Scab nursing?

15 minutes ago, Emergent said:

... Are the nurses who do this traitors to their colleagues, or are they merely profiting from the facility's stubbornness and contributing to their capitulation?

I can see both sides. ...

And what about the patients?

48 minutes ago, chare said:

And what about the patients?

What about them? If there aren't enough scab nurses, what happens to them? Should the fact that patients need care either course the nurses do not go on strike, or does it justify scab nursing?

You asked a pretty open-ended and broad question. Can you explain your question more?

I think that it's just part of the business for hospitals that have unions.

There is probably variation based on union contracts and state laws, but if your union has the right to strike then is it egregious that the hospital has the right to hire temporary workers? That's kind of the point though, you hope that you are valuable enough that the hospital will take you seriously and the you use that as negotiation leverage. But if the ask is too great or the value compared to temps isn't worth it then it is up to the hospital to decide whether to keep or fire the union nurses.

My area is already struggling with hospitals being on overflow. It’s not feasible or possible for a whole hospital to shut down and transfer out their patients to other hospitals- the beds aren’t available. Patients still need the care, so when nurses strike there will be scab nurses.

If workers of a large retailer, such as Target, were union and went on strike there would be no way to justify scab workers in that scenario- they’re not essential personnel and not being able to go to Target is not going to possibly result in death (although many people, myself included, would be lost and in withdraw).

I don’t live in an area with many unions, so a nurses strike would be very very rare. My facility is not union, so this isn’t a situation I have to worry or be concerned about.

1 hour ago, Emergent said:

What about them? If there aren't enough scab nurses, what happens to them? Should the fact that patients need care either course the nurses do not go on strike, or does it justify scab nursing?

I've wondered about this, too.

I work in the NICU, where the kids need to eat every three hours or they will literally die. Many of them are intubated/ventilated, and again, without nurses, they will literally die. That's how most ICUs function--if all of the nurses walked out, many of the patients would literally very quickly die.

I get that scab nurses who cross picket lines can undermine strikes. However, do we need patient harm to occur in order to prove our value when it comes to patient outcomes? It's not not like a strike is going to be solved in a day, and it's not like all of those patients can be picked up and moved somewhere else.

I figure that scab nurses are still being paid exorbitantly high fees that will put the squeeze on hospital admin. Strikes and collective bargaining all comes down to money, and scabs still create a financial burden for hospitals (hence incentivizing them to come to an agreement).

Also...maybe this is just me being ignorant...but wouldn't it be considered abandonment if all of the nurses went on strike without some kind of temporary agency (scab) nurses to leave the patients with?

My brain had not have enough caffeine when I read the title to this and thought "Now why would someone call a Wound Care and Ostomy Nurse a scab nurse? It's a hard certification to get and a difficult job." ?

As far as crossing a picket line I don't think I would due to my views.

13 hours ago, CharleeFoxtrot said:

My brain had not have enough caffeine when I read the title to this and thought "Now why would someone call a Wound Care and Ostomy Nurse a scab nurse? It's a hard certification to get and a difficult job." ?

As far as crossing a picket line I don't think I would due to my views.

I spend a lot of time on the School Nursing board so I definitely thought it was going to be about picking scabs or something. Lol!

On 1/20/2020 at 8:49 PM, Emergent said:

I can see both sides. Ultimately, the facility can't keep paying the exorbitant rates they do to bring in outside staff, so it seems like it could be okay. What say you all?

Actually, management’s willingness to bring in scabs at an excessive cost is proof that there’s more money available - and they’d prefer to divide it up amongst themselves - rather than share with those who actually provide the services.

I’m quite prepared to get lambasted for this, but unions (and strikes, if necessary) are good for companies. There needs to be balance in a free-market economy, and employees who have a voice and an opportunity to change management’s mind don’t have to quit to get heard. Employees who quit cost a lot of money and time to replace.