it. EVERYONE BENEFITS, even you.
CNA. like most organizaions, cannot support itself on voluntary contributions. Why? Because it takes money to run any organization, and cheap people like you, who want something for nothing, will not support it unless you have to. You complain, make haughty statements about, "NOT WANTING MY MONEY TO GO FOR POLITICS OR STRIKE FUNDS!!!" But as I just stated, I don't see you turning down the raises, better benefits, pensions, and better staffing ratios. Put your money where your mouth is and turn it down/give back all that has been won for you by CNA, and then whine about dues, etc. Then, and only then, will your complaints have an ounce of credibity.
Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN
Spokane, WA
I looked at the union financials for CNA ( http://www.stopunions.com )(flyer page)and did some calculations, which figure that less than $2.00 a year per RN is spent on negotialting contracts. Maybe if that were a dues option for the RNs who don't want to be involved with CNA, but "benefit" from the contracts, there would be less greif around dues. There are plenty of nurses that don't want to contribute to the disgusting displays of unions and their leftist politics, but 2 bucks a year for a contract isn't too bad.
What do you think of this as a compromise? Think the "voted in" leaders would agree to let people only pay for what they get? After all if they pay for what they get, then they could choose the rest without being called "cheap" or "free riders", right?
I looked at the union financials for CNA ( http://www.stopunions.com )(flyer page)and did some calculations, which figure that less than $2.00 a year per RN is spent on negotialting contracts. Maybe if that were a dues option for the RNs who don't want to be involved with CNA, but "benefit" from the contracts, there would be less greif around dues. There are plenty of nurses that don't want to contribute to the disgusting displays of unions and their leftist politics, but 2 bucks a year for a contract isn't too bad.
What do you think of this as a compromise? Think the "voted in" leaders would agree to let people only pay for what they get? After all if they pay for what they get, then they could choose the rest without being called "cheap" or "free riders", right?
Here's where I think we have some agreement. I don't know if the cost would be as little as $2 a year. It would probably depend on how many RN's are in the facility and the specific contract issues, when tend to vary by facility. More RN's defraying the cost would make it cheaper per individual than other facilities with less RN's ... and that might be controversial in and of itself.
But I wouldn't have a problem with it. That does sound like a reasonable compromise. If you don't like the politics of Ralph Nadar or whatever then I agree that you shouldn't have to pay for it.
However, if the politics involves more non-partisan improvement of basic working conditions like the ratio law, which does benefit RN's regardless of political party, then I think the members should pay for it. The ratio law, for example, saves money on having to re-negotiate those types of provisions in every contract.
I also wouldn't have a problem with union membership being voluntary, as long as non-union RN's wouldn't benefit from the contract. But I also think the law should be changed to allow CNA to represent RN's without having to get a majority vote.
If 40 percent of the RN's want CNA representation in their facility they should be able to get it. If you're going to make unions more voluntary then it should be voluntary across the board.
Whether all of this is practical is another matter. Changing the laws is never easy. And I wonder if a different set of rules for some RN's and not others would actually work. And, of course, there would probably be a ton of controversy over what the costs and dues would be.
But I wouldn't be opposed to the concept, at least in theory.
It is about what the CNA will do with the money. Like I said before I will gladly give money to or pay for something I decide on. The CNA's strike fund and politics is not what I want my money going to. I do not want a penny of my money supporting the politics of the CNA.
Why did you not answer my question about the "pay your dues or lose your job clause" demanded by the union? The union security clause is one of many issues I bring up yet you do not address those.
Why can't the CNA support it self on a voluntary membership basis? Because their will NEVER be enough Nurses who will voluntarily support the actions and the politics of the CNA. It is flat out not worth it. The CNA must rely on forced payment of union dues because that is the only way will profit.
What is your point? you are NOT in CNA by your own admission, so where is your complaint? Why not join CNA and be a positive voice for change. CNA is run as a democracy if you have more votes then you become president. Obviously your viewpoint has no support at all. So you stand outside enjoying the ratios and wages won by CNA nurses, and throw stones at us. CNA IS NURSES. Your are tearing down those in a profession you claim to support.
This has been a very interesting thread. Thanks for all who are posting.
I think the answer to why we don't refuse to abide by the 5:1 patient ratio or any other benefits supposedly won by the CNA is because we can't - they are the law of the land. I can't take more patients than 5 - ain't gonna happen. So the idea that because I don't believe in being forced to give MY money to another party with whom I don't agree and who is using my money for things I am morally appalled by, that I then have to forfeit any benefits makes no sense. And in reality - I think it wasn't only CNA that won those benefits but the fact that nurses have been standing up and not taking it any more and some have opted out of nursing, creating a shortage, putting hospitals over a barrel . . . . maybe these benefits would have been won anyway.
Maybe in the metaphorical sense I could say I'd give them up . . . but in reality you can't.
How about those great changes that have been negotiated by non-union nurses who simply stood their ground, as individuals, and made changes that benefit all the nurses? Should pro-union nurses refuse to benefit because a non-union person won the benefits?
I don't think those are valid arguments.
There are actually places where you can opt out of a union and not pay dues.
steph
Of course you can give up the ratios. You can move to Louisianna or Mississippi. There you will be free of unions for the most part, and enjoy the benefits and wages of nurses who band together without a union. Or will you just stay where you are? I guess it really is about the money. All nurses in California benefit from wages and benefits won by CNA, as hospitals who have no union are forced to keep pace with union hospitals. So nonunion nurses get a free ride in this state.
"Of course you can give up the ratios. You can move to Louisianna or Mississippi. There you will be free of unions for the most part, and enjoy the benefits and wages of nurses who band together without a union. Or will you just stay where you are? I guess it really is about the money."
Can you give us an example of this compared to a union hospital in your state????
Oh, and what exactly happens WHEN you refuse to take more than 5 patients??? Does someone else do it, do you get written up, do they bring in more help???
What is your point? you are NOT in CNA by your own admission, so where is your complaint? Why not join CNA and be a positive voice for change. CNA is run as a democracy if you have more votes then you become president. Obviously your viewpoint has no support at all. So you stand outside enjoying the ratios and wages won by CNA nurses, and throw stones at us. CNA IS NURSES. Your are tearing down those in a profession you claim to support.
As with your Walmart analogy, your statement that there is NO support at all for the poster's viewpoint is wrong. Just on this little old thread there is support. And CNA is not "NURSES" if that definition means all nurses. It is some nurses. And not the majority of nurses in CA by a long shot.
And I still say the tide has turned where nursing has more power due to many things and not just the union. Women and men are not sacrificing their lives for their jobs anymore - they won't put up with the status quo - I know many strong-willed nurses who WILL NOT do mandatory overtime and that was thrown out at our hospital years ago. Maybe CNA is just capitalizing on the fact that women and men got mad and won't take it anymore. Not that it is wrong to capitalize on it - just that this whole change of attitude is not due just to union representation.
And some of us just philosophically disagree with being forced to join a union.
What is your point? you are NOT in CNA by your own admission, so where is your complaint? Why not join CNA and be a positive voice for change. CNA is run as a democracy if you have more votes then you become president. Obviously your viewpoint has no support at all. So you stand outside enjoying the ratios and wages won by CNA nurses, and throw stones at us. CNA IS NURSES. Your are tearing down those in a profession you claim to support.
CNA is a MINORITY of nurses in California. CNA members are not voting on the decisions that CNA makes with the money collected. It is not a DEMOCRACY it is a REPUBLIC. Decisions are made by people who are voted in.The voter turnout for their elections is probably as sad as the voter turnout for many things if not worse!
Disagreeing with unionism is not the same as not supporting our profession. We simply have different views on what it means to support our profession. CNA did not single handedly get staffing ratios in California, although they were greatly involved. Some of us (yes even RNs) think the ratios are too strict with the "AT ALL Times" thing. I should know if I can handle watching out for my coworker's patients while she uses the bathroom and not have that legislated for me. I believe in less goverment not more. I don't think all of my nursing decisions and judgement should be legislated.
You are obviously passionate about this CNA UNION and that is fine for you, but again I should be able to use my judgement as to whether or not it is what I want in my professional life and NOT have it mandated to me that I belong to an organization that I do not agree with!
Do you really think that is the way we should live? If so, are you prepared to accept forced membership into a right wing conservative union if a majority of your coworkers voted it in and pay them 80 dollars a month. Some of that money going to lobby overturning Roe vs. Wade?
Think about it...what goes around eventually comes around.
I think we should all choose our own politics and not be forced to support financially what we do not support philisophically. Does CNA respect my right to choose....NO!
Sherwood
223 Posts
Again with the name calling and accusations.
For the record, I am a staff Critical-Care Nurse and Trauma Clinician. I am not now or have any plans in the future to pursue my CRNA. I work by the hour and punch a timeclock.
I lead a successful campaign at my hospital to defeat the CNA. So, yes we chose to forego any perceived bebefits" of CNA forced "membership". We chose to rely on our known strengths as nurses and the power of our profession. It works for us here and it could work for you if you wanted it to.
We refuse to negotiate from the postion that we as college educated professional nurses are weak and do not have a voice. I am sorry that you and so many here do not believe enough in yourselves and your collegues to make it work for you.
Sherwood, R.N., CCRN