CNA set to strike at Oakland Children's Hospital

[Kuryakyn]

As usual, the cna is again about to have their nurses at the childrens hospital in Oakland walk out and abandon patients over an increase in insurance premiums! The nurses at this particular hospital make an average of $136,000 yearly with 85% of their insurance premiums taken care of by the hospital. This is the mindset of the cna/nnu....GREED! So now they abandon ill children who need them to get better insurance premiums? This isn't about management as they would have you believe, this is about putting more money in their fearless leader boss rose's pocket. She already makes over $200K yearly! Don't let the pro unionists have you believe that this is anything other than about the almighty dollar. All this does is make the unionized nurses look just as greedy as boss rose and even worse to the general public. Cast off the yoke of unionization and learn to speak and act for yourselves. No one should have to pay to have a job! No one should be subjected to senority style pay raises! And nobody, I mean nobody should be subjected to nurses abandoning their patients over insurance premiums or anything else! Be an individual not a union automaton!!

[nicurn001]

Ominous et al ( who do not feel the need to unionize ) I accept your right to the opinion , but I always come to this impass , what is the answer to a bad , intransigent employer . Nurses who don't like unions suggest Nurses are strong individuals ( which is true in some cases ) who can stand up to management without fear of the consequences ( unfortunately usually with poor outcome to that nurse ), or selfgovernance commitees ( which although bettter than nothing , are only as effective as management allows and can dissapear just as quickly as they appeared with a change in managements ethos ).

I can't understand why is it that these strong individuals and the nurses they advise can face up to management , but quake at the knees at the possibility of being unionized .If they lose the vote ,why not work within the duly elected union to change those things they don't like about the union .

Have you ever actually worked in a unionized hospital , I have worked in both union and non union hospitals and have found better to work in the enviroment where management is not constantly making changes on a whim and not knowing from one shift to the next shift ( in times of management percieved crisis) whether my employment will be terminated ( and no it doesn't matter how good a nurse you are , in the non union hospital your position is dependant upon what influence you have with those in power ), prior to unionization we had some excellent nurses terminated ( most likely because they were expensive , certainly not because of their nursing skills / educational levels.

Bottom line , while we are all free to have an opinion as to whether or not to join a union , those opposed to unions offer no viable action , that may be taken by nurses to change bad management , other than turning tail and fleeing to another employer who may or may not be better than their present employer .

[herring_RN, ASN, BSN]

Many nurses have a loyalty to the health of their community.

The minimum core is nurses' ability to provide safe, effective, therapeutic patient care to patients and families with compassion.

It includes health and safety standards for everyone. No letting our hospitals burn IV bags thus releasing the carcinogen Dioxin into our air.

In the early nineties our union PPC committee recommended that every room have a supply of gloves and a sharps container. We were told, "It is not in the budget." Yet we were told not to recap syringes. WE TOGETHER wrote a letter and a group of us went to the administration offices with 100% of the RNs and most LVNs, CNAs, phlebotomists, and physicians signatures. Then we held a press conference.

Within a week there was a sharps container and box of gloves at each bedside.

Could one nurse accomplish that? I'm talking twenty years ago.

Since then WE together achieved safe staffing by acuity of which the ratio is the minimum, whistleblower protection with fines, and other protections for our patients.

Yes we have to work to keep safe staffing because the hospital union (CHA and AHA) is determined to keep decision making from nurses.

Patients are hospitalized for one reason - they need nursing care.

..."If Children's Hospital Oakland cuts nurses' health benefits, many will choose to work elsewhere," said Martha Kuhl, RN, an oncology nurse at the facility.

"Our patients deserve the best health care and so do we. As hard as these cost-shifting proposals will be for nurses, it will be even worse for other workers at the Hospital who are less able to afford these cuts."

Children's concession demands are proposed in bargaining for a new contract. The hospital wants to dramatically increase costs for the existing health plans in an effort to steer everyone into a single substandard plan, the nurses say.

"Children's has been badly mismanaged for years," said Kuhl. "It's disgraceful that the hospital executives would penalize the nurses and other employees by seeking to severely reduce health coverage for our families to pay for their own extremely poor management decisions."

Among the many failed hospital operating decisions, the nurses cited:

• The struggling endeavors to build outpatient facilities in Modesto and Walnut Creek, spending millions in taxpayer bond money and draining facility resources;
  
• The ill-conceived, losing, and expensive effort to push a parcel tax for the facility past the voters of Alameda County without community input;
  
• The $1.2 million plus lifetime health benefits golden parachute given to ousted short-term CEO Frank Teidemann responsible for both the outpatient ventures and the parcel tax;
  
• The lack of strategic planning for operations to respond to trends in healthcare and effectively manage available staff resources.
  
• Failure to provide adequate training to nurses to meet the basic needs of patients.
  

"The only real option is for the hospital to develop a transparent plan with all public and private stakeholders to overcome these years of failure. Reducing health benefits for nurses will not benefit the hospital in the long run," Kuhl continued....

http://www.calnurses.org/media-center/press-releases/2010/august/children-s-hospital-oakland-rns-to-rally-wednesday-protest-management-plans-to-slash-healthcare-benefits.html?print=t

[ominous]

It has nothing to do with quaking at the knees!! LOL!!! Unions don't scare me, its all the other stuff that comes with them. Senority based system(I've been here for 11yrs), dues, dues being used to advance political parties, strikes, no guarantee that they can come across with whats promised, etc...

[nicurn001]

it has nothing to do with quaking at the knees!! lol!!!i believe you , but some whilst extolling the pwer of the individual nurse , then say that nurses are too weak to go through the canvassing that occurs during a union recruitment process ( hence the quaking at knees comment ) unions don't scare me, its all the other stuff that comes with them. senority based system(i've been here for 11yrs), dues, dues being used to advance political parties, strikes, no guarantee that they can come across with whats promised, etc...

seniority benefits employers by reducing recruitment / retention costs , as staff know their compensation will grow with the passage of time and not drop below what new employees are paid . keeping up educationally is rewarded by a clinical ladder.the euthamistically named merit system is simply a modern version of a monarchial tutelage system whereby those who jump to the leaders whims are favored .

i view my dues as i do insurance . in this case i am insuring that my employer doesn't change the terms of my employment at whim , that they cannot fire me without just cause and that if i need support or we the nurses feel change is necessary we can speak as a group rather than individually , as in the example herring gave above .

i feel unfortunately in all democracies there are parties that either support those with money / power or labor , it is much better that the union supports those who support policies beneficial to employees . sure as anything management supports their advocates with money that could be used for the benefit of the staff and patients they have .so while i understand your point , until / unless we find another way to finance our political parties i would much rather the money goes to those favorable to policies , beneficial to labor .

strikes occur when there is an impass between the two sides , after a vote of the nurses have occurred . so it is not the sole responsibility of the union that a strike occurs . the nurses to vote for a strike must feel their managment is not prepared to negotiate in good faith and that the problem is great enough for them to strike ( no nurse myself included likes to strike , in my 30 years in nursing i have not had to strike ).

there are no guarantee's in life , the union is not a dismbodied entity it is the members , so if they remain a cohesive group management will have to come to them in a contract benificial to both sides , if the members are disunited then they will get little / nothing .

ominous you didn't say whether you have worked in a union facility ?. i try to balance my support of unions with my knowledge of working in a non union enviroment , i accept there are problems for some in union membership , but these are far less than being at the mercy of a bad employer .