Just when I thought our management couldn't get any more pathetic. Well, they have pushed the envelope even further.
At the begining of December the dietary manager decided (without notice) that the meal times during the day were going to change. Staff were not going to be served a full hot meal until after 12:30 pm, after the residents have all eaten their lunch. However, there are two categories of workers that usually have their lunch earlier which is 10:45 am and 11:15 am. They are the Practical Nurses and the Care Aides. For these workers they will only be entitled to have hot soup and a sandwich.
Well this didn't sit too well with these workers. So they decided on their own to change their lunch times in order for them to have the same full hot meal options that the rest of the workers were having in the building. Well the Director of Nursing got wind of this and she was not impressed. She ordered the Practical Nurses and the Care Aides to go back to their previous meal times and any change in staff meal times must go through proper channels and put to a vote with the union.
I have since filed a descrimination grievance and nothing will be looked into until after the first week of January. However, with this particular union's lousy track record of not wanting to hold the employer accountable on anything, I'm not holding my breath. So for over a month the Practical Nurses and the Care Aides will be served the equivalant of a soup kitchen at lunch time, even though their shift starts the same time as other departments (including the R.N.'s) in the building and will be treated as second class health care workers. This has created enourmous amounts of unnecesary tenstion through out the building.
Specializes in Community Health, Med-Surg, Home Health.
That's kinda what struck me about the OP, too. If anything, it would make sense to me to make sure those whose work tends to be more physical get a good meal.
I would also like to commend all who've advised the OP to quit whining on yet another outstanding display of nursing unity. Way to go, team.
I agree with this!
This is an interesting thread.
I think that you do have a fairly good argument and I'm interested in seeing how this turns out.
I'm really curious though, if staff have it written in their contract that they can buy a meal from the facility, do they do anything for night shift? Seems to me that they are being discriminated against too.
I have always found that the night shift is mostly ignored, rarely considered during these decisions, which, is a shame. The kitchen is usually closed and they had to fend for themselves or each picked over food left by the previous shifts.
Many CNAs don't feel valued often. Their's is a low paid job with little respect for what they do. LPNs sometimes feel that way as well. Although it is indeed a 'little thing' in comparison, it is often the sum total of 'little things' that lead you to feel a valued member of your organization. Think how often a simple acknowledgement from a patient or management makes a difference in your day. I wouldn't be surprised if this slight no matter how small, leads to staff turnover. I think that if they are smart, they will either offer to change the times for lunch, return to their previous menu, or yes- only offer a 'soup and sandwich' plan for everybody. My .
I feel the same. Whether some are union employees and others are not...that isn't important to me. I feel that those who make a bit less money and whose work is definitely more physical and exhaustive...allow them to have the same sort of meal that the others are. If the facility decides to say EVERYONE will get soup and a sandwich, that might actually be fairer to the morale.
Is this really true? I know of 1 hospital on Long Island (and there are about 40 of them) whose nurses are nonunion. Obviously I cannot speak for any other areas of the country, but I just thought the majority of nurses in the US were union employees.
Honestly, I can't complain about my union. I think I have one of the best unions in the country. New York State Nurse's Association is my union, and they fight very hard for us and our reps are ALWAYS available to us.
It's amazing to me to see how many people on here regularly go without their lunch breaks! I feel lucky - so far, everyplace I've worked, generally every aide and nurse is EXPECTED to take their lunch, and will be disciplined if they do not. We may not get them at an ideal time - they may end up being nearly at the end of our shift, but the majority of the time, we get them. Granted, there have been a few days where things were so hectic, no one took a lunch, especially when I worked at the hospital. But I can't imagine what the morale would be like, working someplace where that was the norm!
On the topic of the lunches themselves - at the first nursing home I worked at, you could purchase a tray, but it was expensive and gross, AND you had to buy it at the time of the residents' dinner...but no one was allowed to eat during that time. So, you basically had to take your already nasty food and thenlet it sit for a couple of hours in the break room before you got to eat it. Not ideal.
At the second, you could buy a tray of the hot meal for something like $2.50. The food wasn't terrible, wasn't great. The one stipulation was, you had to buy in the hour before the residents had their dinner, so if you got too busy to have your break during that time, you were out of luck.
At the hospital, we bought our food at the cafeteria. There was a lot of variety and the food was alright, but it was EXPENSIVE, even with our employee discount. A bowl of soup and a sandwich would sometimes cost almost $7 once you got a drink, and most other things (hot lines, etc) cost about .40 an ounce. Yikes.
Now, we can order either the hot meal (to be reheated) or a soup and salad for $2. They are payroll deducted and left in the breakroom for us about an hour before our lunch breaks start. You do have to sign up for the meals hours in advance, though.
All in all, I guess I feel lucky that i've almost always at least had the opportunity to get something to eat at work if I desire.
Is this really true? I know of 1 hospital on Long Island (and there are about 40 of them) whose nurses are nonunion. Obviously I cannot speak for any other areas of the country, but I just thought the majority of nurses in the US were union employees.
Honestly, I can't complain about my union. I think I have one of the best unions in the country. New York State Nurse's Association is my union, and they fight very hard for us and our reps are ALWAYS available to us.
I've seen various estimates of what percentage of U.S. nurses are unionized. All range between 15 and 20 percent. The most recent figure was 16 percent.
I'm not looking for a job at my home town hospital. The nurses there have shot a union down three times, each time by a smaller margin. Of course, the fact that they were stripped of a variety of shift differentials and benefits without any warning last month might have provided a wakeup call.
I guess my point is that all of these posters who keep coming into this thread talking about being grateful for scraps should be mindful of what they stand for. Our employers are more than happy to fulfill the low expectations we have for our working conditions.
Basically the less you ask for and expect the less you get and after a while the abuse becomes the norm.
Well said. This thread is not about soup and a sandwich. It's about an employer who's decided to act abritrarily and without regard to a legally binding agreement.
First of all I had no idea that this thread would trigger over 110 replies.
Freedom42 has hit the perverbial nail on the head. The bottom line is that far too many employers feel that they can arbitrarily make decisions that either over ride previous agreements, or simply push their weight around because they have absolutely no respect for the workers.
This holds true in a wide range of occupations both unionized and non-unionized. The unfortunate reality is that this kind of thing happens all too often in health care because frontline health care workers are female dominated. Many of these employers of female dominated workforces have that exact attitude of "Be thankful of what you get."I'll take things even a step further. The facility I work for is run by the municipality. This same municipality has collective aggreements with police officers, firefighters, etc.. To mention one of many examples, this same municipality will pay a firefighter tripple time for working Christmas whereas it will only pay a Practical Nurse time and a half for working the same day. Fire fighters are 100% male and they are 100% Full Time with full benefits. My workplace is approximately 65% part time employees who have no benefit plan like their full time counterparts.
Yes this thread was started with regards to the employer arbitrarily deciding which group is entitled to purchase a full hot meal versus only able to purchase a soup and a sandwich. However, Nurses and other frontline workers have to fight for not only their rights, but also fight to hang on to the very few rights that they do have.
The last time I checked, women in North America and else where have rights.
My reading skills are going downhill, fast. On the first reading, I took this to be a strike by nurses in the days of Florence Nightengale (i.e. Victorian era, or thereabouts.) Guess I should be happy it wasn't in British Columbia (BC). I'd have been picturing a bunch of pickets wearing mastodon furs, or something.
It all makes more sense after re-reading.
Hey, the VON (Victorian Order of Nurses) is a great homecare organization in Canada.
Having been raised in British Columbia, I can honestly say I have never worn mastadon fur. PETA would hurt us.
In an economy where many nurses are struggling to find jobs, I wouldn't dare complain about your employer "only" providing soup & a sandwich. I work in a LTC/Short term rehab facility & employee's aren't provided meals at all. Occasionally, the dietary aides will offer food to staff if there is leftover after the residents & short term patients are served, but it is by no means expected. Consider yourself lucky for what you have.
First of all I had no idea that this thread would trigger over 110 replies.
Freedom42 has hit the perverbial nail on the head. The bottom line is that far too many employers feel that they can arbitrarily make decisions that either over ride previous agreements, or simply push their weight around because they have absolutely no respect for the workers.
This holds true in a wide range of occupations both unionized and non-unionized. The unfortunate reality is that this kind of thing happens all too often in health care because frontline health care workers are female dominated. Many of these employers of female dominated workforces have that exact attitude of "Be thankful of what you get."I'll take things even a step further. The facility I work for is run by the municipality. This same municipality has collective aggreements with police officers, firefighters, etc.. To mention one of many examples, this same municipality will pay a firefighter tripple time for working Christmas whereas it will only pay a Practical Nurse time and a half for working the same day. Fire fighters are 100% male and they are 100% Full Time with full benefits. My workplace is approximately 65% part time employees who have no benefit plan like their full time counterparts.
Yes this thread was started with regards to the employer arbitrarily deciding which group is entitled to purchase a full hot meal versus only able to purchase a soup and a sandwich. However, Nurses and other frontline workers have to fight for not only their rights, but also fight to hang on to the very few rights that they do have.
The last time I checked, women in North America and else where have rights.
While I do agree that workers should fight for their rights, I don't believe that's the issue at stake here. We're not talking about people being forced to work without break, pay/benefits being changed without knowledge, etc...we're talking about expecting an employer to provide a hot lunch--something which I think is a foolish expectation.
While I do agree that workers should fight for their rights, I don't believe that's the issue at stake here. We're not talking about people being forced to work without break, pay/benefits being changed without knowledge, etc...we're talking about expecting an employer to provide a hot lunch--something which I think is a foolish expectation.
Your comments in bold are exactly what Truth66 is talking about.
Agreed benefits and working conditions have been changed arbitrarily as a consequience of another department's operational decision. The DoN has responded (initially) by chastising the disaffected staff rather than support their valid claim. The consequences of the decision are discriminatory.
If an employer says you come work for us and we'll give you $60 an hour - then after you start they drop you to $30 and say - well it was foolish to think we could pay you that much; would you think that was fair and just tolerate it because the organisation made a foolish decision - or later decided to 'optimise' things without consultation?
The event in question - meals vs soup - is not the issue.
The principle of preserving contractual benefits is the issue.
The principle of engendering staff consultation is the issue.
The principle of upholding equity is the issue.
The principle of valuing one's employees and one's self is the issue.
The principle of give and take - quid pro quo - and good will is not a one way street yet so many places rely on it.
Perhaps it's all those free lunches I got that made me so fat that now I'm just unable to bend over for management and grab my ankles?
So leave, and work for an employer that provides a hot lunch to all its employees at the same time. Nothing is stopping you from finding a job that suits your needs.
I work for the biggest unionized hospital system in NYC, and we don't get a hot lunch. I do have a stable job that pays well, and honors our contract, although begrudgingly.
There are a lot more important things to complain about than different food options. Having worked in the food service dept of a hospital, I know how hard it is to clean up from breakfast and start lunch, let alone a full, hot one at 1030 am!!
Your comments in bold are exactly what Truth66 is talking about.
Agreed benefits and working conditions have been changed arbitrarily as a consequience of another department's operational decision. The DoN has responded (initially) by chastising the disaffected staff rather than support their valid claim. The consequences of the decision are discriminatory.
If an employer says you come work for us and we'll give you $60 an hour - then after you start they drop you to $30 and say - well it was foolish to think we could pay you that much; would you think that was fair and just tolerate it because the organisation made a foolish decision - or later decided to 'optimise' things without consultation?
The event in question - meals vs soup - is not the issue.
The principle of preserving contractual benefits is the issue.
The principle of engendering staff consultation is the issue.
The principle of upholding equity is the issue.
The principle of valuing one's employees and one's self is the issue.
The principle of give and take - quid pro quo - and good will is not a one way street yet so many places rely on it.
Perhaps it's all those free lunches I got that made me so fat that now I'm just unable to bend over for management and grab my ankles?
My only point is the IMO, in this economy, I find it foolish to expect an employer to provide a meal as a benefit. Expect them to provide health insurance, dental insurance, etc, of course, these are things we all need. But meals as a benefit, I personally don't find necessary, because I don't think it unreasonable to expect that one budgets a portion of their wage toward feeding themselves & their dependents. As the poster below mentioned, if one doesn't care for the benefits now being provided by their employer, they should leave and find one that suits their needs. To answer the question you posed, yes I would take issue with my employer changing my pay rate without just cause. However, as I am an employee at-will, if a major change took place that I felt so strongly about, I would terminate my relationship with the facility and find a new job.
Everyone has a right to their own opinions, I was simply stating my own. In my original post on this subject (not the one you quoted), I made no mention of whether I thought what this DON did was right (and yes, I agree it's wrong, if employer provided lunch is something negotiated in a contract, it should be provided, and provided to all employees in a fair manner), I simply responded like many others that I don't feel someone should expect lunch from their employer.
pagandeva2000, LPN
7,984 Posts
I agree with this!
I have always found that the night shift is mostly ignored, rarely considered during these decisions, which, is a shame. The kitchen is usually closed and they had to fend for themselves or each picked over food left by the previous shifts.
I feel the same. Whether some are union employees and others are not...that isn't important to me. I feel that those who make a bit less money and whose work is definitely more physical and exhaustive...allow them to have the same sort of meal that the others are. If the facility decides to say EVERYONE will get soup and a sandwich, that might actually be fairer to the morale.