I'm posting this fast, and don't yet have all the details, but here is what I do know:
CNA just won a representation election for the RNs at Cypress Fairbanks Hospital, a part of the Tenet chain in Houston Texas.
Other than a small number of RNs employed by the federal government, this represents the first unionized nurses in the entire state a very tough organizing environment. It is the first major fruits of a three year statewide campaign.
The election was run under an organizing agreement won at the bargaining table by Tenet nurses in California.
Don't yet have numbers or other details, will make a second post when I do. I've met some of these Texas nurses and they are just the greatest. This is only the first of many organizing victories to come in this state.
I cannot find any repeal of the requirement to staff to the indivual needs of the patients as determined by the assessment of the direct care registered nurse.
Thanks, herring. I'm on the same page and appreciate your advocacy and level headed responses to bitters... I hope she shares her point of reference. Those of us who are direct care registered nurses/members of CNA/NNOC know that a democratic union takes work. As we used to say in the Girl Scouts, "many hands make the work light." Many studies have shown that ratios + staffing by individual patient acuity are working! CNA/NNOC members have tools and the benefit of collective advocacy to hold the administration accountable and make them liable for any errors that occur when staff nurses document that staffing is not based on acuity as the law requires. When staffing is strictly "by the numbers", (maximum number of patients to nurse)-without the required "staffing up" based on patient acuity, as determined by the nurse responsible for the patients, it's unsafe. It's our duty and our right to report those unsafe conditions to management without fear of retaliation.
Where are the NNON and CNA representatives who were at the NTI in Chicago? I am wainting for them to call me, and figure out how to get NNOC and CNA representation Washington State. PM me or call me ASAP. I am ready to rolll! Thanks!!
The article also misrepresents the potential impact of a "right-to-work" initiative, saying that it "would let workers in union shops opt out of the union." Actually. no workers are ever compelled to join a union. Under the National Labor Relations Act, when a union is designated as the representing a specific group of workers, it is legally obligated to represent all the workers in the unit, whether or not they support the union. This means that if a worker is wrongfully fired or is the victim of some other breach of the contract or labor law, the union is obligated to represent the worker's interest, regardless of whether or not the worker supports the union.
In Colorado, as in many other states, unions may sign contracts with employers that require all the workers who it represents to pay a fee to the union for this representation. The initiative discussed in this article would make such contracts illegal, thereby giving workers the option of being represented by the union without paying for this representation. Since the initiative would allow people to benefit from union representation without paying for and does nothing about people's right to work, it can more accurately be described as a "right-to-freeload" initiative.
Historically, nurses have always understood that their first duty is to act, to change circumstances as required, for the benefit of patients. Nursing advocacy, patient advocacy, social advocacy, political advocacy...collect the data, make an assessment, make a plan, implement the plan, evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions.
Too bad our nursing "leadership" has forgotten this simple nursing process.
No one critically reflects on the membership organizations or their leadership. If they did, they would throw most of them out.
Too bad our nursing "leadership" has forgotten this simple nursing process.
No one critically reflects on the membership organizations or their leadership. If they did, they would throw most of them out.
Good at making plans, bad at everything else.
A thank you was given because this topic is important. In my opinion nursing leadership is too busy scurrying around, trying to implement a budget that is woefully short of supporting safe patient care. As nurses, the last line of defense for our patients' safety, we have a moral and social obligation to know the reasons behind this fact. Check out
I am not good at providing links, but call or email the DOH and ask for the latest amendment from this January. Am i ANTI RATIO?, No, but I feel acuity is more important like that legislation in Illinois. I do however feel that unions do not belong in hospitals and with the current turf war out there I find it embarrassing with all of the mud slinging on both ends, that we as professionals would even support such behaviors. We can certainly work with our Associations and not pay for protection, because in essence that is what we do when in a union. I have been on both sides, I can speak for myself. Roseann De Moro is not my advocate, nor is Andy Stern, nor is Lorraine Seidel or Anne Converso. they are not representative of what we need and we need more programs, we need to show what a great profession this is to go into. We do not have enough nurses to go around. With the current surge of private surgi centers etc, nurses are going to them to work. they pay well, they have decent benefits they do not have to work weekends or holidays. there is nothing attractive to draw a nurse to work in a hospital. That is what we need to work on, as a profession.
I cannot find a "new amendment". There is no change to Title 22 Section 70217. There has not been an amendment to AB 394, the enabling legislation for the safe staffing ratios:http://www.calnurses.org/assets/pdf/ratios/ratios_ab_394_text.pdf
Acuity has been the law in California since the CNA sponsored it and organized RNs testified for it in 1996. It the hospitals had complied with the regulations we wouldn't have needed to pass the ratio law.
The ratio is the floor, NOT the ceiling! Previous to the ratios each hospital had its "floor" they called "core staffing". It was all too often unsafe.
The California Nurses Association began lobbying our state Assembly members and State Senators for more slots in nursing programs back in the nineties when some believed there were too many nurses.
Governor Davis signed it into law and then Governor Schwarzenegger continued the law.
The Initiative has been instrumental in increasing the opportunity for qualified students to earn their RN license.
In the 2000 to 2001 school year 10,021 graduates of California schools of nursing applied to take their boards.
In the 2007 to 2007 school year 28, 506 graduates of California schools of nursing applied to take their boards.
We need to expand the initiative so ALL qualified applicants, can attend an RN program. Especially LVNs and CNA who have shown a desire and ability to care for people who are sick and injured. At least until we have sufficient registered nurses.
I was blessed to attend one of the 2007 graduations! We have many wonderful new nurses working in our hospitals now!
PS: To attach a link click up at the top of your screen where it says "address". The address will darken. Then click "edit" and then "copy". Then move your mouse to where you want to post the link and click "paste".
and of course you have a right, but we have rights to refrain from a union also. it's a choice you make, to speak for your profession is a right, no matter how you do it. but there are other ways. I have made a choice to NOT be a union advocate. i was a sincere one during most of my career, but saw the change that has occured in the labor movement in this country. " what happens when your votes are not counted and the candidate with the fewer votes is declared the winner? " don't think it can happen? It happened in the White House.....what makes you think it doesn't happen within the union structure? When a union campaigns it is the same campaign as anything in politics....................
Specializes in Critical care, tele, Medical-Surgical.
i love my country and i love democracy.
i do not want to go to anarchy because there is corruption in the electoral process.
i think it is my duty to do my part to work with my fellow citizens and nurses toward fair elections. these nurses volunteered to go to the capitol on a day off work to make it clear that our patients need safe staffing. this is action of people who think their votes were counted.
Nursing associations are not all the same. To lump nursing associations into one big, same agenda group is a disservice to bedside nurses, who continually work in unsafe conditions. Nurses who criticise nursing unions, lumping them all together have not done their research. It is easy to make generlized statements regarding a nebulous philisophical position. As far as "professional" organizations go; the ANA represents the management side of nursing. I cannot speak for other bedside nurses, but I have not seen my management nursing team support what I need to be a competent, safe nursing practicioner for my patients. In speaking with other RNs, throughout California and across the country, I hear the same story; extremely short staffing, unsafe working conditions for nurses and patients, no breaks, lack of proper equipment, lack of lift teams, too many patients to do a proper job of care, assessment, and education, the list goes on and on. Where is the active voice of the ANA regarding these issues? Where is the action needed? Placating words are cheap. If any nurse thinks that the changes we need will come from management goodwill, you are deceiving yourself and failing your patients. Corporate health care and their partners (management) are interested in profit. Wake up nurses. Do some active research. Only with a strong, unified bedside nursing voice will we effect the changes we need. That brings us back to unions. Not all unions are the same. To lump unions into one big group is a disservice to nurses who have done their homework, and researched what each union represents. Again I request that nurses check out www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05092008/watch.html
Here is a group of bedside nurses, the governing body (BOD) of whom are all bedside nurses. This group continually, actively works for improvement in bedside nursing conditions. This in turn supports competent, safe patient care. There is not a nursing shortage. There is only a shortage of nurses who will work in the required unsafe conditions.
RN4MERCY
328 Posts
Thanks, herring. I'm on the same page and appreciate your advocacy and level headed responses to bitters... I hope she shares her point of reference. Those of us who are direct care registered nurses/members of CNA/NNOC know that a democratic union takes work. As we used to say in the Girl Scouts, "many hands make the work light." Many studies have shown that ratios + staffing by individual patient acuity are working! CNA/NNOC members have tools and the benefit of collective advocacy to hold the administration accountable and make them liable for any errors that occur when staff nurses document that staffing is not based on acuity as the law requires. When staffing is strictly "by the numbers", (maximum number of patients to nurse)-without the required "staffing up" based on patient acuity, as determined by the nurse responsible for the patients, it's unsafe. It's our duty and our right to report those unsafe conditions to management without fear of retaliation.