Descrimination: A full hot meal or soup and a sandwich

[Truth66]

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.

[gonzo1, ASN, RN]

I usually work 12 hours with no break. Sometimes I bring something from home and eat it at my computer while charting in between doing things for my patients.

I would think sandwich and a soup is great. It would make for a great diet plan too because I gain weight from eating candy bars because I am hungry and they fit in my pocket so easy.

I don't think you are going to get a lot of sympathy from most of us. However, it is unfair if some workers are getting a full meal and not every one. So I do hope that you pursue this and win an equitable solution.

[SuesquatchRN, BSN, RN]

I agree with SuesquatchRN in that everyone can't be off the floor at the same time. Which is why when the Practical Nurses and the Care Aides decided to change their meal times to reflect the change in dietary, the first group were taking their lunch at 12:30 pm leaving some staff on the floor and the second group took their lunch 1:00 pm. However, as I indicated this did not sit well with the Director of Nursing who ordered the Practical Nurses and Care Aides to go back to their original lunch times of 10:45 and 11:15.

So the DON has altered the terms without consultation with or input from her union employees. A tad authoritarian, this DON.

Grieve it. She's isn't the queen.

[NurseyPoo7]

Wait, you get lunch breaks?

You're lucky.

[DusktilDawn]

I don't quite agree here. the original post said

(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.)

It would only be treating them differently, if the powers that be knew for a fact that the only two groups that took breaks before the changed lunch times were the LPN and CNA's. And for a fact, I mean, if it was in the employee hand book, or in the contract that they are to take breaks at 10:45 and 11:15. two categories of workers that usually have lunch at a certain time is another story. I can say that the Smokers in my facility usually take lunch at 2:00pm. (which is true, since they always take extra morning breaks (to smoke) and let the rest of us do lunch if we can... then they do a later extended smoke/eating break....

I would only consider it a kind of descrimination if for a fact, it was intentional against a specific union.

maybe the hospital can talk about having a rotating break schedule. I am an RN, and I have stayed back to feed patients and let the CNA's go on break. Yea, you don't always have the time and options to do this, but it sure would help moral between the unions.

The situation isn't against a specific union, it is against a specific group of employees. It doesn't have to be intentional and it doesn't have to be against a specific union to be discriminatory. It may not have been intentional towards a specific group of employees when dietary enacted this change. However those that supervise the Practical nurses and Care aides are aware of this situation affecting this group specifically:

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.

So yes, the TPTB are aware and have chosen not to address issue. If these break times were negotiated by the union, they were negotiated in good faith, meaning that these employees had the same options as ALL employees. Management of the Dietary department made changes that affected 2 groups of employees. Whether they intended to or not they disallowed the same choice of these 2 groups that other staff has. Regardless of Dietary's intent or motivation, the Director of Nursing IS aware that it is the Practical nurses and Care aides that have been affected, according to the OP.

Thank you for the feedback thus far. However, I think that there's some clarification that needs to be done.

1) Our collective aggreement states "The parties hereto agree that in every instance the employee shall pay a fair price for any meals obtained which shall in no intance be less than the actual cost of furnishing such meals, and the said cost shall be computed by the Corporation. When employees bring their own meal, they shall use the designated dining area for the consumption of same." In other words all employees are entitled to purchase a meal.

2) Up until the the first week of December, every employee in the building was entitled to purchase a full hot meal of what ever was being served to the residents that particular day. Every employee was treated equally. The only difference was that there was different meal times.

3) After the first week of December the employer singled out two categories of workers and said that they were not allowed to purchase a full hot meal like everyone else.

4) If the employer would have allowed the Practical Nurses and Care Aides to change their break times to eat their lunch after 12:30 pm like everyone else then there would be no arguement. Then everyone would once again still be treated equally and all entitled to purchase a full hot meal.

As it stands now the Practical Nurses and the Care Aides are not treated equally, thus the filing of the grievence.

In regards to this issue they are not being treated the same as other employees, management is aware, and yes that can be a basis for filing a grievance against discriminatory treatment.

[Truth66]

I usually work 12 hours with no break. Sometimes I bring something from home and eat it at my computer while charting in between doing things for my patients.

I would think sandwich and a soup is great. It would make for a great diet plan too because I gain weight from eating candy bars because I am hungry and they fit in my pocket so easy.

I don't think you are going to get a lot of sympathy from most of us. However, it is unfair if some workers are getting a full meal and not every one. So I do hope that you pursue this and win an equitable solution.

I'm hoping that people here are not thinking that I'm trying to gain any kind of sympathy. I appreciate all too well that countless nurses and aides are working so hard that they barely get any breaks at all. I've worked a countless number of shifts like that myself over the past 12 plus years.

The primary reason for starting this particular thread with this topic is that I'm a huge advocate for equality and have very little patience for any employer who takes advantage of their workers. This case has definitely created alot of friction among the staff which as I indicated is completely unnecesary.

Several years ago a nurse told me something that I will never forget. She told me that management love it when staff are fighting amongst themselves because it's less energy and/or fighting that's directed towards them. The Director of Nursing in this case has suceeded in creating unnecesary conflict amongst the staff. In fighting this issue, I'm also trying to end this conflict that she herself has deliberately created.

All health care workers deserve to be treated with the respect that they deserve and not be descriminated against in any way shape or form.

For those nurses who aren't getting their breaks, I feel for you because it's not doing your health any good and can be a contributing factor to early burnout. Please take care of yourselves.

[MAISY, RN-ER, BSN, RN]

I think it's a great idea to file a grievance. This way everyone will be equal and no one will have an opportunity in your facility to be fed when it is decided you all get nothing. Then you will be like all of us, brownbagging it.

Personally, as the owner or manager of this facility I would think that you were all ungrateful. The needs of the patients, and budgets are why things are scheduled the way they are. There must be a reason lunches were scheduled the way they were. All of you eating a meal is just a nice extra, which I am sure you will lose if this is pushed. If they want conflict they will have it, your RNs will just love you guys, and think of all of the CNAs who may not be able to afford spending extra for lunch. Why do people cut their noses off to spite their faces?

There are so many important things in this world to complain about, if this is the only issue your facility has then that is amazing!

[tencat]

There are so many important things in this world to complain about, if this is the only issue your facility has then that is amazing!

Kinda what I was thinking.....I'm sorry, but it does seem rather petty and silly. These molehills that get made into mountains might be part of the reason many people are anti-union. Unions can do great things. Unions can also cause a lot of problems at times.

[morte, LPN, LVN]

all of you who are saying "free" meal, please go back and read.....the negotiated agreement stated the right to purchase, not free......this is a change in a negotiated agreement signed off by management and union and is certainly greivable.....please read more carefully

[Ruby Vee, BSN]

first off, the idea that your employer made any provisions for your lunch is terrific! i worked in a major teaching hospital that had no cafeteria for nurses -- although the physicians had a very nice dining room and the ancillary staff had their own dining room, too. we used to send ambulatory patients out with a list and our cash to the hot dog stand in front of the hospital to get our lunch -- when we had time to take lunch!

second, i'd be afraid that if the union made a stink about the "discrimination" all options for food would disappear. as a cost saving measure, of course.

[Dinsey]

I'd be more upset if a free service was "unequal"

If you're paying for it anyway, then it's business. It costs them less to offer a certain product earlier in the day (sandwiches can be made ahead (or salad bar style) and soup in large volume, so there's less labor involved. So since this is capitalism, vote with your wallet. Don't buy the soup/sandwich, bring your own food.

I also work nights, so I couldn't buy a hot meal even if I wanted to eat the gruel my cafeteria serves. I'm happier with the food I bring and heat up myself.

[Freedom42]

While this appears to be about discrimination, first and foremost, it's about the employer's breach of contract. The meals aren't "a nice extra" or something "terrific" that's been offered by the employer, as previous posters have noted. They are a benefit negotiated by the union as part of the workers' compensation package. By offering a lesser benefit than what was negotiated, the employer appears to be in breach.

Is it worth a grievance? Consider that an employer's past practices are legally binding. So potentially if the union allows the employer to offer a lesser benefit to this group of employees, then theoretically, it must permit the employer to offer that same lesser benefit to another group, without negotiation. The employer gets away with violating contract provisions if the union allows it. It's a slippery slope. What benefit is the next to go?

I'm disappointed, but not surprised, that so many posters respond with arguments along the lines of "shut up and be grateful, because that's more than I get." Instead of condemning the OP for standing up for her rights, these posters might want to ask themselves why they begrudge someone else a benefit. Why is the argument always "but I don't get that benefit" instead of "why don't I get that benefit, too?"

Yes, employers have financial limits, especially in this economy. But that doesn't mean that workers don't have rights. Union contracts and compensation provisions can be changed through negotiation, not unilateral action. As for the OP, I hope she remembers that unions are as powerful as their members choose to be.

[Fiona59]

For some reason I think the OP is Canadian.

We Canadians take our unions very seriously. Contracts are negotiated long, hard, and with every detail included. Chances are the nursing home is either provincially funded or a not-for-profit. Most RNs and PNs are in effect public servants. We've just had to explain all of this to an American nurse who came north to work. We had to explain that paid sick leave and annual vacation are two separate items. She thought she had to use paid vacation time to be sick, sheesh.

Grieve this one until the cows come home because management is playing favourites with which contract they are deciding to honour. To put it simply, under the contracts, it's not the Directors call to make. She's deciding to honour the RN contract and not the contract covering "ancilliary staff"