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.
I've been trying to edit the original post to help clarify many things, but I'm not having too much luck with that. Note to self, try and be more specific with details in any further posts.
Yes I'm a Canadian Nurse. However that doesn't seem to matter because the issue here goes far beyond borders and far beyond the issue of food. The fact is that the collective agreement clearly states that employees(all) have the right to purchase food. If an employer does this right they can actually make money on this. If not, they are at least reducing their costs because staff are purchasing any excess food that would've normally been thrown out if the resident's/patients decided that they weren't that hungry that day.
In addition let's take out the food factor for a moment. The employer in this case has arbitrarily decided that one group of workers is entitled to one benifit while another group isn't. To be more specific. Let's say that the employer was only going to give the R.N.'s who work in E.R. a 5% wage increase while all the R.N.'s in the rest of the building were only going to get a 2% wage increase. I'm sure many nurses here would clearly object to something like that.
Another scenario could be that because of staffing issues and a means of controlling costs, a Director of Nursing could arbitrarily state that only the R.N.'s who work in Labour and Delivery will be entitled to any vacation time next year in 2009. How would the R.N.'s in the rest of the facility react?
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've been trying to edit the original post to help clarify many things, but I'm not having too much luck with that. Note to self, try and be more specific with details in any further posts.
Yes I'm a Canadian Nurse. However that doesn't seem to matter because the issue here goes far beyond borders and far beyond the issue of food. The fact is that the collective agreement clearly states that employees(all) have the right to purchase food. If an employer does this right they can actually make money on this. If not, they are at least reducing their costs because staff are purchasing any excess food that would've normally been thrown out if the resident's/patients decided that they weren't that hungry that day.
In addition let's take out the food factor for a moment. The employer in this case has arbitrarily decided that one group of workers is entitled to one benifit while another group isn't. To be more specific. Let's say that the employer was only going to give the R.N.'s who work in E.R. a 5% wage increase while all the R.N.'s in the rest of the building were only going to get a 2% wage increase. I'm sure many nurses here would clearly object to something like that.
Another scenario could be that because of staffing issues and a means of controlling costs, a Director of Nursing could arbitrarily state that only the R.N.'s who work in Labour and Delivery will be entitled to any vacation time next year in 2009. How would the R.N.'s in the rest of the facility react?
You're preaching to the choir here. I wonder how different the responses would have been if you had posted this in the Canadian Forum.
Most American nurses aren't unionized and from what I've read here, many regards unions with same distaste as they would the anti-christ.
Our mindset is different. The unions that bargain for PNs and Aides have to fight long and hard for what they've achieved. In my province, the government rolls over and gives the RN union pretty much whatever is asked for. PNs had to fight for every last cent and benefit. Yet, the public sees a nurse at the bedside and assumes that we all make the same wage and have the same benefits.
While it might seem like a mountain is being made out of a molehill to the American respondents, to the Canadians and the Australians who have posted here, we understand how management is chipping away at one groups contract to the benefit of another unions contract.
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.
you are right about the night shift. just this last week, I was in working, and one of the night crew was stuck over. we do 12 hr shifts....so her 7p to 7am shift went till 11 am. she didn't have any money, and didn't have any food for after her dinner bag-lunch. at our hospital, you can't even get coffee for free. if you are working 16 hrs, it should be not just a law, but common sence from management that the staff get a free meal ticket or something.
With regards to other shifts. Those who work evening shifts do have the option to purchase full hot meals on their supper breaks. Unfortunately, those who work nights aren't able to because the kitchen is closed. Many times night staff will bring in their own meals or warm up any food that may or may not be left for them. Because night staff get excluded in this, is one one of the many reasons why I and many others have been lobbying for 12 hr shifts. However, neither the employer nor union officials are in any hurry to switch over to 12 hour shifts. Yet some of the facilities that have switched over to 12 hour shifts here locally have much happier staff.
.
leslie :-D
11,191 Posts
i didn't know these hot meals were incorporated into your contracts.
and while it's a nice benefit, it isn't right that only some will get full meals.
i too, am afraid that grieving it would expropriate any meals one receives.
and yes, it really does stink for the morale.
leslie