jsrRN

today the california nurses association/national nurses organizing committee (cna/nnoc) and the service employees international union (seiu) announced an accord to work together to bring union representation to all non-union rns and other healthcare employees in the us. as nurses, we know all too well that working in a hospital these days means engaging in a daily struggle to provide care in an industry more concerned about it's bottom-line than about providing patient care. registered nurses struggle day in and day out to provide care without adequate staffing and resources. non-rn hospital staff are struggling to fulfill essential hospital functions with ever decreasing numbers of staff, while worrying that they'll be the next to be laid off. patients, left to wonder if a nurse will be available to help if they ring their call-lights and whether their hospital bills will bankrupt their families are likely the most affected. the accord between cna/nnoc and seiu and the resulting massive increase in unionization will improve the experience of providing and receiving care in us hospitals--and the resulting movement will change the whole nature of how health care is provided in the us. read the press release here in the words of rose ann demoro, the executive director of cna/nnoc, the nation's largest organization of direct care rns with 85,000 members in all 50 states: "this is an exciting new day for nurses and patients across the nation. this agreement provides a huge spark for the emergence of a more powerful, unified national movement that is needed to more effectively challenge healthcare industry layoffs and attacks on rn economic and professional standards and patient care conditions. it will also strengthen the ability of all direct-care rns to fight for real healthcare reform and advocate for improved patient care conditions and stronger patient safety legislation from coast to coast." in the words of andy stern, president of seiu,the nation's largest healthcare union: "this marks the beginning of a new future for nurses and other healthcare workers and their patients throughout this nation. we are lining up to make sweeping changes to this country's broken healthcare system, and as we wait for the starting gun it is imperative that we put the past behind us and move forward by putting all healthcare workers in the strongest possible position to define reform, move legislation, and make the new healthcare system operational. is this accord surprising? perhaps, but those who recognize our shared value of making sure registered nurses and other healthcare workers have not only a say but a critical role in helping reshape a failed system into something that actually helps people know that this is the right step to help us meet the challenge and the call of this moment." among key elements of the pact: the two unions will work together to organize non-union hospital workers throughout the country, with cna/nnoc as the leading voice for rns, and seiu as the leading voice for all other hospital workers. the unions will launch an intensive national organizing campaign with an initial focus on the nation's largest hospital systems. in addition to organizing, seiu and cna/nnoc will coordinate on a broad range of other issues from bargaining with common employers to the campaign to enact the employee free choice act. seiu and cna/nnoc publicly endorse measures that allow states to adopt single-payer health care systems. both parties will refrain from "raiding," seeking to displace the existing members of the other's organization, or from interference in the other's internal affairs. the two unions will create a new joint rn organization in florida to represent current and future rns of both unions. in all other states, seiu will continue to represent their current rn members in collective bargaining.

This is an amazing step forward! I've always been puzzled that teachers managed to get themselves organized in teacher's unions, but as a profesison as RNs we allowed ourselves to be atomized and porificed out among non-RN unions.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/28635329/ health insurer accused of overcharging millions unitedhealth group agrees to a $50 million settlement after investigation by melissa dahl, jeff rossen and robert powell today updated 4:51 a.m. pt, tues., jan. 13, 2009 one of the nation's largest health insurers has agreed to pay $50 million in a settlement announced today after being accused of overcharging millions of americans for health care. the new york attorney general's office launched an investigation after receiving hundreds of complaints about oxford insurance and its parent company, unitedhealth group, which claims to rely on "independent research from across the health care industry" to determine reimbursement rates. in actuality though, it relies on ingenix, a research firm owned by unitedhealth group. new york attorney general andrew cuomo says ingenix has been manipulating the numbers so insurance companies pay less. in a just-released report, he contends that americans have been "under-reimbursed to the tune of at least hundreds of millions of dollars." although unitedhealth group and oxford insurance were the only entities investigated, other major insurers use ingenix, including aetna, cigna and wellpoint/empire bluecross blueshield. "this is a huge scam that affected hundreds of millions of americans [who were] ripped off by their health insurance companies," says cuomo. "this was unethical, and it robbed vulnerable patients of insurance reimbursements they deserved." a battle on two fronts sixty-four-year-old mary jerome of yonkers, n.y., is one of those who complained to the attorney general. when jerome was diagnosed with advanced ovarian cancer in 2006, she chose to go to memorial sloan-kettering cancer center in new york, an out-of-network hospital under her insurer, oxford, reported nbc news correspondent jeff rossen for the today show. the insurance company determined via ingenix that many procedures jerome needed-including chemotherapy medications-were not considered "usual, customary or reasonable." after three surgeries and treatment for an embolism, jerome was left owing $46,000. weakened from cancer and frightened over her finances, jerome was fighting a battle on two fronts. she remembers "the devastation it gives to a patient who is at the worst time in their life. they're trying to fight one battle, and then they have to fight a second battle when they have nothing-physically, spiritually, emotionally-left to fight with." but jerome's daughter, eva, who is a manhattan lawyer, encouraged her mother to appeal to the state's attorney general. jerome's complaint was one of hundreds from angry customers, which prompted cuomo to launch an investigation of the insurer. "this is huge. this problem went across the country," nancy nielsen, president of the american medical association, told the today show. "it's industry-wide, throughout insurers. so, it touched every state. many doctors, many millions of patients, and this has been going on for years." more insurers under investigation cuomo is now investigating other insurance companies that use ingenix's database to determine reimbursement rates for patients and taking steps to make sure this won't happen again in the future. the $50 million unitedhealth group will pay as the settlement will be used to create a nonprofit organization that will determine reimbursement rates for patients. jerome's cancer was in remission for 20 months, but returned in october. her employer, columbia university, where she is a lecturer in the english department, now uses united health care, another insurer owned by unitedhealth group, the company that owns oxford. but so far, her experience with her new insurer has been "perfect," jerome says. she says she's "thrilled" with the settlement the new york attorney general's office has reached with unitedhealth group. "my main hope now and in the future is that patients won't have to go through this," jerome says. "it's much more than money; it's being treated with honor and dignity. i think that's what's going to change." since jerome complained, oxford has refunded her thousands of dollars. in a statement, unitedhealth group told today: "we respectfully disagree with the new york attorney general's findings that we manipulated data ... (or that our ownership of ingenix was a conflict of interest.) we agreed to his settlement because it was an effective way to address any perceived conflict of interest." cuomo says he's now looking into other health insurance companies for exactly the same thing. so, there may be millions more on the line here as well. in addition, some patients plan to bring a class action lawsuit against unitedhealth group.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/search/ci_11356013?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com Readers Forum: Let's stop counting on charity to pay medical bills By Rose Ann DeMoro Guest Commentary Updated: 01/02/2009 05:05:10 PM PST THE MOST heartbreaking e-mail alert that crossed my computer screen this holiday season came from a union which has set up a fund for medical benefits for widows and orphans of their former members. Reliance on charity rather than a public safety net symbolizes what has become a perversely unique American solution to social problems, especially in the Bush administration era. In "Critical Condition," a searing 2006 indictment of the collapse of our medical system, Donald Barlett and James Steele described how pervasive this dependence has become. Garage sales, spaghetti feeds, livestock auctions, pancake breakfasts, walkathons, bingo tournaments, pie socials, car washes, church suppers, raffles, barbecues, basketball shootouts, even hot-air balloon rides, all to help families drowning with unpayable medical bills. Rather than a coordinated national system, as every other industrialized country has established, our go-it-alone, you're-on-your-own society has hit rock bottom in the most basic area of all, the care of our communities. No wonder the U.S. ranks last among comparable nations in preventable deaths and first in out-of-pocket costs, despite spending twice as much as anyone else on per-capita health care. Much has been said about Franklin Roosevelt's first 100 days, a period that inaugurated a new standard of social action and set the stage for some of the most important reforms in American history. It's also worth remembering FDR's 1944 call for a second Bill of Rights, which included the right for all Americans to quality health care and other basics in jobs, education, housing and food that he said "spell security." Counting on personal check writers or online donors certainly relieves others of their responsibility, most notably the insurance companies who loathe to jeopardize their wealth by starting to actually pay for medical care. It circumvents the vision of those who think our government should guarantee health care for all of us, much as government already assumes a duty for our police, fire, armed services, schools, libraries, mail service, parks, environmental protections, airport security, national museums and prisons. Indeed, the government is already in the game of financing or providing medical care for seniors, veterans, the disabled and low-income families, and does it with less administrative waste, less bureaucracy and without rejecting people based on pre-existing conditions or dumping them when they get sick. But, somehow, a whole lineup of liberal advocacy groups, policy wonks, media pundits and politicians have concluded there is a national "consensus" to fix this broken and dysfunctional health care system by expanding the private insurance system that created the disaster. That approach, however, would not curtail skyrocketing premiums, deductibles, co-pays, or bills for care denied by the insurance companies. Perhaps those "consensus" builders are counting on the pancake breakfasts' and orphans' funds to make up for their policy failure. Or instead, they could channel that giving spirit into the growing campaign for real reform. Registered nurses will be in the forefront of this movement and nurses know what it would take to guarantee high-quality care for everyone-a streamlined, more effective system than our current nightmare, based on care not insurance, by expanding and extending Medicare to cover everyone. In an era when our government has already intervened on behalf of Citigroup and AIG and Freddy and Fannie and all those other financial wizards on Wall Street, maybe we can bailout the tens of millions of Americans without having to count on livestock auctions or widows' funds to pay for medical care. DeMoro is executive director of the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee and a vice president of the AFL-CIO and a resident of Contra Costa County.

I agree with Latenightnurse I believe that many non-union nurses are bullied into silence by managers that employ threats and intimidation. New graduates, nurses who are the main breadwinner and foreign nurses are often most at risk. Others who speak up watch as their silent sisters who toe the line get favored treatment (choice of shifts, merit raises, etc.). In the current economy nurses have good reason to worry about job security. Nurses that do attempt to advocate for their patients and themselves without union protection report being fired for speaking up. Depending on where you live, going across town to another facility may not be an option. Some communities have only one hospital and in other communities, nurses find themselves blackballed at all of the facilities in town. As a union nurse I really value the ability to speak up and advocate whether to a difficult MD, to the Director of Nursing or to a newspaper or regulatory body without any fear of retribution. I believe that all RNs should have that peace of mind and security.

I think that my previous posting speaks for itself.

The strikes were necessary to accomplish the staffing improvements. Once the hospital agreed to staffing improvements, we were willing and able to negotiate wages. It took about 2 hours for us to agree to their wage proposal. 18 months and 3 strikes to bargain over staffing and two hours to bargain over wages. Why? Because, wages are in fact, the easiest and least controversial thing to negotiate. What hospitals fight over are any issues that give RNs control over our practice--in this case staffing and the ability to go to an neutral arbitrator to enforce our right to RN staffing to allow us to safely take our meals and breaks.

As a union member and a member of our bargaining team, I believe that it's ethical for nurses to go on strike. If conditions are unsafe and you've exhausted your options, it is unethical not to strike when a majority of your coworkers voted democratically to authorize the strike. Adequate compensation is essential for recruitment and retention which effects patient safety. However, the reality is that in RN unions strikes often have nothing to do with compensation. The Sutter Health strikes in California (I was on strike) were about unsafe staffing conditions and the hospitals' refusal to follow the law around meal and break relief. We did not even propose a wage proposal until the end of negotiations (18 months after bargaining started) AFTER the strikes and AFTER the hospitals agreed to our staffing proposals. A majority of RNs in a facility (think about your co-workers) simply will not vote to authorize a strike unless they believe that conditions warrant it AND that the bargaining team has exhausted the negotiating process and needs the leverage of a strike to move negotiations forward. When faced with a trike deadline, most employers suddenly feel motivated to settle the contract and avoid the strike.

The National Nurses Organizing Committee (NNOC) is the union that organized at Cypress-Fairbanks. You can belong and get involved even if you work in a non-union facility. For example, nurses across the state are fighting for NNOC's bill for staffing ratios in TX. NNOC can be found on facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=17869708504&ref=ts#/group.php?gid=17869708504&ref=ts or the website is: www.calnurses.org/nnoc Feel free to message me on AllNurses if you want to.

I have to agree with ChicoDavid. It's management's job to manage employees, i.e. counsel them when their behavior needs to change and initiate disciplinary action if appropriate. The union's job in disciplines is to provide support and fair treatment. The best parts of belonging to a union (that haven't been mentioned): --The ability to speak up and advocate for patients and to address unsafe conditions without fear of retaliation or loss of your job. --Having a contract in writing that locks in your benefits and work conditions and that you can point to the moment a manager fails to follow negotiated terms. (It's also nice to know what percentages my pay raises will be and when up to three years in advance, to make sound financial decisions!). --If you're in an RN union, the ability to join with other RNs to fight legislatively for things that matter like staffing ratios and to fight against bills that would allow hospitals to replace RNs with less qualified personnel.

Another bill that we defeated in California thia year would have allowed dental assistants to administer conscious sedation! The attacks on our scope of practice are constant. It takes collective action to have enough power to push back effectively.

I was a member of ANA when I got out of school and found that they had very little to offer me as a bedside nurse. I get my updates from www.calnurses.org and www.nnoc.net (the folks that fought for and won staffing ratios in Ca).

SEIU Agrees to Gag Nursing Home Workers Full story: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003601276_seiu05m.html By Ralph Thomas Seattle Times Olympia bureau OLYMPIA -- State lawmakers are used to seeing big budget requests from the Service Employees International Union, Washington's fastest-growing labor organization. But few legislators realize what's really behind SEIU Local 775's push this year for a $60 million state-funding increase for nursing homes. Under a confidential written agreement with several operators of for-profit nursing homes, Local 775 has promised to help push for more money, and in exchange, the companies have pledged to bless the union's organizing efforts. Although the main goal of the agreement is to pursue public money, its details have been kept secret. The Seattle Times recently obtained a draft copy of the agreement.

Give me a break! If SEIU had been organizing in Ohio for 3 years, how could CNA/NNOC derail the process in a week's time? This is proof that there was no support from RNs in those facilities. SEIU and teh hospitals were banking on the fact that teh election would be over before most RNs even got word that it was hgappening. From where I sit this is simple. SEIU cut a deal with an employer (What they do best!). They whispered sweet promises into the ears of executives...."we promise not to strike, we'll keep your "girls" in line, we'll keep real unions out, we won't fight back if you want to restructure or down-size, we won't let RNs speak out about unsafe conditions..." Think about it: what kind of anti-RN, anti-patient promises would you have to make for a hospital to be railroading RNs INTO a union?! The employer filed the election petition!