CNA's Union-Busting in Ohio-An Open Letter

Nurses Union

Published

this week, nearly 8,000 nurses and other healthcare workers in ohio saw their dreams of forming a union derailed after the california nurses association (cna) flooded the state with hostile organizers and bombarded workers with wildly false and misleading leaflets and phone calls urging them to vote against the union.

for three years the workers joined with service employees international union (seiu) members, leaders and staff to form their union. they sent letters to catholic healthcare partners (chp) officials, mobilized community support, campaigned for fair organizing rules, and signed petitions saying they wanted to unite in seiu. the effort resulted in ground rules agreed to by both the workers and chp that were designed to put the interests of workers first—not the union or employer. they called for quick elections without delays, equal access to information from both sides, and guidelines to ensure honest discourse.

because of the union-busting onslaught by cna, the ethical, fair and democratic elections scheduled for today and friday at nine (chp) hospitals in ohio have been suspended.

the following is an open letter from those os us nurses who were denied the chance to unite this week for better jobs and healthcare to rose ann demoro, executive director of the california nurses association:

march 12, 2008

dear rose ann demoro,

it’s hard for us to imagine how someone who calls herself a labor leader could purposely do what you have done to us and our families. you don’t know any of us. you have never been to our homes or met our children. you have never visited us on our shifts, or walked in our shoes. you don’t know a thing a bout the struggle that brought us to the verge of our dream to have a union. and yet without talking to a single one of us you send your bullying staff to come in and spread terrible lies for no other reason than to destroy what we worked so hard to build.

for three years we have worked with seiu members, leaders and staff to form our union. we sent letters to hospital officials and mobilized community support for fair organizing rules. seiu has supported and encouraged us through some very hard times, and helped us stand up for ourselves. we are caregivers—registered nurses and respiratory therapists, dietary and housekeeping staff, lab techs and other employees. seiu helped us understand how we could do more by speaking with one voice and standing together for our families and our patients. seiu respected our intelligence and our ability to make our own decisions.

you say you stand for democracy. but then you come in with a goal of destroying our campaign without ever asking us what we think about seiu and our agreement for fair election ground rules—ground rules we now understand you have made use of many times in california.

you say you stand for justice. but then you deny us our opportunity for a fair vote free of misleading propaganda and scare tactics.

our efforts to unite for better jobs and health care were not a secret. at any time during those three years you could have come and presented your union, compared yourself to seiu, and asked us to make a choice. but you didn’t. so it is obvious to us that your sole intention was to destroy what we have built. what kind of organization sets out to destroy the efforts of the very people you claim to stand for, and then tries to pretend it’s a moral cause?

here in ohio, union organizers and representatives don’t behave the way yours do. they show respect for hard-working people. we have read all the words about how you try to justify this, but when compared to the needs of our families and the needs of our patients, they show a complete disregard for basic fairness and decency. you have brought harm to thousands of workers and families in ohio, and you should be ashamed of what you have done.

signed,

linda kirby, rn

mercy anderson

anderson township, oh

sue koch

er tech

mercy western hills

cincinnati, oh

barbara matlie, rn

mercy western hills

cincinnati, oh

michaela silver, rcp

springfield regional medical center

springfield, oh

diana stamler, rn

mercy fairfield

fairfield, oh

sally baker, rn

springfield regional medical center

springfield, oh

mary ann wolf,

lead cook

mercy anderson

anderson township, oh

peggy vaughn, rn

mercy western hills

cincinnati, oh

sue allen, rn

springfield regional medical center

springfield, oh

lorie compton, rcp

mercy memorial hospital

urbana, oh

colleen gresham, rn

mercy mt. airy

cincinnati, oh

betty white, mlt

mercy fairfield

fairfield, oh

susan home, rn

mercy mt. airy

cincinnati, oh

alecia davis, rn

springfield regional medical center

springfield, oh

marianne heider, rn

mercy western hills

cincinnati, oh

since when is no union better than any union?

ah, the problem lies in your choice of question. why should rns have to choose between seiu acting as a company union vs. "no union" when there are unions out there that actually reject seiu's partnership nonsense and build genuine, collective rn power? in this case, the choice was limited because when the employer files for an election, no proof of support from rns is required and other unions are blocked from getting on the ballot.

fyi: feigning militance while trying to cut a partnership deal in the background is seiu's mo.

the tactic goes like this:

seiu to the employer: our campaign of negative publicity is hurting you. if you partner with us we'll campaign for you rather than against you.

employer: what else is in it for me?

seiu: unlike other unions like nnoc, we'll keep nurses quiet by signing a gag clause. we'll sign an agreement banning strikes. we'll negoatiate a contract with you now, so that you know what you're getting up front. if you get into trouble with jcaho or regulatory bodies, we'll help you wiggle out."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003601276_seiu05m.html

a union that is actively working against the interests of patients and rns isn't a union, it's a vehicle for oppression. instead of just being locked in a cell, now you're locked up in a cell wearinga ga and handcuffs.

Specializes in Med/Surg/Tele, Hem/Onc, BMT.
When I was a member of SEIU/1199W in Wisconsin, I was asked to help organize RNs in non-union hospitals. I was apalled at the attitude of the SEIU staff.

In the "organizing training" I was told never to use the words "power, struggle, union, fight, or employer" when talking to my felow RNs. Instead we should say, "voice, dialogue, partnership, place at the table, and hospital administration".

Did they tell you to stalk nurses who were speaking out- follow them into grocery stores, make such a scene that you get kicked out of your hotel, blow cigar smoke in nurses faces, curse at them and make a scene?

This is what the SEIU did in this campaign.

When an NNOC nurse got arrested for using her voice to expose a sham the hospital provided proof "that NNOC was a menace"- the proof???

PICTURES OF SEIU ORGANIZERS!!

Specializes in Emergency room.
ah, the problem lies in your choice of question. why should rns have to choose between seiu acting as a company union vs. "no union" when there are unions out there that actually reject seiu's partnership nonsense and build genuine, collective rn power? in this case, the choice was limited because when the employer files for an election, no proof of support from rns is required and other unions are blocked from getting on the ballot.

fyi: feigning militance while trying to cut a partnership deal in the background is seiu's mo.

the tactic goes like this:

seiu to the employer: our campaign of negative publicity is hurting you. if you partner with us we'll campaign for you rather than against you.

employer: what else is in it for me?

seiu: unlike other unions like nnoc, we'll keep nurses quiet by signing a gag clause. we'll sign an agreement banning strikes. we'll negoatiate a contract with you now, so that you know what you're getting up front. if you get into trouble with jcaho or regulatory bodies, we'll help you wiggle out."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003601276_seiu05m.html

a union that is actively working against the interests of patients and rns isn't a union, it's a vehicle for oppression. instead of just being locked in a cell, now you're locked up in a cell wearinga ga and handcuffs.

i have a problem with your response in that it's a generalization. in this instance, the cna is acting not as a union but as a union-buster. that's the 'union' having issue with seiu. elections conducted by the nlrb are not multiple choice ballots--there's not a choice between 'a' 'b' or 'c' union. it's a 'yes' or 'no' vote to union representation.

i'm assuming your quotes are speculative--that you weren't witness to any of those conversations. the fact of the matter is that cna's union busting activities have deprived almost 8,000 people, including 3000 rn's, of the opportunity to make their own choice. there is no speculation there. it is never a good thing when people are deprived of their right to choose for themselves. cna has not offered any viable options to those employees---especially the non-rn employees. they have only been disruptive, misleading and destructive.

we are currently under our third contract negotiated with seiu's guidance. it's a good contract--each one has gotten better and better. and, the next contract will be even better than this one. we are our union. it's our contract---and seiu helps us hold chp accountable. they have helped educate us in the bargaining process. we have a voice now---and we have much more than we had 10 years ago, before we had a union. it's been very gratifying to hear some of my co-workers who were not on the union bandwagon with us 10 years ago now say, 'i wouldn't work here without a union.' we have made significant positive changes and we have a system in place that enables us deal with the dynamics of healthcare today. we have plans to make even more improvements---which we couldn't do without a union, without seiu.

these statements are not speculation, but, rather, knowledge gleaned from personal experience in my dealings with both seiu and chp.

From HobbesRN

"Elections conducted by the NLRB are not multiple choice ballots--there's not a choice between 'a' 'b' or 'c' union. It's a 'yes' or 'no' vote to union representation.

I'm assuming your quotes are speculative--that you weren't witness to any of those conversations. The fact of the matter is that CNA's union busting activities have deprived almost 8,000 people, including 3000 RN's, of the opportunity to make their own choice."

One correction here, and one question:

1. NLRB elections - real ones, where there is actual organizing and actual support among the workers - sometimes are multiple choice. If two unions are able to show support among the workers, two unons can be on the ballot. The bosses and the SEIU colluded to create a rush process - no campaigning, no discussion and no chance for another union to intervene. The Bush-appointed, anti-worker NLRB joined in the collusion by scheduling the election only ten days after it was announced.

2. How exactly did CNA/NNOC deprive these workers of a choice? There have been numerous times - most recently a few months ago at St Mary's in Reno - when SEIU has tried to block CNA/NNOC organizing campaigns with false attacks. They don't succeed because CNA/NNOC has done the work and taken the time to build actual support among the nurses. If SEIU had done their organizing work and built a strong base among the nurses, CNA/NNOC'S attack would have just rolled off and amounted to nothing. But since they hadn't, the nurses were being asked to vote for something they didn't understand and had no chance to ask questions about. If the election had been a legitimate election with real support, a few fliers asking questions about it would not have derailed it. The fact that exposing it to the light of day stopped it pretty much tells you it was a process that wouldn't bear exposure.

Any rational nurse knows that "union choice" is unhelpful. Having more than one union on the ballot makes it more difficult for nurses to have any union at all, because a majority must still vote for one union to be union. For example, 70% of nurses could vote union, but if they were split between union A and union B, nurses would still be non-union.

Arguments about union choice are nonsensical in the case of the CNA's union busting in Ohio, because there was only one union on the ballot. The choice was SEIU or no union. All CNA needed to be on the ballot was one card at each of the affected hospitals; they had zero because in the whole three years these nurses had been organizing, CNA had not approached any of these nurses about choosing it over SEIU.

As for the argument that CNA should not have been able to derail the election campaign if there was true support, I find that bogus as well. I have looked at their flier online, and it is clearly a product of much effort and expense. It is nastier than anything I have ever seen from hospital management in terms of anti-union assertions. I am confident than cNA did everything they could think of to divide and confuse these nurses. How were the CHP nurses supposed to be prepared to defend against union-busting by another union? Who could ever have imagined such a tactic? And by an organization that represents ZERO union nurses in this state? I wonder how many out of state organizers CNA sent into these hospitals? 30? More?

Any rational nurse knows that "union choice" is unhelpful.

Wow, you and CHP certainly support the same position! Now you're back to defending CHP getting to handpick SEIU as their union of choice. It disheartens me to hear an RN argue that our fellow RNs can't assess two unions on a ballot and make an educated, informed decision about which union they want to be a part of. Do you believe that RNs are that easy to confuse? SEIU and the CHP tried to rush this election through so that RNs wouldn't have time to adequately research the implications for themselves.

As soon as light was shed on the process, CHP and SEIU obviously realized that they couldn't pull it off, so they cancelled the election (oops, RNs got information, now we can't let them vote).

Guess what! If RNs are going to successfully negotiate staffing language and patient care protections into their first contract and build organization in their hospitals to defend patients and RN practice, face off against the healthcare industry to win legislation that improves staffing, etc., we're going to have to be strong enough that we don't fall apart every time the someone puts out a leaflet that challenges our position.

Why do RNs need to be protected from a leaflet that is critical of the practices of the union that they're being rushed to join? Oh that's right, too much data and we might get confused and actually vote in our own interests!

from SamanthRN

"How were the CHP nurses supposed to be prepared to defend against union-busting by another union? Who could ever have imagined such a tactic?"

How could SEIU not imagine it, when they have made a career of it - as they did most dispicably in CNA's recent successful organizing in Reno. The difference is that when they do it it doesn't work, because nurses know better. And because CNA has done the actual organizing to build support.

This is in response to the first post by Linda Kirby

The fact of the matter is, the election was called because SEIU had no support form the rank & file, except maybe the 15 who signed your letter.

There is no evidence that only 15 employees supported the union in this case.

There is evidence that zero employees supported the CNA/NNOC, since they did not have even the one signed union card that is required to get on the ballot.

The employees who put their name on this letter should be honored, not ridiculed. They have already been stripped of their chance to have a union, now they are smeared as stooges for seiu. Very inappropriate in my opinion.

What is the number/percentage of employees who have to put themselves out as seiu supporters there without the protection of a union contract before the cna/nnoc admits that what happened here was union busting and apologizes for its actions? Do nurses have to be willing to strike to prove that they want the cna/nnoc to leave them alone? Who gave the cna the right to try to bust this up in the name of nurses who did not ask for their interference?

And I say again: if there was real support, the fact that a handful of people showed up and passed out some flyers - despite physical intimidation by SEIU with management support - would have made no difference. Any deal that won't stand the light of day is not a good deal.

Think of things that hide in the dark and scurry away when light is shined upon them: rats, cockroaches, worms, critters like that. What was it about having quesitons asked and opposition expressed that made the election impossible? And how was CNA's intervention in this worse than SEIU's intervention in Reno? In Reno, SEIU's attempted intervention made no difference in the outcome, since CNA had real support and won a resounding victory.

It sounds to me like CNA has a beef with SEIU. This is not about the history of these two unions in Reno or in California. What I have seen in thread after thread on www.allnurses.com on this issue is nurses who actually work at the CHP hospitals devastated that the CNA showed up univited and poisoned the well so that these elections had to be cancelled. I have been moved by the voices of these courageous nurses, and saddened by the negativity and often contradictory justifications for union busting put forth by CNA supporters. I cannot believe that CNA just showed up with a couple of volunteers and "passed out a couple of fliers" that "raised legitimate questions." Here's why: the CNA supporters offering justification for their actions in Ohio are brimming with anti-SEIU hatred and vitriol -- it literally drips from their posts. I would bet that they did everything they could think of to bring tension and confusion into those CHP hospitals, and that they used every resource at their disposal to do so. Also, the sadness that comes from the CHP nurses seems genuine. It seems like the sadness of nurses who knew that they were going to win and had that taken from them by other nurses and staff of a supposed nurses organization.

You bet CNA has a beef with SEIU - and with any organization that engages in their kind of dirty backroom dealing to treat nurses like commodities to be bought and sold for short term advantage. And once more I ask what you can't seem to answer: what was it about a little info and some flyers that made it impossible to hold the election?

Answer: Because the election was a fundamentally illegitimate process that wouldn't stand up to the light of day.

+ Add a Comment