Published
they probably said 18 months instead of "indefinitely" so that they could budget. makes it easier to promise the money will go to other places if you know for sure where it's not going for a set period of time. 18 months is 6 fiscal quarters...isn't it? bureaucracy is not my strong suit.
We have a hiring freeze as well. The hospital has been using agency nurses to fill in the gaps though, and I don't understand how that's cost effective. Why not pay the already employed nurses overtime? We are about to get our annual raises, but everyone is anticipating that it won't be much and blame it on "patient satisfaction scores" rather than personal performance.
We don't have a wage freeze as of yet but NO overtime, no agency, no per diems. We also have a hiring freeze and transfer freeze (I'm not sure how that helps) but our unit is short because there were 4 full-time RN positions open and noone was hired for them and now they can't. And then they claim no OT and all around we get the shaft. But then they call me in at least once a week.
I also feel bad for the new grads, we have a hospital-based RN program and they won't be able to hire anyone. All those new grads not able to get jobs. It certainly won't be that a grad can go anywhere they want, they'll have to take what they can get.
dabowhunter
10 Posts
My hospital anounced this week that there will be a 18 month freeze on wages and bouses. They also are eliminating reimbursment for conferences etc. This they say is due to the ecomony. I can understand it partly,
but why not call it an indefinite time period instead of 18 months. Any other hospitals doing like wise