Raising Their Wages......

Published

Forget about importing RNs :welcome: :nono: http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?bid=15&pid=88153

Specializes in Critical Care.
I'm not trying to convince you or other Texans to join a union. If you don't want to, that's fine. But let's not distort the facts about union pay or benefits, either.

So I guess all those Texas nurses who post in the California forum shouldn't be allowed to post there either ...

:rolleyes:

I think the point is that the OP routinely posts new threads in the Texas nurses' forum how Texas is about to go pro-union.

It's not surprising that the nurses FROM TEXAS would have a different take. Gauge's response was in response to YOU saying that you aren't trying to push unions on Texas, if that's not what they want.

I believe gauge was pointing out that that indeed was the point of the thread.

~faith,

Timothy.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
But how about the case of Scripps Encinitas, that just spent 2.5 yrs negotiating TO MAKE AS MUCH AS THEIR NON-UNION COUNTERPARTS BY THE SAME COMPANY IN THE SAME COUNTY.

Makes you wonder how much they would have been making in those 2.5 yrs WITHOUT union representation. Oh wait, I guess that would have been AS MUCH AS THEIR NON-UNION COUNTERPARTS.

Anecdotal evidence runs both ways.

~faith,

Timothy.

First of all ... since when is BLS data anecdotal evidence?

As far as Scripps Encinitas ... those raises didn't come down until AFTER the union won the election. It's not unusual for management to give raises to their other facilities after an initial union victory, because they're trying to keep the union out of those other facilities.

But that doesn't mean the raises weren't prompted by union activity ... they were. If the union wasn't there, the raises wouldn't have happened.

If you read the news articles BEFORE the union came in ... low pay was the number one reason the RN's voted for the union in the first place. If the raises were already there, the union wouldn't have won the election.

:typing

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Look - I am not trying to be difficult here - it has been pointed out repeatedly that the climate is not pro-union here in Texas in rather blunt fashion when explaining it in nicer terms was not effective. It has been said in several threads by several people. Personally *I* am tired of the "here take our union because if it's good for us it's good for everybody" mentality. Unions may work well for you where you live. We live here, and we are familiar with the political and social environment here.

By referring to Kerry and Unions and I was saying that I know how poorly anti-union or anti-Kerry comments would be received in a CA forum - im not saying the state is not diverse. But why would I go and say things like that there when I know that they likely would not be well received? What would be the point? That's all.

There are plenty of anti-union RN's who post in the California forum, and there have been plenty of anti-union threads in that forum also. Just because a lot of California RN's may support unions doesn't mean all of them do. Their voices should be heard also ... and they are.

I suspect the same thing applies in Texas. Just because a lot of RN's may oppose unions doesn't mean all of them do. Maybe some of those people are interested in the information. I don't see how anyone can speak for all RN's in any state. How can any one person know what topics people want posted in any forum?

If the union threads bother you so much, why not use the ignore feature?

:typing

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Critical Care.
First of all ... since when is BLS data anecdotal evidence?

As far as Scripps Encinitas ... those raises didn't come down until AFTER the union won the election. It's not unusual for management to give raises to their other facilities after an initial union victory, because they're trying to keep the union out of those other facilities.

But that doesn't mean the raises weren't prompted by union activity ... they were. If the union wasn't there, the raises wouldn't have happened.

If you read the news articles BEFORE the union came in ... low pay was the number one reason the RN's voted for the union in the first place. If the raises were already there, the union wouldn't have won the election.

:typing

Gauge pointed out that your BLS data can be 'averaged' out by unions tending to be in higher cola areas. Then, specific examples were pointed out where that isn't the case.

I just pointed out that not ALL anecdotal examples bear that out.

And your BLS data is further contradicted by the fact that, when COLAs are figured, 6 of the 10 highest paying cities in the nation are in non-union Texas.

You respond that it's still 'union wages' because unions account for non-union wages, too. Well, when you wish to define unions as being the progenitor of ALL WAGES, be they at unions or non-union shops, then I guess your conclusions about the benefits of unions are unassailable. But, that's a perspective, not necessarily a reality.

In fact, the non-union nurses in the same county as Scripps Encinitas were making MORE money than the union nurses and that contract only got parity.

~faith,

Timothy.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Public Health, DEI.
Look - I am not trying to be difficult here - it has been pointed out repeatedly that the climate is not pro-union here in Texas in rather blunt fashion when explaining it in nicer terms was not effective. It has been said in several threads by several people. Personally *I* am tired of the "here take our union because if it's good for us it's good for everybody" mentality. Unions may work well for you where you live. We live here, and we are familiar with the political and social environment here.

By referring to Kerry and Unions and I was saying that I know how poorly anti-union or anti-Kerry comments would be received in a CA forum - im not saying the state is not diverse. But why would I go and say things like that there when I know that they likely would not be well received? What would be the point? That's all.

Difficult doesn't bother me. You presuming to speak for all nurses in CA does. We'll speak for ourselves, thankyouverymuch. It bothers me when other Californians assign themselves our spokesperson, it is particularly irksome to see an non-resident do it. As for why you would post on a forum where you know your comment wouldn't be well received... there are plenty of CA nurses who would receive your comments well, because there's lots of anti-union sentiment in this state. Which goes back to why generalizations don't work.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Critical Care.

The top ten cities for highest paid nurses (after COL adjustment):

McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX-77,628

Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito, TX, 77,381

Houston, TX 66,289

Wausau, WI, 64,098

Rochester, MN, 62,646

Odessa-Midland, TX 62,542

Richland-Kennewick-Pasco, WA, 61,952

Olympia, WA 61,313

Fort-Worth-Arlington, TX, 61,288

Laredo, TX, 60,174

Source: MODRN (published by ATI) career guide

~faith,

Timothy.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

Im going to TEXAS!!

Up Vote Up Vote ×

.....just for the fun of it, could you prove to me with a credible link :smiley_ab

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Critical Care.
.....just for the fun of it, could you prove to me with a credible link :smiley_ab

I cited the source: MODRN magazine from ATI.

You cannot link the article online; you'd have to subscribe.

http://www.modrnnurse.com/mn-index.aspx

~faith,

Timothy.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

.. it sounds to me that the dog eat the homework...... :rolleyes: :barf02:

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Critical Care.
.. it sounds to me that the dog eat the homework...... :rolleyes: :barf02:

Either that, or the company is actually a BUSINESS, like several media outlets, that depends upon subscriptions.

~faith,

Timothy.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I

I

I

I

I

J

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion