Tenet Health Care Corporation, Union Officials Collude to Overturn Employee Vote agai

caliotter3 · Feb 14, 2010

"You're going to keep on voting until you vote the way we want" ehh. Such a fine example of democracy at its finest.

elkpark · Feb 14, 2010

Oh goodie, more anti-union propaganda ...

nicurn001 · Feb 14, 2010

right to work foundation attorneys file federal unfair labor practice charges for philadelphia nurses being railroaded into union ranks
philadelphia, pa (january 28, 2010) – with free legal assistance from the national right to work foundation, a philadelphia nurse has filed federal charges challenging an attempt by her employer and outside union organizers to ignore the results of a workplace election rejecting unionization.the results of an election are not official until they are certified , so in law this election has not been completed , so the result hasn't been ignored .
joanne k. mcgovern is a registered nurse employed by hahnemann university hospital, a medical facility owned and operated by tenet healthcare corporation. mcgovern and her hospital coworkers recently endured a prolonged organizing drive, during which union operatives from the california nurses association (cna) union and its local affiliate, the pennsylvania association of staff nurses and allied professionals (pasnap) union, attempted to impose unionization on hospital employees. as a vote was to be taken , how can that be imposition ?
despite a backroom deal between the cna union and tenet that suppressed employee opposition to unionization and granted union organizers preferential access to hospital facilities, the nurses voted against the cna in june 2009. although there was a neutrality agreement , do any of you really believe tenet is pro union ??!!
undeterred by this setback, union lawyers have turned to private arbitration and the national labor relations board (nlrb) to block the certification of this result, claiming that cna organizers were intimidated during the organizing drive.
although the nlrb has yet to rule on these claims or even hold a hearing, hospital and union officials recently agreed to disregard the election results anyway. in november 2009, the cna union and the hospital announced plans for a new unionization election despite the fact that the nlrb has not invalidated the results of the last workplace election. again you can't invalidate something that isn't certified ( i am sure you would be making these same points if the election had apparently been for unionization )
mcgovern’s charges challenge the legality of this move, arguing that workers who have already voted should not be subjected to repeated elections until they submit to unionization. the charges will now be investigated by the nlrb. if both sides had adhered to the neutrality agreement there would be no grounds for appeals , but there were a number of transgressions .
“after getting roundly rejected by hahnemann nurses, union officials just won’t take no for an answer,” said patrick semmens, director of legal information for the national right to work foundation. “by attempting to stifle hospital workers’ votes against unionization, cna bosses have shown that their real goal is pushing nurses into the union’s forced dues-paying ranks, like it or not.”

at this point the only real way to bring an end to the wrangling is to have another election .either the nurses at hahnemann will be so outraged by the continued union appeals , they will soundly reject them . or the nurses may feel that the union is fighting so hard against tenet already it might be worth having such tenacious representation .

allnurses Guide · Feb 14, 2010

I found it:

Hahneman Charged With Unfair Labor Practices
http://thebulletin.us/articles/2010/01/31/news/local_state/doc4b66469c0faa5211408266.txt

The RN accuses her hospital of violating the law.

I agree that Tenet hospital management frequently ignores the law.

allnurses Guide · Feb 14, 2010

nurses campaign at hahnemann and the lasting effect of northeastern hospital closure

...the nurse, who stayed anonymous for fear of being fired, tells how tenant healthcare corporation, which owns hahnemann, threatened workers before the vote and used manipulative tactics to get the votes impounded by the national labor relations board.

he also discussed how tenant understaffs the hospital floor, which is a danger to patients. finally, he discussed the threats management made if nurses formed a union, including using the closure of northeastern as a "warning." he explained:...

http://www.youngphillypolitics.com/nurses_campaign_hahnemann_and_lasting_effect_northeastern_hospital_closure

dianacl · Feb 15, 2010

First question, what were the results of the election?

Their is always oposition from the employer when some workers want to unionize. This is nothing new and all the unions know this going in to a campaign. A union that knows what they are doing should be able to deal with this or they shouldn't be going in there when they first evaluate a campaign.

There is apparently an agreement in place between th union and Tenet that allows the union to set up shop in the hospital and talk to the nurses with permission from the employer. The union has a list of who all the nurses are and they are allowed to hang up literature in the break rooms announcing the times they are available to meet and discuss the union. The one important ingredient missing in this type of campaign is the nurses never called the union to talk about unionizing. The union called the employer instead. I don't agree with this concept and in my opinion it does not work. Bottom line, if workers are not willing to openly fight to join the union then their will be no union or at best a very weak presence which usually ends is dissapointment for all.

I do believe that workers in a union have higher wages, benefits and most important a voice in their work place. Employers all fight against giving this power to their employees. Tenet is no different than any other hospital administration, except they actually have agreements with the employer (Tenet) to go into the hospital with access to employees.

I hope it works out for this group of nurses whatever they decide. If no union is the choice as it was the first time then unfortunatley they will be left with hostile feelings towards each other (who wants a union vs who does not) and their employer. In the end some will blame the union for this. That's a poor introduction of the union to workers. Instead of blaming the employer maybe the union should evaluate what they are doing wrong. After all they are using the existing members money to do this campaign and should be using that money responsibly.

I don't mean to insult anyone. I am simply giving my opinion.

nicurn001 · Feb 15, 2010

While the votes have been counted and went against union representation , until they are certified they are NOT the result . An election has to be certified to show it met the legal requirements for a free and fair vote , at present this is still in dispute and until the dispute is resolved those involved in the election are at an impasse .

I am sure that whichever way a vote goes , if participants of an election think they have evidence of transgressions they will report them and let the legal system decide the issue ( eg Bush v Gore , sorry to use that example but honestly its the only classic one I can think of ). That is where we are at .

I am sure that if the union simply walked away when there are outstanding challenges to the vote , there would be those who would say , hey look how the union walks and doesn't defend you when they think they are going to lose etc..

As I said earlier , if by continuing to appeal the union has created enough ill will amongst the nurses at HUH ,regarding their percieved behaviour then they will be soundly defeated in a new election . If however those who want a union at HUH feel they have been harrassed enough / adveresly effected by Tenets actions re. pay and conditions etc they would vote the union in .

PICUPNP · Feb 15, 2010

I am sure that if the union simply walked away when there are outstanding challenges to the vote , there would be those who would say , hey look how the union walks and doesn't defend you when they think they are going to lose etc..

THis is exactly what happened at the other two tenet hospitals in Houston. The uniopn just walked when it looked like they couldn't win.

nicurn001 · Feb 15, 2010

I am sure that if the union simply walked away when there are outstanding challenges to the vote , there would be those who would say , hey look how the union walks and doesn't defend you when they think they are going to lose etc..
THis is exactly what happened at the other two tenet hospitals in Houston. The uniopn just walked when it looked like they couldn't win.

This contribution proves my point , re.walking away at any stage of the process , as anti unionists will use it in this manner .

Not being prive to what happened at the two Tenet hospitals mentioned above , I would guess that an organizing campaign was underway at them and due to poor response the decision was made not to file for an election .

But at HUH the process is at a further stage ( from what I can glean upon the internet ) the election process is under appeal with the NLRB , the union must feel it has some hope of winning the appeal and while there is hope they will continue to maintain the appeal . Really the problem seems to be with the NLRB not coming to a decision , for my :twocents: I would accept the decision when it comes .

dianacl · Feb 16, 2010

I understand there was a vote that took place and a vote count at the end. That's all I asked. I get it about the charges. My point is it shouldn't come to charges if the job is being done correctly. No one thinks for a minute that the employer wants their employees to unionize and everyone involved knows that the employer is going to try to stop unionization. Tenet is no different. It is not a surprise when the employer reacts negatively to those wanting to join the union. No one expects the boss to say "hey pretty cool that your in the union" or isn't it great that you might get a union".

Union organizers should have a clue as to what they are doing and where they are going in a campaign. If they everyone suffers and the end result is lousy for the nurses that tried to build a union.

I wish the nurses we are talking about here, the best of luck getting back on their feet. In the end they must all work together to put aside their differences and provide the best possible care to their patients and at the same time take care of themselves.

efy2178 · Feb 16, 2010

I find it interesting that this nurse started the lawsuit. I suspect someone is putting her up to it. Why wouldn't you just wait it out and see what happens? Filing is very expensive. Is she paying for this suit out of her own pocket? I would bet someone is backing her.

Of course, Tenet is for the union. Historically, unionized hospitals pay better. Too bad they don't recognize that patient outcomes also tend to be better.

If the employees don't like this particular union, they could always go with the ANA's union (or the one they started) or SEIU. I belong to SEIU and have always paid dues because I WANT TO but most of my collegues don't. But if needed the union is there for them. And they always get a better contract.