Published Dec 24, 2009
What are your thoughts on the correlation between proposed reform and its impact on the salaries or nurses? Include RN's, ANP's & CRNA's...
OutlawNurse86, BSN, RN
148 Posts
A few years down the road I'll probably be wishing I'd gotten that welding degree instead....
Yeah, I love my job, but people gotta live. If I ain't gonna get paid jack then what's the point of working a high stress job with sucky hours?
dmc_rrt
59 Posts
How strong is your nurses union? In the public health care system in Canada, the nursing wages seem quite acceptable ($30-40/hr). The nursing unions are very strong.
RedhairedNurse, BSN, RN
1,060 Posts
A few years down the road I'll probably be wishing I'd gotten that welding degree instead....Yeah, I love my job, but people gotta live. If I ain't gonna get paid jack then what's the point of working a high stress job with sucky hours?
IMO, I don't think we have "sucky" hours. I love having 4 days a week off.
I just recently had 5 days off in a row, I worked two, got canceled on one
then have another 5 days off. Wonderful hours. Sure as heck beats
my previous 9-5 mon-fri job.
charlestonsailing
49 Posts
Most people in the US "can't just choose when/where/who" now, because their insurance company controls and dictates that. Also, even the more progressive House bill doesn't implement anything remotely like "all the other countries/nations that have socialized healthcare." Shoot, the Senate bill is little more than a big Xmas gift to the private insurance industry! Don't worry, they (the private for-profit insurance industry) will still be calling all the shots in the US for a long time to come ...
Just curious but have any of us actually read the bill?? I know our senators didn't before
they voted. I just have trouble trusting any bill that only passed due to backroom dealmaking and virtual bribes. I haven't read it either just wondering I'd those who are stating strong opinions have.
Medsport, LPN
352 Posts
So this passed today, what exactly does it mean? I hear rumors they are going to make you pay for insurance or pay a penalty. My small company does'nt offer it (well I think they do but it's like $170 a month and not that good anyway) and I can't afford it anyway. If it comes out to say $15 a week or so then it won't be that bad, but I'm probably dreaming. This may put me over the edge whether to file bankruptcy or not as I can barely pay my bills now and that's with working a PRN job occasionally and deferring my student loans from time-to-time, although I know I eventually will have to pay it (unless I do the loan forgiveness thing after 10 years of payment, but not sure how you sign up for it). I'm starting to look for a better paying job again, but my area just is'nt hiring very much and if they do they don't want to give you the hours and/or pay that they should so you can afford to live...
I haven't read it. I've heard the pundits talk about people required to buy insurance. In your case the talking heads have talked about subsidies for those making under 80000. Not sure if that is true. In any case I can't imagine the supreme court ruling that it is constitutional forbthe fed to require a private citezen purchase anything. That will be a first in our nation. I know a lot of people try to say that auto insurance mandates are the same but anyone who thinks logically about the two will see yje flaw in the analogy. Namely that a person can live their entire life without auto insurance if they choose not to drive on public roads.
sweetiepeas
93 Posts
Here is a detailed summary
http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/health_care/hr3962_DETAILEDSUMMARY.pdf
PostOpPrincess, BSN, RN
2,211 Posts
I don't want a union.
I prefer to speak up for myself, and I've done a good job of making sure I get what is fair to both my hospital system as well as myself.
The thing is that there will be many of us who will leave this profession if the wages go down
We are talking about TALENT here....
What will be left behind?
Well.....the opposite of TALENT.....
'Nuff said.
MaxAttack, BSN, RN
559 Posts
In any case I can't imagine the supreme court ruling that it is constitutional forbthe fed to require a private citezen purchase anything. That will be a first in our nation. I know a lot of people try to say that auto insurance mandates are the same but anyone who thinks logically about the two will see yje flaw in the analogy. Namely that a person can live their entire life without auto insurance if they choose not to drive on public roads.
I've been sitting here thinking about this, searched my memory, then finally had to pull up a copy of the Constitution. I'm having the hardest time trying to figure out under what Power they would be able to do this, and you might be right. I can't think of one thing that every American is required to buy. This is a very interesting point that I haven't heard anyone bring up before.
While I was looking for the section which requires the purchase of insurance, I found this:
SEC. 1501(a)(3):
"SUPREME COURT RULING- In United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association (322 U.S. 533 (1944)), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that insurance is interstate commerce subject to Federal regulation."
I've been debating in my head the different powers they were going to justify mandating insurance, but they've conveniently included it in the bill. The Constitution is far from black and white, so they might be able stretch regulation to include mandating every citizen (aside from the few exceptions) to purchase a service. However, this will create a massive flaw in the system and grant powers to Congress that should be beyond their scope.
Since insurance can be regulated under interstate commerce, whatever powers apply to insurance also apply to interstate commerce (since that's what it is, legally). Granting Congress the power to mandate a purchase will also apply to anything regulated under interstate commerce.
Sorry for the multi-post, but here's what you're looking for. Not rumor, it's written into the bill. There will be reduced premiums depending on your income, so hopefully that'll be enough to keep you out of bankruptcy.
"SEC. 5000A. REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE.
(a) Requirement To Maintain Minimum Essential Coverage- An applicable individual shall for each month beginning after 2013 ensure that the individual, and any dependent of the individual who is an applicable individual, is covered under minimum essential coverage for such month."
moneyline702
97 Posts
No need for apologies, this is great info!!