INCREDIBLE CNA/NNOC victory in Houston.

Nurses Union

Published

I'm posting this fast, and don't yet have all the details, but here is what I do know:

CNA just won a representation election for the RNs at Cypress Fairbanks Hospital, a part of the Tenet chain in Houston Texas.

Other than a small number of RNs employed by the federal government, this represents the first unionized nurses in the entire state a very tough organizing environment. It is the first major fruits of a three year statewide campaign.

The election was run under an organizing agreement won at the bargaining table by Tenet nurses in California.

Don't yet have numbers or other details, will make a second post when I do. I've met some of these Texas nurses and they are just the greatest. This is only the first of many organizing victories to come in this state.

This week registered nurses at Scripps Memorial Hospital Encinitas voted out the CNA as their union in an election. The decision by Scripps nurses to eject the CNA follows contract negotiations that didn't result in real improvements for nurses or patient care.

[

I guess you can take a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

I imagine Scripps made bargaining hard. If the nurses were not united, that made it easier for the administration to be punitive in it's contract offers.

Too bad the RNs let a good thing go. But the bottom line is that YOU are the union. If you don't want to unite and fight for patient improvements, then unionizing isn't for you.

Specializes in Critical Care.
I'll just add a bit more detail here now that I have it.

the margin of victory was close - 119 to 111, but in a very anti-union environment, we'll take it and gladly!

What I'd really like to see is 1. How many of those 119 nurses actually JOIN the union and pay dues, and 2. How many dues paying members there are in 3 yrs.

My guess: less than half to start and less than a third in 3 yrs.

Texas is open shop. You can have a union if you like, but joining is optional. Whatever they negotiate has to be offered to everybody (although non-union employees can be offered MORE and often are, to break the union.) Paying dues is optional.

All the benefits of a union, none of the dues. What a great deal for the 60 or so nurses that voted for the union but won't join.

Even at the VA San Antonio when I worked there and HAD a union, less than 10% of the nurses belonged. I'll give an example of 'elective dues paying'. When it's elective, how many nurses pay to join ANA? About 5%. There you go.

It means very little to unionize a Texas hospital. Go ahead. Unionize them all. I still won't join. Fortunately, I won't have to.

~faith,

Timothy.

Specializes in ICU,CCU,OB,L&D,ED,MS.

In my opinion, the previous comment was made by a rugged individualist. I have never found nursing to be an individualist profession. Yes, we are each responsible for our nursing practice. But without the support and mentoring we provide for each other when we are working, it would be impossible to do our jobs safely and adequately. It is telling when an individual is willing to enjoy the benefits others have worked to achieve, without appreciation or participation in the process.

I believe we have all noticed the down sizing of nursing staff. Or has it been that way so long, and you are so new to nursing, that you know no other manner of caring for sick patients, except to be totally understaffed?

This thread also discusses union raiding. For nurses who believe this is the real topic, I would ask you look deeper. The whipped up emotion concerning "raiding" is a diversion from a more important issue. The issue is democratic union functioning vs union/corporate partnerships. Do so many nurses out there really believe any union is better than no union?

What if a union gives away your rights in the interest of corporate profit?

As a nurse, your rights to safe working conditions acts also in the interest of patient safety.

Corporate health care is the issue. In the quest for more and more profit, the patients for which I care are being dangerously short changed. As a unified group , nurses could change this scenario. Unions are more than a bargaining unit to which folks pay dues and in return receives raises. Unions gave us the working conditions which this country enjoys. I do not think anyone would be interested in returning to the days of enforced child labor.

I would suggest nurses research a little history on each union of interest. Emotional responses to trigger words, like "raiding", and "open shop" do not service nurses or our patients.

Specializes in ICU/CCU/TRAUMA/ECMO/BURN/PACU/.

"Being a good nurse is not always the same as being a good employee."

:up:Advocacy for our patients should always be our primary mission, even when it is in conflict with our employer's bottom line. An open shop is promoted by employers and union busters as "free choice". It's really a signal to employers that they will continue to have the freedom to exploit and abuse workers.

Hospitals are reimbursed for nursing care, yet hospitals fast track patients and emphasize through-put over restoration to optimal health. Restructuring "engineers" and "consultants" redesign "workflow" and give patients "passports" and "boarding passes" that replace nursing judgement so the bosses can increase volume and maximize their profit at the expense of patients.

This interferes with the nurse-patient relationship; "lean and mean" is not an environment of care that is conducive to the nursing process! Nurses leave the profession because they aren't allowed to provide the care they know the patients need; the care that they were educated to provide.

A strong union and professional association, such as CNA/NNOC-Texas protects nurses who choose to advocate in the exclusive interests of their patients. No nurse should be threatened by "discipline and discharge" for speaking out against and working to change unsafe conditions. Safe Harbor is an administrative den of iniquity; Don't go into their den alone. Take a CNA/NNOC nurse rep with you! Weingarten Rights: if you're unionized, you get 'em! You may not realize you need them until it's too late to save you from unjust "discipline."

Mandatory overtime, fatigue, unsafe ratios and management's failure to increase staffing for high acuity patients, lack of proper equipment and adequate supplies, too few ancillary staff, and frequent interruptions cause preventable errors and poor patient outcomes. Hospitals often blame the nurse instead of trying to fix the system.

If you work to weaken the solidarity of your peers, then at least have the intellectual honesty to refrain from calling the union a failure. Without the support of the majority of the bargaining unit members, it surely will be. I suppose there will always be freeloader nurses who take, instead of pay their dues money to help provide for the common defense. Go ahead, take the benefits and run; maybe there are those who can outrun their conscience.

Responsible nurses throughout Texas have organized with CNA/NNOC. Instead of whining about how bad things are they have collectively and actively begun working to overcome the hospital industry's barriers to patient and professional advocacy. To those who would fault them for that I would say, lead, follow, or get out of their way. Pay your fair share and let those who can, DO!

...

This thread also discusses union raiding. For nurses who believe this is the real topic, I would ask you look deeper. The whipped up emotion concerning "raiding" is a diversion from a more important issue. The issue is democratic union functioning vs union/corporate partnerships. Do so many nurses out there really believe any union is better than no union?

What if a union gives away your rights in the interest of corporate profit?

As a nurse, your rights to safe working conditions acts also in the interest of patient safety.

Corporate health care is the issue. In the quest for more and more profit, the patients for which I care are being dangerously short changed. As a unified group , nurses could change this scenario. Unions are more than a bargaining unit to which folks pay dues and in return receives raises. Unions gave us the working conditions which this country enjoys. I do not think anyone would be interested in returning to the days of enforced child labor.

I would suggest nurses research a little history on each union of interest. Emotional responses to trigger words, like "raiding", and "open shop" do not service nurses or our patients.

Here's a great site to go to for research about the differences:

http://www.calnurses.org/seiu-watch/facts/

Specializes in Critical care, tele, Medical-Surgical.

Nurses who leafleted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDILOA2Ktfs

Specializes in Critical Care.
In my opinion, the previous comment was made by a rugged individualist. I have never found nursing to be an individualist profession. Yes, we are each responsible for our nursing practice. But without the support and mentoring we provide for each other when we are working, it would be impossible to do our jobs safely and adequately. It is telling when an individual is willing to enjoy the benefits others have worked to achieve, without appreciation or participation in the process.

I believe we have all noticed the down sizing of nursing staff. Or has it been that way so long, and you are so new to nursing, that you know no other manner of caring for sick patients, except to be totally understaffed?

This thread also discusses union raiding. For nurses who believe this is the real topic, I would ask you look deeper. The whipped up emotion concerning "raiding" is a diversion from a more important issue. The issue is democratic union functioning vs union/corporate partnerships. Do so many nurses out there really believe any union is better than no union?

What if a union gives away your rights in the interest of corporate profit?

As a nurse, your rights to safe working conditions acts also in the interest of patient safety.

Corporate health care is the issue. In the quest for more and more profit, the patients for which I care are being dangerously short changed. As a unified group , nurses could change this scenario. Unions are more than a bargaining unit to which folks pay dues and in return receives raises. Unions gave us the working conditions which this country enjoys. I do not think anyone would be interested in returning to the days of enforced child labor.

I would suggest nurses research a little history on each union of interest. Emotional responses to trigger words, like "raiding", and "open shop" do not service nurses or our patients.

A few points.

1. I've been an RN for 15 yrs.

2. I never suggested that I would like all the benefits of a union and none of the responsibility. I SAID that I figured this applied to about half the nurses that voted for the union in Cy-Fair (about an hour from me).

3. That union passed only because there was an explicit understanding that joining would be optional. "Open Shop" means something, it's not just a 'trigger word'. It means the union has no power and so, there is no real need to oppose it.

4. I don't think a union WOULD particularly benefit me. Instead, I have taken my 'rugged individualism' and found a place to work that provides me with everything I need. Here in back-hick, anti-union Texas, I have one of the highest cola-adjusted salaries in the nation. My 100k house on a cul-de-sac opposite a park suits me well, as does my more-than-manageable 900/month mortgage/escrow (the value of my home has gone up 10% in the last 18 months; there is no housing crisis here, except for a shortage of good homes to buy). My CCU ratio is 2:1. Tele where I work is 4:1. Med/Surg 5:1. Without a union. I have a 503 retirement account that my employer matches some on. In addition, I have a pension fund. Last month, my employer gave me 16hrs of extra vacation time, as a reward for a productive year in 2007. Not just me, every hospital employee. It has been announced that in June, we are to receive, on top of our annual 3% cola raise, yet another 'market based adjustment' (competing with the Houston and Dallas markets). The last such adjustment, in 2006, was a 10% raise. On top of the yearly 3% raise.

My health insurance plan last year spent about 600,000 dollars on the birth of my preemie newborn. MY share was about 5 grand. Our plan went up 14 dollars/month this year. It is now $228/month for six of us.

In back water Texas. Oh, And. We're hiring.

Do I need a union? Why on God's Earth would I want to antagonize my wonderful employer? No, thank you. Unions have their place, I have never denied that. I do dispute that unions are universally beneficial. NO, they are not.

~faith,

Timothy.

Timothy,

As a nurse working in the Great Nation of Texas, you are very fortunate to be in the situation you are in, and if you are honest with everyone, you'd agree many hospitals in TX aren't anywhere near as "nurse friendly as yours"--they don't give annual raises, keep ratios at a reasonable place, and from your description, work to please their employees as much as possible.

I absolutely agree your hospital doesn't at all sound like it needs to worry about unionizing. However, check out Conroe Regional with their 7:1 tele ratios (not stepdown) and maybe a tech or 2; or Harris County Psych where the ratios are 12 or 13:1 at best (and that is really unsafe), but could go up to 24-26:1; or St. Joe's where I've heard (although I can't speak from experience) that ratios can dip in the 2x digits; they don't care how their nurses feel, and the nurses have obviously been able to do nothing to convince mgmt to listen to them, so what alternative is there but to organize through a union?

Now whether or not the union is successful is completely up to the nurses; if noone wants to be active and pay their tax deductible dues, then all they have done is spun their wheels. But if they truly do want to improve their situation, they now have a voice that can be heard loud and clear, without fear of termination for speaking out. If they are stong they can refuse an unsafe assignment and their union can fight for them to prevent them from being terminated (as has happened to many, but I'm thinking of a thread started yesterday, in particular).

Specializes in Critical Care.
Timothy,

As a nurse working in the Great Nation of Texas, you are very fortunate to be in the situation you are in, and if you are honest with everyone, you'd agree many hospitals in TX aren't anywhere near as "nurse friendly as yours"--they don't give annual raises, keep ratios at a reasonable place, and from your description, work to please their employees as much as possible.

I absolutely agree your hospital doesn't at all sound like it needs to worry about unionizing. However, check out Conroe Regional with their 7:1 tele ratios (not stepdown) and maybe a tech or 2; or Harris County Psych where the ratios are 12 or 13:1 at best (and that is really unsafe), but could go up to 24-26:1; or St. Joe's where I've heard (although I can't speak from experience) that ratios can dip in the 2x digits; they don't care how their nurses feel, and the nurses have obviously been able to do nothing to convince mgmt to listen to them, so what alternative is there but to organize through a union?

Now whether or not the union is successful is completely up to the nurses; if noone wants to be active and pay their tax deductible dues, then all they have done is spun their wheels. But if they truly do want to improve their situation, they now have a voice that can be heard loud and clear, without fear of termination for speaking out. If they are stong they can refuse an unsafe assignment and their union can fight for them to prevent them from being terminated (as has happened to many, but I'm thinking of a thread started yesterday, in particular).

I have checked out Conroe in the past to work PRN as it's close to me (I decided against). A local hospital not mine normally keeps med/surg/tele ratios at 6-7:1. I know this. I'm just saying, there is power in voting with your feet.

But, more to the point - an ineffectual union is not going to significantly change that. And make no mistake: a voluntary union that has the support of maybe a fourth of a hospital's nurses is NOT an effectual organization. 230 Nurses at Cy-Fair, 119 voted for the union, BUT - HOW MANY WILL JOIN? My guess is around half, about 60 nurses.

60 unionized nurses out of 230 total is NOT the epitome of union power. At that point, it's just a nuisance to management, and not much more. What is the union going to do, strike? So?

But it's worse. By the time negotiations get to the point of a strike, in a few years, that number of actual dues-paying unionized nurses will likely be down to 30-40. You don't even need strike breakers to combat that, just an offer of generous overtime for the overwhelming non-unionized majority that remain on the job. You can't even appeal to your co-workers. Being non-union, they could not strike without being terminated.

The ONLY way to give the union any power is to make joining completely painless: $5/month dues. In that case, the 30-40 active members could speak for a possible majority of unionized nurses. That's not a sure thing; Texas is very anti-union; many wouldn't join if you PAID THEM to join. Also, a largely uninterested majority of union nurses would not likely authorize any strike, under any conditions. That would be obvious in the negotiations. In ANY case, while the union might be of benefit for Cy-Fair if it's painless dues-wise to join, it does so by making Cy-Fair a drain on the national union. That might make sense to make a point, as is the case here. However, it just isn't an effective strategy for unionizing the State.

Is this a moral victory for the union? Absolutely. But, it's not much more than symbolic. I doubt seriously it's the start of a wave of unionization. If you think otherwise, then, you likely don't know or have much experience with Texas.

~faith,

Timothy.

Specializes in ICU,CCU,OB,L&D,ED,MS.

I have noticed that the conversation regarding unions in Texas revolves around paying dues, and nurses not interested in joining a union. I have also learned that some nurses are able to take care of themselves, live a good life, and do not need no stinking union. All of these pieces relate to $$. What about the facts concerning the corporate health care assault on nursing practice through out this country? Who is determining how nursing practice will proceed into the future? If nurses do not have a unified voice regarding nursing practice issues, and patient safely issues, we have failed as a profession. Unions and how they approach bargaining are different, one from another. There are unions that are democratic, with members driving the agenda. There are unions that are union/management partnerships, having predetermined contracts that support corporate profits at the expense of the nurses and patients. Seems like the hospital in Texas with the decent ratios is paying attention to California, for those are the ratios which together for over ten years, the nurses in California fought. I am interested in nursing as a profession that supports and cares for the sick, does it safely, with adequate competences. If you are only interested in how much you can make, and what an awesome life style you live, I would challenge you to become involved in the fight for our profession. Since when has collective work for an honorable cause been out of style? This dialogue is about more than $$. :nurse:

Specializes in Critical Care.
I have noticed that the conversation regarding unions in Texas revolves around paying dues, and nurses not interested in joining a union. I have also learned that some nurses are able to take care of themselves, live a good life, and do not need no stinking union. All of these pieces relate to $$. What about the facts concerning the corporate health care assault on nursing practice through out this country? Who is determining how nursing practice will proceed into the future? If nurses do not have a unified voice regarding nursing practice issues, and patient safely issues, we have failed as a profession. Unions and how they approach bargaining are different, one from another. There are unions that are democratic, with members driving the agenda. There are unions that are union/management partnerships, having predetermined contracts that support corporate profits at the expense of the nurses and patients. Seems like the hospital in Texas with the decent ratios is paying attention to California, for those are the ratios which together for over ten years, the nurses in California fought. I am interested in nursing as a profession that supports and cares for the sick, does it safely, with adequate competences. If you are only interested in how much you can make, and what an awesome life style you live, I would challenge you to become involved in the fight for our profession. Since when has collective work for an honorable cause been out of style? This dialogue is about more than $$. :nurse:

I agree that nurses need a unified voice for the profession. Unions cannot BE that voice, for several reasons:

1. Many unions are in direct competition with each other. How can there be a 'unified' voice unless one union wins a monopoly and crushes all others?

2. Unions are first and foremost required to promote local governance issues. That means that national issues need take a backseat.

3. Not all hospitals need a union and not all areas of the country are union-friendly.

4. Professionals are best served by professional organizations. What we need is to kick the ANA to the curb and have a real professional organization.

As far at it being about dues in States like Texas, yes. 'Open shop' creates an untenable 'free rider problem'. Why pay when I can take the same ride, for free? THAT is almost an insurmountable problem.

~faith,

Timothy.

Specializes in Critical care, tele, Medical-Surgical.

100% of the Flagstaff Arizona firefighters choose to be union members:

http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/congress/9874/index.html

+ Add a Comment