Published
Yes, most hospitals do pay significantly more for non benefited positions. It is not just benefits the PRN nurse gives up, it may be job security as well. These are usually the first to be cancelled if census is low or floated to another area. If there are staff cutbacks, PRN is the first to go. I worked at one hospital who paid 40% more to PRN nurses in lieu of benefits. Many hospitals are moving toward their own "in house agency" and not using travelers or ourside agency help. The draw was a substantial increase in pay, but no benefits. Some are even offering 13 week contracts thru their own "agency" for more security.
It's the old rule of supply and demand. In my area (L.A.) so many nurses want to work Per Diem that the hospitals don't necessarily need to pay a much higher rate than they do for staff (FT or PT) nurses. We have 3 classifications of "bedside" nurses: FT or PT with benefits (rates are from $29-$42/hr), FT or PT without benefits (about 17-20% higher), and Per Diem (no benefits, only requirement is 2 weekend shifts/month and they get a flat rate of $37/hrs). Last year when the FT/PT with or without benefit RN's got a pay raise the Per Diems didn't simply because we have a waiting list of RN's who want to work PD and the law of supply and demand kicked in.
leisa22
61 Posts
I just moved and was previously working for a hospital that payed their PRN employees about $10 more an hour than full and part time employees. I guess they did this to make up for lack of insurance benefits and such. Since I didnt need these benefits I worked PRN for about 36 hours a week, which was like full time with the added pay. My question is do all or most hospitals pay PRN employees more? I tried to look it up but I noticed that hosptials do not post their pay. I even emailed a couple human resourse people in my new area and got no response. I thought I would ask here.
Thanks