I really don't understand. I am a newish nurse that landed my "dream job" in the icu. My hospital is the biggest and best in the area and we are currently on a journey to magnet. I feel like I was lied to about how this would help nurses and we would be supported and taken care of.
In my icu we have a very high acuity. We are constantly short staffed and tripled. 1:1 for ccrt pts is advertised but never actually happens!
I have seen a patient self extubate during the holy interdisciplinary rounds due to that nurse being tripled and spread out across the unit. None of the bosses said any thing and just went on to round on the next patient.
The majority of our assistants will not help unless asked and it's like pulling teeth just to get them to help with a blood sugar check. Often they are sitting on their cellphones or just catching up on gossip. But since they have worked there a long time it is widely accepted by the staff.
We have are losing staff nurses left and right.
I have been talked down to by our surgeons and blatantly disrespected on more than one occasion for trying to help a patient but not enough to be considered abusive so that I could report it. Once, I calmly asked a doc to update the close family members of a dying patient at their request. Since a distant family had been updated, the doctor was visibly offended and proceeded to call my charge nurse and say "I got in her face" which was completely false. Luckily the charge was within ear shot and heard everything. This was swept under the rug.
During my new nurse orientation the nursing instructor preached against unions especially since we were going magnet and would have so many benefits.
I feel like a strong nurse union could solve many of our problems and help our patient care. But the majority of nurses I have talked to are completely against it. I can't understand this for the life of me.
Sadly, my dream job has turned to hell. I love my sick patients and family but sick of being overworked, tripled, never even getting a lunch break, all while being talked down to and humiliated by the Dr.s that see me as a stupid new nurse.
Based upon your mention of liberal several times in your post I will assume you are conservative. You understand that no union in their right mind would support a conservative voice as generally conservatives want to weaken/eliminate unions altogether so they they can take advantage of employees. Not all employers do this, some in fact are quite supportive of their employees and stand by them and listen to what they have to say. Those are excellent employers and they exist in all industries.
However those employers are unfortunately not the norm, most employers will only protect the bottom line and ignore their increasing turnover rates due to their uncaring nature. Eventually these employers will have an ingrained culture of apathy towards employees and healthcare isn't like other industries where companies have a low barrier of entry so a competitor could easily emerge. No, healthcare is an expensive business so those companies know they can get away with treating their employees badly, simply because they know that no competitor can easily swoop in due to the nature of the healthcare industry.
If you want to join a union and continue to advocate for conservative ideals regarding unions, know that you have joined a union and turn around to advocate for their weakening and/or destruction. I have met several people in my own union who are far-right conservatives who absolutely hate this union and what the union supports on the left. They simultaneously love the benefits unions provide and are quite defensive of losing their benefits but their conservative beliefs lead them to actively support their own unions destruction. Ask yourself this question; would you rather have a job that is protected from sudden unlawful or undeserved termination while ignoring what the union bosses tell you about political stuff? Or would you rather be in that so-called meritocracy who will pay you a mint for your skills somehow negotiated by yourself better than an entire union of tens or hundreds of thousands can negotiate for and you'd be the first terminated when the hospital cuts costs as you'll have a high salary?
I consider myself a conservative/libertarian, but I am also adamantly pro union. I believe that most people are sophisticated enough in their beliefs to have nuanced opinions rather than blanket support of one political party. This is reflected in states like Michigan, Penn. and Ohio where a strong minority of union members vote with Republicans in some (especially Presidential) elections.
I consider myself a conservative/libertarian, but I am also adamantly pro union. I believe that most people are sophisticated enough in their beliefs to have nuanced opinions rather than blanket support of one political party. This is reflected in states like Michigan, Penn. and Ohio where a strong minority of union members vote with Republicans in some (especially Presidential) elections.
This defies all logic as it is well known that a fundamental, overarching GOP tenant and core value, is it's unabashed support for business (mostly big business). That many for-profit businesses have a real and vested interest in practices that are decidedly anti-employee/pro-business-i.e. wage stagnation, limited benefits, age discrimination, discretionary firing.....talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face!
No because voting preferences involve a plethora of issues for example:
a. prolife/vs pro choice (for some this is the modern slavery level issue).
b. Gun ownership (another big issue).
c. Immigration policy.
d. Free trade vs restricted trade and tariffs.
f. School choice vs public school.
g. Climate policy including things like carbon taxes.
h. Taxation policy
i. Issues such as water-rights and land stewardship which sometimes place dwellers at issue with those who live in a more urban environment.
j. Hunting and animal rights including issues like veganism and vegetarianism.
k. Single payer and socialized medicine vs free market approaches.
l. The right to freedom of expression vs the right to be free from offensive perspectives.
These are all major issues that can and do impact which party one votes for and overcome the relatively narrow issue of union support. Also, much of conservative opposition to unions is a "hold over" from the cold war days when unions were heavily infiltrated by communist/socialist elements. This is no longer much of an issue. Many people look at their voting choices holistically and have a web of complex preferences on the above issues.
@myoglobin You are quite right in that more than 1 issue would be involved towards how a particular person would vote. However as we learned in RN school Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs puts physiological needs like shelter at the most important of anyone's needs. For most of us our primary source of income is from 1 or more jobs which places protecting your job(s) to provide for your basic needs above all other issues to include abortion and trade issues. One would find it difficult to advocate for any issue if you struggle to provide housing and food, for example.
That is why finding ways to protect your job and aligning your choice of who to vote for would be critical. There is strong union presence in those northern states, and I believe that is because those state politicians recognize the benefits that unionization provides even though they are generally conservative. Other red states like Texas really don't like unions, but the overarching platform of national-level Republicans is to weaken/eliminate unions. But as usual in American politics, states can and do different things based on what those particular state politicians believe is right for them and that might go against what the national-level party platform may be.
This defies all logic as it is well known that a fundamental, overarching GOP tenant and core value, is it's unabashed support for business (mostly big business). That many for-profit businesses have a real and vested interest in practices that are decidedly anti-employee/pro-business-i.e. wage stagnation, limited benefits, age discrimination, discretionary firing.....talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face!
Why is being a social liberal and a fiscal conservative beyond logical sense?
Seriously....are you a herd mentality animal that cannot pick and choose what YOU believe in and support it do you have to follow the Dem vs. Rep false choice?
I like ice cream but not all ice cream. Nothing with NUTS. If I'm going to spend my calories eating ice cream, I am buying the most expensive, organic kind. Some people feel the exact opposite.
Yet we both like ice cream.
Being a fiscal conservative doesn't make me pro big business any more than it makes me a Republican.
I like being effing smart with my money.
Being behind pro choice and marriage for all doesn't make me a flaming bleeding heart far left Democrat. I feel the government doesn't get to tell me who to marry or how many kids I need to or dont need to have.
Unions give workers protections against abuse. Decent salaries and workplace environment.
If they weren't necessary they would never have existed. Do some homework on the beginning of unions.
I don't like being a part of the nurses' union, although I am completely silent about it. I support others' right to unionize. The reason I don't like it is because 1)the benefit I receive is far less than what I pay into it, 2)I am often told "the union won't allow that" when I want to switch a shift, pick up a shift, change hours, etc., 3) the union is way too controlled by politicians, 4)everybody, from the do-nothings to the above-and-beyonders are treated the same and compensated the same
I have noticed a trend amongst those here who argue against unions. They argue that they desire to be paid more for the same work because they, for whatever reason, believe that they deliver superior care or provide superior service compared to those around them. I find that odd that so many here are overly concerned with the pay that others in their unit receive. What business it is of theirs what goes into and out of the account of their coworkers? Sure it is good to know how much they make to compare your salary to but in the end if they make more than you, you are ignorant of the entire picture. Perhaps there is a certification they didn't tell you about, or skill they have that you don't have, or maybe it's simply they were a better negotiator during the hiring process and thus were rewarded with higher pay due to that. Regardless of the reason as to why they may be receiving a higher salary, your concern should be at asking how they acquired it and if you can repeat any strategies they used during negotiations. You should not be concerned with the fact they may get paid more than you and it is certainly not up to you to judge them as a valuable employee or not worthy of said salary. Unless of course you are HR or their manager, then by all means do so.
That is where being in a union really shows its value. Most of the time there are higher benefits and salary overall as the union has done the negotiating for you and thus everyone benefits from higher salary and benefits. If you are receiving higher salary than you would in a non-union facility for the same work, where are the complaints coming from? To me this is akin to everyone on a floor suddenly getting a $5 raise an hour, but one person is found to get $5.25 an hour. Instead of celebrating your large sudden raise, most people I'm sure would nitpick over that $0.25. As I mentioned before there are undoubtedly other things in motion here regarding salary. Even if you cannot place how that employee got that extra $0.25 are you going to let that bother you considering I did previously mention that in this example everyone got a $5 raise an hour? At the end of the day are such marginal figures worth losing superior pay and benefits over? The answer is an obvious no, math and common sense both agree that to jeopardize higher salary and benefits overall over such trivial issues is petty and unimportant. To me that is the issue here, most of the anti-union posters think they are better negotiators than an entire union as they seemingly feel they can get negotiate higher salary and benefits than an entire union can provide. In rare cases where that person has an amazing resume with highly desirable and rare skills perhaps, but the vast majority of people here do not have such resumes backing them up. Even if you have a superior resume and skillset, it is highly unlikely that you are a better negotiator than professional negotiators that unions employ. If you consider yourself a highly skilled RN who also has superior negotiating skills than professional negotiators, then you might be grossly overconfident in your abilities. It is a mistake to think themselves as superior negotiators than what thousands or tens of thousands of voices can get when combined together.
The second main argument against unions seems to be protection of 'incompetent' employees. This is an ongoing issue anywhere, we see those amongst us who seemingly don't belong as they barely seem to function at work. Being in a union or not isn't the reason those people continue to work at that location, it's management refusing to put a paper trail on those employees so the proper channels can be used for additional training, changing departments, or termination. That would exist regardless of the workplace as I can assure you that any workplace has these people and they don't suddenly appear simply en masse because a union is involved. Plus this type of thinking is full of bias as this thinking assumes that most union members must be incompetent for this to be a common union problem (according to many posters that is).
Unions are a good thing to have, and any issues with them are usually individuals and not the system. Few people would blame the entire hospital and all hospitals anywhere for a few people at a workplace who are incompetent. Yet that is the exact line of thinking that many people use when considering unions and it's not a correct line of thought, they blame unions as an institution for a few underachievers they see at a union worksite. Even in a meritocracy you will find those amongst you who seemingly do not perform well and yet have a higher salary than you do. That exists everywhere and will continue to exist as long as salaried labor exists in the world. Unions simply level the playing field for everyone and ensure all receive fair compensation and no one is fired without very good reason to do so.
Specializes in Pediatric Nursing and Educational Technology.
14 hours ago, Xance said:
Even in a meritocracy you will find those amongst you who seemingly do not perform well and yet have a higher salary than you do.
Excellent response. I have worked in union and nonunion environments. In the nonunion meritocracy workplace I saw raises distributed at the whim of the supervisor. Those who curried her favor got more money each year. "Merit" raises need to be based on measurable outcomes. A union can help make sure that happens.
Lengthy response. But I'll keep it short. Unions are NOT doing a good job as private-sector union participation is at/under 6% compared to government-sector at/above 35%. A plurality of states have Right-To-Work laws, so unions can't stop terminations. As for pay, yes there are numerous factors affecting compensation as you mention. But the go-getter, hard-charger, should be able to negotiate wages on their own, or move on.
Specializes in Pediatric Nursing and Educational Technology.
5 minutes ago, tacticool said:
Unions are NOT doing a good job as private-sector union participation is at/under 6% compared to government-sector at/above 35%.
I am not sure how the low percentage is due to the unions not doing a good job. There has been a systematic effort to kill unions in business for the last 45 years. Entire business are out there to help businesses keep union away. Employees will be told the dangers of unions, with pleas to not let them come between the employees and the beneficent employer.
If you want to get better working conditions just start talking about starting a union. Suddenly, benefits and other perks will appear. I have seen it happen several times in my career.
Lengthy response. But I'll keep it short. Unions are NOT doing a good job as private-sector union participation is at/under 6% compared to government-sector at/above 35%. A plurality of states have Right-To-Work laws, so unions can't stop terminations. As for pay, yes there are numerous factors affecting compensation as you mention. But the go-getter, hard-charger, should be able to negotiate wages on their own, or move on.
On 7/22/2019 at 10:49 AM, BrentRN said:
I am not sure how the low percentage is due to the unions not doing a good job. There has been a systematic effort to kill unions in business for the last 45 years. Entire business are out there to help businesses keep union away. Employees will be told the dangers of unions, with pleas to not let them come between the employees and the beneficent employer.
If you want to get better working conditions just start talking about starting a union. Suddenly, benefits and other perks will appear. I have seen it happen several times in my career.
Absolutely agree with this^^^. I've also worked both (union and nonunion) and while I have witnessed employee behaviors that would have resulted in immediate (and justifiable) termination outside of a union shop, I have also witnessed employees who were wrongly accused but were able to keep their jobs due to union representation. Sadly, without representation, the average employee has very, very little recourse or advocacy with most employers. In almost 30 years of active nursing, I have seen hospitals systematically whittle away at staff benefits over the years while the top-heavy senior managerial staff seems to enjoy more and more perks and greater salaries. The idea of being a "hard-charger" and securing higher $ than your colleagues is 'pie in the sky'. Hospitals are a business and the number one way to balance the books and control costs is by slashing benefits and intentionally stagnating wages.
myoglobin, ASN, BSN, MSN
1,453 Posts
I consider myself a conservative/libertarian, but I am also adamantly pro union. I believe that most people are sophisticated enough in their beliefs to have nuanced opinions rather than blanket support of one political party. This is reflected in states like Michigan, Penn. and Ohio where a strong minority of union members vote with Republicans in some (especially Presidential) elections.