lizzyj

SEIU international has sent out about 50 organizers to harass CNA RN leaders in their homes yesterday and have tried to stir up havock in CNA-represented facilities. The heart of the matter... lies in the fact that SEIU International has created a harmful company union structure where the "union" partners with management to the detriment of their members. This is especially dangerous and harmful when you represent healthcare workers who work in unsafe conditions and goes against a licensed nurse's ethical and legal obligation to be a patient advocate. The unfortunate outcomes harm patients as well as caregivers as detailed in a recent SF Weekly article. The article is a must read from start to finish, but I feel compelled to excerpt the part about the tragic death of Mary Hochman, a night nurse and SEIU member who worked at Beverley La Cumbre, a Santa Barbara nursing home: (Read the full story here http://www.sfweekly.com/2008-04-02/news/nursing-home-lobbyist-quits-after-he-predicts-seiu-power-play/full) According to news accounts, Hochman walked onto a beach and shot herself in the heart after a months-long dispute with her employer. Her problems began when she tried to report that a nurse's aide had hit an 81-year-old man with dementia. According to Contra Costa Times reporter Carolyn McMillan, Hochman said in a sworn affidavit that she was told to cover up the information. "If a nurse cannot protect her patients, I do not want to be a nurse," Hochman wrote in her suicide note. "This has taken all hope away from me."Hochman's note, along with a journal detailing instances where she was told to cover up incidents of abuse and neglect, helped spur a federal raid on the nursing home. A subsequent investigation revealed patients suffering beatings and maggot-infested bedsores, culminating in a $2 million settlement against Beverly relating to preventable deaths. The investigation also spawned a dozen civil suits, according to press reports. SEIU had lobbied to ensure that a bill before the California legislature "didn't include provisions supported by patients' rights groups that would have set standards guaranteeing high-quality care. The union added hundreds of nursing home workers to its ranks. But the labor contracts that resulted included a scandalous detail: The union was discouraged from informing regulators, or the press, in cases of bad patient care. Under traditional contracts, whistle-blowers such as Hochman could report abuses to the union and feel protected. The Alliance contracts, however, seemed to have the opposite intent. Under Stern's "modern" collaborative strategy, such protections are apparently worth sacrificing to grow the union. CNA/NNOC is proud of our record in fighting for RNs and safe patient care, from winning the first-in-the nation RN-to-patient ratios, to fighting Governor Schwarzenegger's attacks on our ratios and on the Board of Registered Nurses to building a national nurse's movement to fight for the highest standards nationally for RNs and patients. Building a national nurses movement isn't always going to be easy, but it will all be worth it when we change the face of healthcare in this country.

Link to press release about this as requested...will post articles as they arise... I am posting gthis on All Nurses as a Nurse Alert http://www.calnurses.org/media-center/press-releases/2008/april/rn-leaders-of-california-nurses-association-nnoc-demand-andy-stern-immediately-cease-seiu-s-harassment-and-stalking-of-nurses-at-home-and-on-patient-care-floors.html

seiu threatening nurses at home -- what you should do if they come to your door thursday afternoon, cna/nnoc board of directors member margie keenan, rn was sitting at home, when she looked up and saw four people staring at her through her front window. the four seiuers then started yelling her name and chanting epithets through her window. they left before the police arrived. margie later learned that seiu staff had first showed up on her nursing unit without visitors badges, and pressed co-workers in an effort to try to track her down. rn leaders of california nurses association/nnoc demand andy stern immediately cease seiu’s harassment and stalking of nurses at home and on patient care floors

an update on nick colombo from richard and patti colombo, nicks mom and dad "we just wanted to give you an update of how things are moving what we are doing and how all this is just working out in such a positive way. nick is at usc/norris cancer center*, in los angeles, and everything is now falling into place. the doctor here worked with dr. rosenthal from the sarcoma institute in kansas and knows the procedure. they are preparing him with all the things that need to be done in order for him to have the cyber knife treatment. the doctors here are upset—they say that they had never heard of nick’s case or the denial from usc norris. we said that pacificare had told us that usc didn’t have a program to treat children. they said that only applied to infants and toddlers and they wished he could have been here sooner. they told us to come down immediately, which we did! his treatment was given the green light from pacificare. it’s all covered, so this is just an awesome testimony right now, and were just so glad that nick is gonna be given a chance. they have treated tumors that are bigger than his with cyber knife. the cyber knife procedure will either kill the tumor or shrink it and make it sterile. right now we are focusing on nick and we hope that our situation has helped your organizations fight for healthcare issues. we truly believe that your efforts helped get us where we are today. thank you for your concern for the best for our family. *note: usc/norris is a major national center or cancer research, treatment, prevention and education)

http://http://www.calnurses.org/assets/pdf/ratios/ratios_booklet.pdf CHECK IT OUT This is a 20 page booklet on mandate RN-to-patient ratios authored by CNA/NNOC :"The Ratio Solution-CNA/NNOC's RN-to-Patient ratios work-Better care , more Nurses" There is a reason this book was written--RNs all over the country want madated ratios like California, which has proven to improve care and bring RNs back to work in hospitals with improved staffing. CNA RNs authored and defended AB 394...it took 13 years. We paved the way for other states and now there are Patient Protections Acts that are modeled on California in Ohio, Illinois, Texas, Arizona, and Maine. Sadly it is fact that SEIU did try and derail this bill at the eleventh hour. Fortunately they were unsuccessful, but are now doing the same dance in many of the states where CNA/NNOC is currently working to win support for mandated ratios, not: --voluntary ratios with no public disclosure, --no rights for RN as patient advocate, --LVN/LPN interchangeability --staffing based soley on patient classification sysyems without ratios as a minimujm standard. AND AS FOR RATIOS IN CONTRACT[/bMost of CNA/NNOC's 150 California contracts have won binding arbitration as a mechanism to resolve staffing disputes as well as having the actual ratios in the contract to give them extra protection from any uncertainty in the legislative arena in the future (as we witnessed with our Governor who tried unsuccessfully to weaken them a couple of years ago).

"So-called neutrality agreements occur under the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act. The CNA has had many elections under the same provisions for neutrality. Neutrality agreements are not the issue..yes NNOC/CNA has won neutriality agreements and subsequent elcetions but the BIG DIFFERENCE was that the agreeement included a requirement that 30% of the the RNs being organized had to sign authorization cards stating they wanted NNOC/CNA represenation before filing for an election and before having the rights to go inside and speak with the nurses. ...and in most cases an NNOC/CNA didn't file forthe election un til over 50% signed. How many RN signed cards in Ohio? an d why wasn't that a require,ent before going fdorward with an election? It's called democracy.

Hey there-lets have a reality check and put this into a larger perspective- Under its current leadership (Andy Stern), SEIU has repeatedly signed deals with employers that compromise RN (and other employyees) standards, scope of practice, and endanger patients in exchange for getting more and more new members. It's purely a numbers gain for SEIU. SEIU has signed off on hosital closures, lobbied for hospitals against reforms to crack down on unsafe conditions and supports proposals to erode nursing practice. SEIU JOINED CA.'S HOSITAL INDUSTRY IN LOBBYING AGAINST NNOC/ CNA's HISTORIC RN-TO-PATIENT RATIOS. T hey continue to sponsor and lobby for weakended fake staffing bills in states all throughout the country while NNOC has introduced and is fighting for real ratio laws in Ohio, Ilinois, Texas, Arizona and Maine, Hey colleagues-the proof is in the pudding. Ca.'s ratios ( authored, lobbyed, and defended all by CNA alone) have proved to be tremendously successful-since the law was signed there are 86,000 more active license RNs in the state...many of them travelers who have worked in CNA hospitals and decide to take residence in an enviroment where they can provide quality care as well as retire with dignity. Questions anyone?

insurers hijack california healthcare u nbelievable. yesterday most of california's major insurance corporations (blue shield, kaiser, cigna, etc. etc.) testified in support of arnold schwarzenegger's healthcare reform bill...and the donations they have given to assemblymembers was money well-spent, as the bill passed and was sent to the senate. [http://www.calnurses.org/media-center/press-releases/2007/december/rns-say-latest-health-bill-even-more-flawed-still-a-boondoggle-for-insurance-companies-while-affordability-provisions-are-eroded.html no wonder the private insurance corporations love this bill:] by including an "individual mandate," it creates a forced market where individuals are forced to purchase expensive, wasteful products from the very people who wrecked our healthcare in the first place. oh, but that's not all. other provisions from the bill: *insurance companies can continue to deny medical care they brand as "not medically necessary" or experimental, deny access to specialists, and deny tests - even when those care options or treatment are recommended by a physician. *insurance companies can continue to charge whatever they want. the bill has no limits on escalating premiums, deductibles, co-pays, or other rising costs. *individuals are still forced to buy insurance without guarantees of what they are buying or whether they can afford it. *fails to include the much discussed requirement of employer contributions which are left to a separate initiative to go before voters next november. "without an employer mandate, the concept of 'shared responsibility' is out the window, and it just becomes an individual mandate bill, with all the onus and burden on individuals and families," said cna/nnoc legislative director donna gerber. it's appropriate that individuals are forced to purchase insurance products without knowing what they're getting--because legislators voted for the bill without knowing how it was going to be funded. oh, that! the ironic part is that the bill relies of george bush sending california $4.7 billion in health aid, because we all know how much he loves to fund healthcare. if this process sounds vaguely familiar, [http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/574846.html it's exactly what happened with the enron deregulation some years ago.] so why, one wonders, would the governor and the speaker push an incomplete, unclear and legally questionable health plan, especially when they face an immense deficit in the state budget that senate president pro tem don perata rightly says should be addressed first? political ego. the two politicians said they'd do it this year, so with two weeks remaining in the year they wanted to claim to have done something - no matter that it is, at best, a work-in-progress that has generated as much opposition as it has support, with labor unions, consumer groups, employers and health care groups divided by ideology and self-interest. it's a lousy way to make public policy that could affect the lives of millions of californians - just like the ill-conceived, sloppily written energy scheme 11 years ago. if this is worth doing, it's worth doing right, not as a cheesy stunt a few days before christmas that, incidentally, cost taxpayers about $20,000 in expenses. another bitter irony of the bill is that it [http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/12/14/mass_panel_approves_changes_to_subsidized_residents_health_plan/ ignores the problems in massachusetts,] where the boston globe has recently reported that in the face of costs next year that could climb 14 percent, state officials are considering sharp increases in co-payments and other out-of-pocket costs for massachusetts families, fewer choices for consumers, and cuts in payments to doctors and hospitals. that's right, you're required by law to purchase insurance--and the insurers have the freedom to jack up your rates as much as they dang please. that's compounding the problem of financial risk and insecurity for patients. the good news is that this bill has been losing support faster than george bush. labor unions and patient advocates, who rightly support healthcare reform, are now bitterly divided as they see the ugly insurance corporation giveaway wearing reform drag. [http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-health18dec18,0,4788656.story?coll=la-home-center so the bill passed the assembly.] it goes to the senate, where california's hellacious budget deficit makes its passage uncertain. if it does pass, it will lose on the ballot in november. the california nurses association will of course be leading a coalition of healthcare activists to block the bill--details coming. this is california folks, we gotta stop it here so they don't do this nationally. in the meantime, i'm going to leave you with a partial list of the groups who support this bill, and support corporate welfare in the drag of healthcare reform: albertson's allscripts blue shield california association of health plans catholic healthcare west cigna daughters of charity health system integrated healthcare association kaiser permanente lindora medical clinics longs drugs memorial care molina health care pacificare/united plymouth health seiu international silicon valley leadership group small business california small business majority sutter hospital chain we'll take a look at what's up below ...cross-posted at the [http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/blog national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association's] breakroom blog, as we organize for guaranteed healthcare on the single-payer model

mandates: heart of the healthcare debate mandates: heart of the healthcare debate from iowa to california to massachusetts, the national healthcare debates are finally starting to hit the key point: the problem of the health insurance corporations. cross-posted at the [http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/blog national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association's] breakroom blog, as we organize for guaranteed healthcare on the single-payer model. [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071121/ap_po/obama_health_care the key issue is being played out now on the presidential campaign,] in exchanges between sens. clinton and obama. clinton (and edwards, romney, schwarzenegger, etc.) supports the individual mandate, requiring every person to carry health insurance, most likely purchased from one of the huge insurance corporations that have been busily gutting out health care system for their own profits. obama is put into a difficult spot by charges that he doesn't support "universal" care, but argues that the reason people don't carry insurance is because they can't afford--not, usually, that they don't want it. of course, both sides are ignoring the key point: every other industrialized democracy is successfully operating some version of a single-payer system; only we put insurance companies ahead of public health needs. nonetheless, it's important to decide if we want to hand over more customers, influence, and revenues to the same insurance corporations that are speedily wrecking our health care system. out in california, schwarzenegger and the legislature is considering their own mandates, cheered on lustily by insurance donors greedy for more profits. [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/11/26/mnp9tgrhb.dtl one key problem?] public health officials who provide most of the care for millions of uninsured residents are increasingly concerned that the proposed system could leave big financial holes in the state's safety net. which only makes sense...if you channel billions in public subsidies to insurance corporations, and guarantee their profits; of course the public health systems take a huge financial hit. that's where the money comes from. the good news for californians? [http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/520089.html a deeply-divided state government might just make this harmful "reform" impossible to pass.] [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/11/25/mnfptfchu.dtl meanwhile, kids in california are about to start getting dropped from the public rolls, while the politicians debate their plan for insurance company subsidies. unbelievable.] massachusetts is starting to experience the problems with its own mandate experiment. [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/25/us/politics/25mass.html?_r=1&n=top/reference/times%20topics/people/s/sack,%20kevin&oref=slogin short answer: only people who get subsidized insurance are signing up], while the insurance corporations are gleefully jacking up rates 10 to 12 per cent a year on everyone else. [http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/25/212436/36 finally did you catch nyceve taking on the nyt editorial board?] wow.

mandates: heart of the healthcare debate from iowa to california to massachusetts, the national healthcare debates are finally starting to hit the key point: the problem of the health insurance corporations. cross-posted at the [http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/blog national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association's] breakroom blog, as we organize for guaranteed healthcare on the single-payer model. [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071121/ap_po/obama_health_care the key issue is being played out now on the presidential campaign,] in exchanges between sens. clinton and obama. clinton (and edwards, romney, schwarzenegger, etc.) supports the individual mandate, requiring every person to carry health insurance, most likely purchased from one of the huge insurance corporations that have been busily gutting out health care system for their own profits. obama is put into a difficult spot by charges that he doesn't support "universal" care, but argues that the reason people don't carry insurance is because they can't afford--not, usually, that they don't want it. of course, both sides are ignoring the key point: every other industrialized democracy is successfully operating some version of a single-payer system; only we put insurance companies ahead of public health needs. nonetheless, it's important to decide if we want to hand over more customers, influence, and revenues to the same insurance corporations that are speedily wrecking our health care system. out in california, schwarzenegger and the legislature is considering their own mandates, cheered on lustily by insurance donors greedy for more profits. [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/11/26/mnp9tgrhb.dtl one key problem?] public health officials who provide most of the care for millions of uninsured residents are increasingly concerned that the proposed system could leave big financial holes in the state's safety net. which only makes sense...if you channel billions in public subsidies to insurance corporations, and guarantee their profits; of course the public health systems take a huge financial hit. that's where the money comes from. the good news for californians? [http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/520089.html a deeply-divided state government might just make this harmful "reform" impossible to pass.] [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/11/25/mnfptfchu.dtl meanwhile, kids in california are about to start getting dropped from the public rolls, while the politicians debate their plan for insurance company subsidies. unbelievable.] massachusetts is starting to experience the problems with its own mandate experiment. [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/25/us/politics/25mass.html?_r=1&n=top/reference/times%20topics/people/s/sack,%20kevin&oref=slogin short answer: only people who get subsidized insurance are signing up], while the insurance corporations are gleefully jacking up rates 10 to 12 per cent a year on everyone else. [http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/25/212436/36 finally did you catch nyceve taking on the nyt editorial board?] wow.

I have greast respect for our feisty Senator...and besides her major rival would be Arnold Scwazanegger, a great "friend" to nurses in california. I think not

amidst the talk of the 2008 senate races, senator barbara boxer may be the most endangered incumbent in the class of 2010.[http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/460989.html polling came out this week finding that she narrowly trails arnold schwarzenegger in a projected matchup. and now the health insurance industry has come up with a devilish scheme to prop up arnold, increase their revenues by hundreds of millions of dollars, end the drive for genuine healthcare reform all in one fell swoop...with boxer's senate seat being collateral damage in this scenario. we'll take a look below...cross-posted at the [http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/blog national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association's] breakroom blog, as we organize to make 2007 the year of guaranteed healthcare on the single-payer model. there's a fake debate going on right now, with insurers funding both sides. governor arnold's proposal is to require individuals to purchase expensive, wasteful, private insurance products. some democrats in the legislature are countering with a proposal to force employers to purchase these same products. really, what's not for insurers to like? and now we are presented with a strange political kabuki between these two proposals. advocates on both sides are bashing the other--with arguments that would apply exactly equally to their own proposal. so yesterday, in a bit of capitol irony, schwarzenegger's health care plan was heard on halloween--and it is scary and full of treats for insurance donors. the charge that the legislators made against his plan? [http://www.mercurynews.com/localnewsheadlines/ci_7337740 it's unaffordable!] but their counter-plan, for so-called employer mandates, is just as bad. that's the system we have now, but more. and it's a recipe out-of-control premiums, rising co-pays and deductibles, and an entire industry devoted to denial of care. in short, we'd have the healthcare crisis we already do. we don't know the third act of this drama. but since the sides aren't really too far apart, there's a good chance that schwarzenegger will compromise, look like a conquering hero, bring fake healthcare reform to california, and be all set up to turn the wonderful barbara boxer out of the senate in 2010, with full complicity of a number of legislators who are heavy on the payroll of the big insurance corporations. [http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-cap1nov01,1,2181218,print.column?coll=la-headlines-california george skelton, dean of the california press, doesn't think so,] but neither he nor i are privy to the planning sessions that the insurers have convened between arnold and their democratic allies. the sad part is that after the legislature passed a guaranteed healthcare, single-payer bill last year, arnold set the terms of this year's debate by vetoing it. now the capitol insiders are running around saying, "let's get something, anything done so we look good." [http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_7275575 malinda markowitz, rn, a member of cna/nnoc's council of presidents, takes on this] argument, saying: sadly, the main beneficiaries of a rushed "compromise" will be the same insurance companies that created the present crisis. they would harvest millions of new customers, with the government using its power and the public purse to further an insurance industry that will continue to be able to profiteer and deny care. we don't have to turn just to massachusetts to see an example of how this can lead to disastrous public policy. a decade ago, the same "consensus" pushed the hurried passage of energy deregulation. that was followed by blackouts, skyrocketing energy costs for consumers, financial calamity for the state, and open thievery by enron and other energy corporations. californians should demand that legislators pull the plug before we plunge into another disaster. and in case we needed it, here's one more reason to fight for genuine healthcare reform on the single-payer model: [http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-10-30-uninsuredvets_n.htm nearly two million veterans,] who already face a number of challenges, have no coverage at all. that's just not right.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/29/us/politics/29health.html?_r=1&ref=washington&oref=slogin the new york times reports today that healthcare corporations] have decided that the democrats are the party they really really love after all....to the tune of $6.5 million this year alone, with just $4.8 million going to the republicans. this marks a major change from the 2004 and 2000 campaigns. not surprisingly, frontrunners clinton and obama also lead this race. hospitals, drug companies, hmos and insurers all gave more money to the democratic candidates than to the republican ones. could this be a key reason for the "mandate fever" that some of the democratic candidates have? mandating individuals to purchase expensive insurance products, or employers to provide them, is the kind of policy that pads the bottom line of insurers without really tacking the crisis in healthcare. most of the big donors probably aren't lobbying for the kind of guaranteed, single-payer system that is succeeding in nearly every other industrialized democracy. meanwhile, trade pub modern healthcare (reg. req'd) reports that hospital industry profits have just set another record--$35.2 billion in 2006. that's just the profits folks, not counting the high executive salaries, the guys handing the checks to politicians, and the bureaucrats who shoulder on in their fight with the insurance industry over care dollars. that profit, incidentally, of $35 billion is the exact amount needed to cover 4 million more kids with the schip program. just saying... speaking of [http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/457950.html young people without healthcare,] aurelio rojas reports that people in their 20's are increasingly unable to afford health insurance and are simply going without. [http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_7299789 some doctors are so sick of the insurance industry,] that they're just moving to flat flee yearly charges--no insurance accepted. [http://www.dailysouthtown.com/news/opinion/editorials/622026,102807edithealth.article finally, in chicago, there's a move to make the public health system care] more about patients than patronage. it's about time.... cross-posted at the [http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/blog national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association's] breakroom blog, as we organize to make 2007 the year of guaranteed healthcare on the single-payer model.

when even [http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_10_22/cover.html a magazine called "the american conservative" counsels] the republican presidential candidates that they can't live on hillary-hate alone, something is happening. as nurses fighting for guaranteed healthcare, the california nurses association/national nurses organizing committee tracks this trend in terms of health policy. [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rose-ann-demoro/memo-to-the-gop-stopping_b_69472.html i will let our executive director rose ann demoro sum it up: attacking hillary clinton is not a health plan.] you can click through to the full article, but here's a taste: apparently taking their leadership from karl rove who warned that the republican candidates must focus on healthcare because the issue is "on the mind of a lot of swing voters," the republican candidates for president have now latched on to healthcare. but in the true spirit of their mentor rove, it appears they think our biggest healthcare crisis is the potential election of hillary clinton. hearing their fulminations about "socialized medicine" and "hillary care" almost makes you wonder what they've been drinking. in a new report, george lakoff's rockridge institute aptly describes the approach of clinton and the other top tier democrats as the "neoliberal mode of thought" in its dubious reliance on regulation and technocratic changes to an industry that needs to be dismantled, not tweaked. but at least clinton and company are talking about comprehensive reform. the republican candidates' healthcare policies recall the words attributed, probably erroneously, to marie antoinette whose infamous solution to mass shortages of bread was "let them eat cake." ...cross-posted at the [http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/blog national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association's] breakroom blog, as we organize to make 2007 the year of guaranteed healthcare on the single-payer model.

the movement for guaranteed healthcare remains centered this week in california, as plans based on huge public subsidies for insurance corporations wend their way through a special session of the legislature. the good news? in-fighting has broken out between governor schwarzenegger and some of the dems in the legislature, making it harder for them to reach the anti-patient compromise they're shooting for. rns and patient advocates, among other groups, continue to monitor the situation and work to ensure that any bills hurting patients are defeated. clarence page notes the central confusion over the schip veto: ...the public has been very supportive of medicare for the elderly, medicaid for the poor and the state children's health insurance program, or schip, for children whose family income is too high for medicaid but too low to afford private coverage. nevertheless, the president and his allies are reduced to reminding people that, "pssst, it's government health care so you're supposed to be afraid of it." hopefully, george bush is right and s-chip is the first step towards guaranteeing all people, child or adult, have access to healthcare. right now, that's only true in san francisco. finally, as health insurance takes a bite out of wages, labor unions getting more involved in healthcare issues, and nurses in the appalachian region are striking. go, nurses! .. cross-posted at the national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association's breakroom blog, as we organize to make 2007 the year of guaranteed healthcare on the single-payer model.

Thank-you space nurse for posting one of sadly many many examples of the impending death of employer-based healthcare insurance

The kind of single payer system being put forward in bills SB 840 in California nad HR 676 are a unique American style nati0nal health insurance that allows you to pick your provider and that doesn't dismantle the current privatre hospitals. The diffrence is that everyone is covered which expands the risk pool. You may have decent insurance now, but employer based healthcare coverage is becoming more and more unaffordable with more and more out of pocket costs and less coverage. The percentage of employers who provide healthinsurace is decreasing dramatically every year.

huge: fake ca health reform is dead more than schip, the important action in the movement for guaranteed healthcare is happening in california, where the insurance industry almost pulled off the big scam, getting governor arnold schwarzenegger and speaker fabian nunez to cooperate on a plan forcing the sale of more expensive, unworkable insurance products--and blocking the guaranteed, single-payer reform this country needs. [/b]cross-posted at the national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association's breakroom blog, as we organize to make 2007 the year of guaranteed healthcare on the single-payer model.[/size][/b] the quick background for those of you who missed it...insurance corporations have set the terms of the debate this year in california, with schwarzenegger proposing that all individuals be forced to purchase private insurance products, and nunez and certain corporate dems countering that all employers be forced to purchase them on behalf of their workforce. both plans would give more customers, revenue, and medical influence to the very insurance corporations who have ruined our healthcare system...while doing nothing to actually solve our healthcare crisis. everything has changed as a broad coalition of mainstream dems has realized that arnold's plan is unaffordable for the average patient. of course it is! private insurers waste one-third of care dollars on overhead and profits. you simply cannot do that and provide people with the care they need. of course, any plan built on private insurance corporations is unworkable. but what really kills the deal is the fact that speaker nunez' wife has just gone on the payroll of the hospital industry, having been hired by a lobbying group funded by the california hospital association. it is quite possible that he will be legally required to recuse himself on all healthcare bills...including the one he is trying to push through with schwarzenegger. even if not, the symbolism of doubling his family income through hmo money leaves him with no credibility on the issue. or as zenei cortez, rn, put it: "californians can no longer trust that he will represent the public interest and not the financial interest of a large industry that has put his wife on their payroll." of course you gotta feel for the nunez family...it's not easy to fund global luxury travel anymore! to join the fight for guaranteed healthcare (with a "medicare for all" or singlepayer financing), visit guaranteedhealthcare.org, a project of the national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association.

I was referring to empolyers don't already provide health insurance

labor & healthcare-the issue of our time you probably know that the uaw has called a national strike against gm. this is the first auto strike since 1976, the first strike against gm since 1970...and the first strike since the afl endorse a "medicare for all" style guaranteed healthcare plan. and what are they fighting for? healthcare..of course! (cross-posted at the national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association's breakroom blog, as we organize to make 2007 the year of guaranteed healthcare on the single-payer model.) executives, while pressing u.a.w. members to make concessions. no one keeps the stats, but about 90 percent of strikes are caused by the issue of healthcare. the labor movement remains at the heart of the movement to protect and expand access to healthcare for all people, while employers are looking to get out of the healthcare field. it is cruel and short-sighted of employers to just want to drop benefits rather than look for solutions that are in everbody's interests. and guess what? it's only going to get worse. just like gm will try to dump their u.s. employees out of the healthcare system, and end their own interest in solving the healthcare crisis, many of the healthcare reform proposals being floated by politicians will encourage the same thing to happen. look at the emerging deal between schwarzenegger and the legislature in california: employers spend between 12% and 15% of payroll on average for health care, and cna fears either the 4% or 7.5% plan would encourage them to move to high-deductible insurance policies with limited services, communications director chuck idelson said. "if you think we have a lot of labor strife now over health-care benefits, wait until this plan goes into effect," idelson said of the democratic bill. unlike employers, labor unions won't give up the fight for guaranteed healthcare. why? because more and more employers think of medicaid and charity care as their health benefit. and now even healthcare workers are in danger of losing their healthcare. strikes like the uaw's will help us build momentum for guaranteed, single-payer healthcare--and force corporations to really grapple with the crisis. the rapid unionization of america's rns will also provide the movement with a committed, organized, knowledgable group of activists who are personally committed to improving patient care. as uaw is standing up to gm, california's nurses will take the lead in standing up to the fake healthcare reform bill that is being pushed by a "coalition of the willing" sacramento insiders. healthcare hero sen. sheila kuehl, author of the groundbreaking single-payer bill sb 840: "i continue to believe that the movement that's been building for single payer, a movement that has seen support for a single payer universal health care system more than double over the last six months alone, will continue to build in '08 in'09 in 2010," kuehl said. "then, with a new governor, perhaps there might finally be a chance to get a signature on the bill that is actually the best solution for businesses, for employees, and for all the people in california. because if you take the insurance companies out of the system, and they are the only entity that adds no value at all to the provision of health care, the overall costs for health care in california drop $19 billion in the first year alone, simply because we're finally not paying their inflated overhead and profit." and finally, zenei cortez, rn, a member of the council of presidents of the california nurses association/national nurses organizing committee issued the following statement on the uaw strike: america's registered nurses recognize that the uaw is standing up not just for their own healthcare--but for the healthcare of all our patients. the california nurses association and national nurses organizing committee strongly supports their efforts, and will continue to work to see guaranteed healthcare won for autoworkers and everyone else in this nation. to join the fight for guaranteed healthcare (with a "medicare for all" or singlepayer financing), visit guaranteedhealthcare.org, a project of the national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association.

[/b][/b]Labor & Healthcare-The Issue of Our Time The UAW's strike against GM is not just about their members' healthcare...but also about the healthcare of millions of people not represented by a powerful union. We'll look at the potential impact of this historic strike and what it means for workers and the nation that is healthcare increasingly becoming the central issue for labor, both in bargaining and activism... cross-posted at the National Nurses Organizing Committee/California Nurses Association's Breakroom Blog, as we organize to make 2007 the Year of GUARANTEED healthcare on the single-payer model. You probably know that the UAW has called a national strike against GM. This is the first auto strike since 1976, the first strike against GM since 1970...and the first strike since the AFL endorse a "Medicare for All" style guaranteed healthcare plan. And what are they fighting for? Healthcare of course! No one keeps the stats, but about 90 percent of strikes are caused by the issue of healthcare. The labor movement remains at the heart of the movement to protect and expand access to healthcare for all people, while employers are looking to get out of the healthcare field. It is cruel and short-sighted of employers to just want to drop benefits rather than look for solutions that are in everbody's interests. And guess what? It's only going to get worse. Just like GM will try to dump their U.S. employees out of the healthcare system, and end their own interest in solving the healthcare crisis, many of the healthcare reform proposals being floated by politicians will encourage the same thing to happen. Let's look at the emerging deal between Schwarzenegger and the legislature in California: Employers spend between 12% and 15% of payroll on average for health care, and CNA fears either the 4% or 7.5% plan would encourage them to move to high-deductible insurance policies with limited services, Communications Director Chuck Idelson said. "If you think we have a lot of labor strife now over health-care benefits, wait until this plan goes into effect," Idelson said of the Democratic bill. Unlike employers, labor unions, however, won't give up the fight for guaranteed healthcare. Why? Because more and more employers think of Medicaid and charity care as their health benefit. And now even healthcare workers are in danger of losing their healthcare. Strikes like the UAW's will help us build momentum for guaranteed, single-payer healthcare--and force corporations to really grapple with the crisis. The rapid unionization of America's RNs will also provide the movement with a committed, organized, knowledgable group of activists who are personally committed to improving patient care. As UAW is standing up to GM, California's nurses will take the lead in standing up to the fake healthcare reform bill that is being pushed by a "coalition of the willing" Sacramento insiders. Healthcare hero Sen. Sheila Kuehl, author of the groundbreaking single-payer bill SB 840, gives an update on the strategy: "I continue to believe that the movement that's been building for single payer, a movement that has seen support for a single payer universal health care system more than double over the last six months alone, will continue to build in '08 in'09 in 2010," Kuehl said. "Then, with a new governor, perhaps there might finally be a chance to get a signature on the bill that is actually the best solution for businesses, for employees, and for all the people in California. Because if you take the insurance companies out of the system, and they are the only entity that adds no value at all to the provision of health care, the overall costs for health care in California drop $19 billion in the first year alone, simply because we're finally not paying their inflated overhead and profit." And finally, Zenei Cortez, RN, a member of the Council of Presidents of the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee issued the following statement on the UAW strike: America's registered nurses recognize that the UAW is standing up not just for their own healthcare--but for the healthcare of all our patients. The California Nurses Association and National Nurses Organizing Committee strongly supports their efforts, and will continue to work to see guaranteed healthcare won for autoworkers and everyone else in this nation. To join the fight for guaranteed healthcare (with a "Medicare for All" or SinglePayer financing), visit GuaranteedHealthcare.org, a project of the National Nurses Organizing Committee/California Nurses Association.

http://www.calnurse.org for immediate releaseaugust 20, 2007 contact: david johnson, 310-345-8237, jill furillo, 916-417-6203, or charles idelson, 415-559-899 rns announce breakthrough multi-state organizing pact national agreement one of largest for rns in u.s. history over 6,500 nurses covered in cna-nnoc-tenet agreementfirst phase complete as rns approve contract with 9 hospitals with pay gains of 25.5%, enhanced patient care provisions[/size][/b] in one of the largest multi-state union organizing agreements ever for registered nurses, the california nurses association/national nurses organizing committee today announced a major national pact with tenet healthcare opening the door for representation elections for at least 3,000 non-union rns around the united states into one of the nation’s fastest growing unions. concurrently, cna/nnoc announced the completion of the first phase of the agreement as rns at nine california hospitals, including tenet’s two largest facilities in the state, had approved a new collective bargaining contract covering an additional 3,500 nurses. the contract provides for average pay gains of 25.5% over four years, significant patient care enhancements, and improved union rights. tenet rns approved the pact in membership meetings friday, saturday, and sunday. “this is a monumental moment for the nation’s rns as tenet nurses across the nation have a historic opportunity to join with 3,500 of their unionized colleagues to assure the highest standards for their patients and themselves,” said rose ann demoro, cna/nnoc executive director and a national vice president of the afl-cio. the organizing pact provides a process under which tenet rns in selected facilities are now eligible to affiliate with cna/nnoc in fair, democratic representation elections. meanwhile, california tenet rns were hailing their new agreement. "today, tenet rns spoke out clearly in favor of patients and our profession. there is strength in numbers," said laura fairhurst, an emergency room rn at modesto. “the overwhelming vote to ratify in all nine cna/tenet hospitals demonstrates the nurses' solidarity in advocating for our patients and insuring working conditions that will keep rns at the bedside,” said nurse negotiator sherri stoddard, a cna/nnoc board member and a tenet rn at sierra vista regional medical center in san luis obispo. on top of across the board pay raises, the rns receive more additional compensation based on years of service to their hospital that will be determined in separate bargaining at each facility, “wage equity and rates that will recruit and retain rns in our hospitals,” as stoddard put it. for nurses at the usc university hospital in los angeles, “this contract not only ensures our raise, it promotes recruitment and retention of experienced nurses while benefiting quality patient care," said norris rn nicole ramos. ratios and other patient care enhancements enhanced patient care provisions were a major focus as well. the new agreement places california’s groundbreaking rn-to-patient ratios in the tenet contracts, making them subject to contract enforcement provisions. it strengthens guidelines to assure rns work in areas of their specialty expertise and provides for lift policies to ensure safe patient handling. additionally, the agreement stipulates that introduction of new technology at tenet facilities will not displace or erode rn professional judgment. "this contract will benefit both the nurses and patients, resulting in strong, quality patient care. we are ecstatic that an overwhelming majority of doctors (modesto) nurses have approved the contract," said modesto rn sue boyer. “i was proud to present this contract to our coworkers,” said marlen wears, an rn at desert regional medical center in palm springs. “the agreement is a great step forward for nurses and patients in the coachella valley.” “this contract for desert nurses is the best ever! it was great to see coworkers with smiles on their faces throughout the voting process,” said desert rn jim cannon. among many other provisions, the agreement also includes an important protection for the rns’ union rights. tenet agreed, joining with many other cna/nnoc facilities, that it will not seek to exclude nurses from representation on the dubious claim that they are “supervisors” under a controversial ruling by the bush administration’s federal labor board last year. “we have been negotiating with tenet for nearly a year, and i am thrilled with the ratification of this contract,” stoddard noted. "as a member of the statewide cna bargaining committee, i am proud of the job we accomplished in coming to an agreement with tenet healthcare, said norris rn alice colacino , like many of her colleagues a nurse negotiator. “this contract will reward our nurses for their diligence, skills, and critical decision making, and will strengthen our collective voice. our patients, nurses and tenet will reap the benefits from this historic agreement." other hospitals affected by the agreement are los alamitos medical center near los angeles, twin cities community hospital in templeton on the central coast; and two bay area hospitals, community hospital of los gatos, and san ramon regional medical center. cna/nnoc represents 75,000 rns from california to maine. for more information about cna/nnoc, see http://www.calnurses.org.