Flagstaff Medical Center Nurses voted against union representation by the California Nurses Associations NNOC in an election held earlier this week.
The CNA of course claims that management threatened pro-union staff and otherwise interfered with the fair election process. ULP's have or will be filed by the CNA delaying the certification of the vote therefore not allowing the voice of Flagstaff Nurses to be heard and disrespecting the will of the voters.
The CNA must have thought it had a chance to win. I wonder how much of its members dues money was was wasted on a what you believe was a sure loser? How long will it take for the staff to recover from the anger and resentment created by a union organizing effort?
The first vote was defeated by a 2:1 margin. This vote was defeated by 30 votes. By no means was this considered a sure loser. Yes they thought they had a chance to win. We will see what happens when they try again.
The CNA must have thought it had a chance to win. I wonder how much of its members dues money was was wasted on a what you believe was a sure loser? How long will it take for the staff to recover from the anger and resentment created by a union organizing effort?
Good points. I wonder how the teamwork is on the floor up there now that they've spent the past few weeks getting polarized.
The CNA must have thought it had a chance to win. I wonder how much of its members dues money was was wasted on a what you believe was a sure loser? How long will it take for the staff to recover from the anger and resentment created by a union organizing effort?
Actually I do disagree with CNA's strategy here. I don't think they should focus their efforts on places like Texas and Arizona. I think they focus more on places like Illinois where they do have a better chance of winning and, actually, have won like with Cook County hospital.
Even if they had won in Flagstaff it would have been by a small margin and then we'd probably see the same mess we've seen with Scripps Encinitas.
I think they should build in more friendly states first where there's a less likely chance of infighting getting in the way, build some good contracts, legislation with ratio laws, etc ...
And then, once they have a more solid national base ... maybe go into the tougher states.
This organization is not in full compliance with all applicable standards.
You can read the "Requirements for Improvement"
Go to the right side, click State Arizona
City Flagstaff
Then "Hospitals"
Then "View Online Quality Report"
Apparently working for that hospital is good enough that the majority didn't see a need to vote in a union.
Lizz, you are right. It does make more sense for a union to go into an area where nurses are overworked and underpaid. It's a lot easier to persuade nurses to vote in a union when they feel mistreated and unappreciated.
Lizz, you are right. It does make more sense for a union to go into an area where nurses are overworked and underpaid. It's a lot easier to persuade nurses to vote in a union when they feel mistreated and unappreciated.
Look: don't misinterpret what I am saying. I'm sure there's plenty of overworked and underpaid nurses in Arizona and Texas.
But politically, those are states that don't typically support unions. If you're going to build a national organization it's probably more productive to go into more union friendly states first.
Look: don't misinterpret what I am saying. I'm sure there's plenty of overworked and underpaid nurses in Arizona and Texas.
But politically, those are states that don't typically support unions. If you're going to build a national organization it's probably more productive to go into more union friendly states first.
That's what I'm saying.
:typing
Yes, I am sorry. I do agree that politically, Texans and Arizonans don't support unions as much as other folks. Arizonans are very independant. It's evident in their open carry and CCW laws. They are not likely to bring in unions unless they feel it's needed.
Way to go Arizona!!!! Keep your own voice!!!:balloons: :monkeydance:
News
Advertisement
Nurses say 'no' to union
By LAURA CLYMER
City Editor
Friday, June 23, 2006 12:09 PM CDT
Registered nurses at Flagstaff Medical Center rejected a bid to form a union during a two-day election that ended Thursday night.
By a 242 to 211 vote, nurses opted against representation for the second time in three years. The results are pending certification by the National Labor Relations Board.
"We are pleased the majority of our nurses chose to work directly with the management team and not through a union," FMC president Bill Bradel stated in a press release.
Disappointed union organizers, however, vowed to fight the results.
"We are going to file an objection, and we're going to let the course of the law just handle it," said David Glenn with the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee.
Just a week before the election, nursing union organizers alleged unfair labor practices, accusing hospital administration of intimidating and threatening nurses who supported the union, removing union literature from employee mailboxes and bulletin boards and promising wage increases if the union failed. Hospital administrators denied the charges, saying its management team is complying with the law. An agent with the National Labor Relations Board will investigate the complaint, which could impact the outcome of the election if the charges are found to have merit.
"We knew it was going to be close," Glenn said.
Glenn speculated a late push by the administration worked.
"They did it through intimidation and fear and union-busting meetings," he said.
Nurses who led the union effort contended patient care at FMC was compromised by how the hospital administration staffs units, by a patient records system that is cumbersome and by an unresponsive administration. They also cited concerns over pay and scheduling, and FMC's decision to pull out of a national accrediting agency just before its accreditation was to be stripped over medical record-keeping and health and safety standards issues.
Hospital officials counter that nurse-to-patient ratios meet national standards, the patient records system was selected by a group of healthcare providers, including nurses, and it has many avenues for employees to voice their suggestions or concerns.
Bradel promised to address the issues that led to the election.
"A union drive can cause divisions among staff and is a stressful experience. Regardless of whether our colleagues supported the union or not, we are asking them all to join in beginning the healing process," Bradel said. "As the management team at FMC, we reaffirm our commitment to work with our employees to understand and address the issues that led to this election. During the last week, I personally met with more than 350 nurses. I have heard firsthand their concerns and I am confident that we can address them together as a team."
An effort in 2003 to organize the nurses at Flagstaff Medical Center failed by a nearly 2-to-1 margin. The final vote was 207 to 117 against union representation. That campaign was led by United Nurses United Health Care Employees who waged a "quiet" campaign.
This time, the campaigning by both sides was hardly quiet. Pro-union nurses staged a rally, as did anti-union nurses. Both sides distributed literature and campaigned vigorously.
Both sides also accused the other of using "outside" resources to pursuade eligible voters. Pro-union nurses teamed with the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee for advice. The hospital hired Oliver J. Bell's consulting group for its services at a cost of $148,000, according to Janet Dean, vice president for community affairs. Dean said the hospital spent $200,000 on the campaign three years ago.
According CNA/NNOC literature, the union has a 90 percent election victory rate and represents about65,000 nurses in 40 states.
An estimated 550 registered nurses, which included all full-time, regular part-time and per diem RNs in various nursing care units throughout the hospital, were eligible to vote.
cardiacRN2006, ADN, RN
4,106 Posts
The first vote was defeated by a 2:1 margin. This vote was defeated by 30 votes. By no means was this considered a sure loser. Yes they thought they had a chance to win. We will see what happens when they try again.
Where in Az do you live?