Unionized vs Non Unionized hospitals

  1. Which is better to work for overall and why? Are pay, benefits, and respect better with the union hospitals?
  2. Visit sungrl01 profile page

    About sungrl01

    Joined: Oct '08; Posts: 116; Likes: 40


  3. by   RunBabyRN
    Search posts here. There have been several debating this topic.
  4. by   SuperStaffer
    If you want to join an evil organization that has had a good idea perverted than defiantly join a union. You won't have to work much, you can be lazy, make mistakes, generally lower your standards overall, be known as a member of a buying organization and looked down on by management and many other peers.

    If you want to be your own person and maintain your own responsibility than non-union. I left a hospital because unions were being let in the door. I have had too much experience with the ugly organizations. At their inception they were a good idea but like so many things they have been perverted over time.
  5. by   PNW_NPstudent
    Depends entirely on the hospital. There are plenty of places with unions, like where I am now, that are phenomenal for nurses and patients.
  6. by   xoemmylouox
    I'm sorry to hear you've had such bad experiences, but Unions can be wonderful.
  7. by   herring_RN
    This study showed that union hospitals had a lower percentage of heart attach mortality.

    [FONT=NewBaskerville-Roman][FONT=NewBaskerville-Roman]This study examines the relationship between R.N. unionization and the mortality
    [FONT=NewBaskerville-Roman][FONT=NewBaskerville-Roman]rate for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), or heart attack, in acute-care hospitals in California.
    After controlling for patient and hospital characteristics,
    the authors find that hospitals with unionized R.N.'s have 5.5% lower heart attack mortality than do non-union hospitals...

    ... [FONT=NewBaskerville-Roman][FONT=NewBaskerville-Roman]By offering protection from arbitrary dismissal or punishment and by implementing a grievance procedure, R.N. unions may limit the intensely hierarchical character of the relationship between nurses and the medical staff. The protections offered by unionization may encourage nurses to speak up in ways that improve patient outcomes but might be considered insubordinate and, hence, career jeopardizing without union protections...


  8. by   laborer
    ... North Carolina !
  9. by   OC_An Khe
    It does depend on the employe and the union. Overall a unionized facility is better financially to the employee. As to a previous post re laziness, lower standards, et.al. it is not the Union that causes this, its the employer that allows it to happen.
  10. by   shermrn
    I am traditionaly a non union person, I hate the whole liberal/progressive, union mindset. I am for free markets and limited government. I have worked for many non union facilities as well as union facilities. I have, however come to believe that as far as nursing is concerned, being unionized is a better way to go. Too often I have heard horror stories from my coworkers and friends about being treated unfairly either because management was misinformed of or failed to follow facility rules/policies. Also there seems to be a number of things that happen simply because a nurse, regardless of his/her skill and job performance, is disliked. In these non union facilities management often can and will do whatever they want with their staff. The presence of a union ensures some level of security for the employee, that he/she will be treated fairly and rules will be followed. Now granted it kills me to say this but I do feel a bit more job security working in a union facility. I know that in a perfect world, with people behaving professionally, there would be no need for a union. I appreciate the protection I get from the union but am embarassed by the political posiitions they take. I'm all for finding a better solution but one hasn't presented itself.
  11. by   whichone'spink
    I work in North Dakota where there are no unions for nurses, and I don't know if the two hospitals in town would allow that. But I live in Minnesota where nurses in smaller hospitals are unionized and it's embarrassing. I know a former coworker got a job in Brainerd, which has a small hospital, but it's unionized and the pay is higher than what nurses get in North Dakota. I want to move to the Twin Cities eventually, but I like my current job now.
  12. by   bisson
    Depends on the union/ hospital. As seen above, clearly some have had experiences.

    I was a part of NYSNA when I worked in ny. I made $40/hr as a new grad, paid $87 for my union dues and had all my benefits covered. Although St. Vincent closed, it was my best experience. Now, 6 years later, in Virginia, no union, I pay $200 per paycheck for health insurance with $40 copays for office visits that are owned by my hospital, and I make $24/ hr as an experienced nurse working in heart surgery ICU. The best part is nurses having no one to stick up for them.

    I would move back to NY and join NYSNA in a heart beat.
    Last edit by bisson on Apr 30, '14 : Reason: error
  13. by   PMFB-RN
    In my experience union hospitals are much better. After experience in a variety of hospitals in differest states I decided what I wanted. That was to work in a modern, EBP based, publicaly owned, non religious, non Magent, union hospital. After a long search and a lot of leg work I ended up where I am now. I have never been treated better, or paid better.
  14. by   shermrn
    Has anyone read about the SEIU in Michigan and Home Healthcare Workers? Perfectly illustrates a major reason I hate unions.