CNA Un-Truths

Nurses Union

Published

before you decide to believe everything the unions are telling you, take the time to speak with some of the employees who are working for facilities that recently voted the union in.

you may be just as surprised as they were about just how many important issues the union considers "negotiable".

before you cast a vote based on verbal promises, ask to see their promises in writing. as you start to hear the excuses flow, consider why you are not receiving a simple "sure, no problem" from the union.

the following will be an ever growing list of "untruths" the unions use to manipulate employees into voting for them, or worse yet, not voting at all.

why are they less than honest with us? simple, they stand to make large sums of money from mandatory pre-tax dues (read the math). they have always been able to count on employees who don't "have the time" to investigate their statements.

untruth

"you will have a voice"

this is absolutely false! under a union contract and as defined by nlrb rules, you will not be able to directly discuss with anyone in administration or management staff anything that relates to hours (schedules, overtime, call-ins, etc.) and terms and conditions of employment. to do so, you must go through your "shop steward" or union representative who after the union wins will have sole possession of your voice. under a union contract, you must follow the written agreement to the letter without much recourse.

untruth

"you only need to vote if you want the union."

this is absolutely untrue! if you do not vote you have actually helped the union just as much as someone who voted yes (read the math). you must voice your opinion by voting.

untruth

"your bonuses will not be affected."

this is negotiable! there is no guarantee you will continue to collect bonuses under the union; there is actually a high probability you will no longer receive your bonuses.

untruth

"you will receive a 7% increase in pay for the

next 2 years."

the unions can, and probably will, take 3% for "economic improvements" after union dues, this will leave you with less than the 4% you could have received without a union.

untruth

"your schedule will not be affected."

are you one of those employees who has been working a set schedule for years? if so, prepare for the high possibility that will change. unions have historically forced employees to rotate weekend and holidays, regardless of previously agreed upon arrangements. no more "working it out" with your co-workers.

untruth

"unions will provide more staff."

there is a national nurse shortage that the unions can do nothing about. the unions do not have a magical factory full of nurses just waiting for the hospital to become unionized. in reality, the unions frequently have the opposite effect since many quality nurses will not even apply at unionized facilities.

untruth

"voting the unions in will make a statement to the hospital and its management."

don't be fooled, the hospital and its management will not have their incomes and careers influenced by the unions, only you will (read the math).. any additional costs incurred (i.e. payroll increases to fund union dues) will eventually be passed down to our customers, the patients.

untruth

"the union will provide me with a pension."

the unions will not be providing pensions for employees. their one and only motivation is to increase their membership and dues (read the math).. they are not some human rights organization attempting to make the world a better place.

Just here to educate nurses on the evils of unionization, nothing more, nothing less. As far as my postings of anti union information, I could say the same with regard to all of the pro union "clap trap" that you and your buddies are fond of posting from all of your pro union sources. Not going away. Put me on ignore. Going to continue to espouse the anti nursing union viewpoint.

No, actually, as long as you continue to post obviously false mis-information, I think I'll continue to be around to refute it.

In my last comment I clearly established that one of the major points in your posting was factually false. Do you have a response to that, or do you just ignore that information? I'd be deeply concerned about trusting my health to a medical practitioner who had a habit of ignoring information that didn't fit their preconceptions. It would be as if, once you had decided what the patient's diagnosis was, you refused to acknowledge or accept any lab work that didn't fit that diagnosis. It's an unhealthy habit of mind.

I really don't care about who you would or would not trustto handle your healthcare needs. And who are you to talk about my practice as you don't even know me? That gets pretty close to slander.... You should rethink what you post about others abilities in their chosen fields. So now if I don't agree with you then i am poor practitioner? I would look to your own practice and not others.

I really don't care about who you would or would not trustto handle your healthcare needs. And who are you to talk about my practice as you don't even know me? That gets pretty close to slander.... You should rethink what you post about others abilities in their chosen fields. So now if I don't agree with you then i am poor practitioner? I would look to your own practice and not others.

You seem to also have a habit of distorting what others say, along with the rest of reality. I said nothing about your practice as such - but I did point out that you have an obvious tendancy to ignore facts when they don't match your beliefs and I pointed out that someone who has such a habit might tend to do it in other areas as well - and why one should be concerned about that. Sort of like the habit of resorting to anger when you are questioned rather than presenting facts to back up your postion. But just exchanging insults with you is a silly way to spend time and lowers the tone, especially for those of us who are doing it on our own time. So I think I've said enough for this thread and will just wait for your next new post to continue pointing out the errors in fact.

Specializes in Critical care, tele, Medical-Surgical.

The original post stated, "The unions can, and probably will, take 3% for "economic improvements" After union dues, this will leave you with less than the 4% you could have received without a union."

Since the title is about CNA please provide proof. That statement is untrue.

Regarding a voice nicurn001 explained that in these times it is rare for an individual nurse to have a voice.

WE have a voice. WE meet together and present recommendations regarding patient care to management. The contract they agreed to requires them to respond in writing within a defined time.

They generally don't put silly statements in writing as they will verbally.

So in that way we get new equipment that works, no longer are ordered to float to areas where we are not competent, and improve staffing.

Specializes in being a Credible Source.

In these parts, the unionized Kaiser nurses are - by far - the best paid and have the best benefits (defined benefit pension, even)... oh, an no call-offs. Next in line? That would be the unionized UC nurses. Next? That would be the unionized CHW workers.

That nasty, evil union.

Interestingly, turnover at Kaiser and UC is very low.

Bad union.

It would be so much better if they were all at-will employees who could be terminated for... oh yeah, no reason at all.

Unions are good for nurses and CNA's. They insure that corporate greed doesn't get in the way of patient and employee safety & security.

Specializes in Liver, lung and kidney transplants.

Deaf PICUPNP

I am chair of the Illinois nurses assoc at a large university hospital. Yes it is a union, but we are a close unit and all reps are in the hospital. Right now we are under assault by CNA to overtake our union with lots of promises of higher wages and better benefits. I believe they promise big and deliver little, do you know more or where I can find facts about this association, My members are falling for it.

Specializes in Liver, lung and kidney transplants.

I totally believe in our union, but I do not want CNA to come in and force themselves upon us. Of course there would have to be a unanimous vote, but I believe they promise more than they can deliver. A neighboring hospital that switched to them a few years ago have been without a contract for 8 months, perhaps they should direct their energy towards them!

Specializes in being a Credible Source.

You have nothing to fear, livernrs. If your members are happy with what you have then there's no need to make a change. As you said, it's a matter that will be decided by the membership.

As to what CNA can deliver, nobody really knows. The CNA hospitals in this region of California, however, do very, very well by their nurses.

Specializes in Psych , Peds ,Nicu.

livernrs as I know little of what you are talking of I googled what I could and found this :-

“I think UCMC hospitals are very typical, and a prime example of what’s happening now, especially in these large, rich and powerful employers, says Jill Furillo, the lead contract official with National Nurses United. (NNU comprises recently merged California Nurses Association/NNOC, the United American Nurses, which included the Illinois Nurses Association that originally organized UCMC, and other state groups.) "

Could you clarify if INA is affiliated to United American Nurses , if so I don't quite understand what your concern is As CNA is an affiliate of NNU as are you if the INA is affiliated to UAM . Sorry for the spagetti soup of initials but hpefully you can follow it

Specializes in Liver, lung and kidney transplants.

INA is affiliated with UAN. There was a so called Vote/takeover by NNU. We believe the vote is not valid and have a lawsuit against them. Being affiliated (which is voluntary) does not mean that we must go along with NNU We could affiliate with another institution, but it is a difficult process. So publicly that is all I really want to say about it.

INA is affiliated with UAN. There was a so called Vote/takeover by NNU. We believe the vote is not valid and have a lawsuit against them. Being affiliated (which is voluntary) does not mean that we must go along with NNU We could affiliate with another institution, but it is a difficult process. So publicly that is all I really want to say about it.

Or to tell it a slightly different way:

Calling it a takeover is certainly questionable. Three organizations - UAN, Massachusetts Nurses Assn (MNA) and CNA/NNOC all sat down over a period of months and negotiated the process of coming together to form the new organization.

When the former president of UAN - who had originally favored the joining of UAN into NNU - realized that she was not going to be the sole leader of the new organization, she changed her mind and got a few other people (including INA leadership) to go along with her in refusing to show up for the vote, hoping to prevent a quorum of the UAN board. They knew they would lose a vote, so tried to prevent the vote from happening by refusing to attend, even though they had all traveled to Florida for the meeting at their members' expense. Whether there was a valid quorum or not may be slightly subject to dispute, but it is clear that those voting represented something like 80% of the UAN membership and the lawsuit mentioned is having no success and not likely to have any. Though it surely will eat up more of the members' dues money.

+ Add a Comment