I work on a busy telemetry floor in Florida. Most days/nights (I work both) I am running around like crazy trying to get everything done with minimal time to take a break, go to lunch, or go to the bathroom. Pay is not that great and I feel as if upper mgmt continuously send patients that are not appropriate acuity for our floor. We are staffed 5:1 and have rapid responses/codes daily and are always shipping people off to the ICU for higher level of care. Also, our charge nurse usually takes patients and we are usually also short staffed a tech leaving the individual RN to fend for ourselves.
I know it is like this everywhere (at least on telemetry units)....sooooo why aren't nurses banding together to stop this? Why is it such taboo to talk about starting a nursing union in Florida (or in other states for that matter)?
In a private conversation with my ANM (who I have grown close with through the ups and downs of our crazy floor), I asked her this same question. She totally freaked out on me and refused to even say the word "union" out loud suggesting that if someone overheard us, we could be fired on the spot. What? Seriously? I'm not saying that unionization is the absolute answer but maybe blending some of their ideas with our own to make for a better workplace for all. Why are we not allowed to even talk about it out loud? This isn't a dictatorship. And nurses continue to put up with this. They say things like, "It is what it is." Actually, usually, it is what it shouldn't be.
Anyway, sorry for the rant. As a disclaimer, I am very thankful to have a job and I do enjoy taking care of my patients. Have a great day!
I just want to throw this out there. I heard the other day that the hospital I used to work at, which was union when I worked there but is no more, are hiring younger less experienced nurses because they are cheaper, eventually with the managment's across the country craze of short stafffing, these young nurses are burning out and a whole new crop of new inexperienced nurses are hired for cheaper and stay until they burn out and this pattern has repeated itself. When the union was there, I remember us nurses had seniority, longevity and the doctors trusted us with the care of their patients because, yes, this phenonomen was said to me by a doctor I used to work with there and that doc is still there. That doc also said- you nurses are my eyes and ears- I can't be with that patient infront of me 24/7. I asked that doc how he/she dealt with this ( the young inexperienced cheaper nurses with out us older nurses around) the response was "I pray alot!!"
This turn over did not take place when the union was there-The union had alot to do with that. keeping turnover rates down. When we fought and negotiated our contracts- that was unbeknownst to us then, an emotional investment in our workplace. Not something that is valued today. We knew our jobs and we knew it well. I think unions encourage longevity in employees not something today's employers want. They only want a few yrs out of an employee and then it's time to work on that employee to get rid of them.( outrageous write ups, accusations of wrong doings, criminal behavior, false charges, threats and intimidation) Unionized workers cost hospitals (MR CEO) money- Mr CEO doesn't get as much to suck out of healthsystem and stuff his personal pockets with. The union makes sure an employee gets a fair wage for a fair day's work. and that an employee is dealt with in a legal manner( Federal Labor Laws) not by rules subject to individual interpretation and "at whim"by a bunch of managment self serving crackheads.A manager can not falsify a write up, a manager cannot accuse a nurse of wrong doing without concrete proof, if it is done, the union can file charges on that nurses behalf. Managment has to answer to the union contract. Managment doesn't like that- it take the wind out of thier free sailing.
I think it is very foolish to blame the current economic situation on unions. Unions have not been very popular for years, their numbers have been dramatically decreased. Employers have been enjoying free rein for some time, approx a decade. And look at the mess this ecomony is in- look at the unemployement rate and the poverty rate. I think it may be a fair observation to say- the Unions stopped alot of this. If there wee more unions- I don't think there would be a national average of 9.2% unemployemnt and there wouild be more money in joe public's pocket to spend. I think we have the Anti-union people to blame for this. or the 1% vs the 99%. The playing field would be alittle more equal. Just my 2 cents.
Specializes in respiratory,hospice,discharge planning,c.
i lost my job because i supported the union idea, in a small northern california town rn schedules were being replaced by hi pay travelors, some of us counted up about 42 nurses that we thought should have not been let go, that led to off cite union interst meeting. i was considered part of managemnt, i lost my dream job. i never say the uniion word now!
i lost my job because i supported the union idea, in a small northern california town rn schedules were being replaced by hi pay travelors, some of us counted up about 42 nurses that we thought should have not been let go, that led to off cite union interst meeting. i was considered part of managemnt, i lost my dream job. i never say the uniion word now!
So, instead of saying, "union", again, say, "LAWYER!!". You gave up to easy. JMHO and my NY $0.02.
Specializes in LTC, assisted living, med-surg, psych.
I think it is very foolish to blame the current economic situation on unions. Unions have not been very popular for years, their numbers have been dramatically decreased. Employers have been enjoying free rein for some time, approx a decade. And look at the mess this ecomony is in- look at the unemployement rate and the poverty rate. I think it may be a fair observation to say- the Unions stopped alot of this. If there wee more unions- I don't think there would be a national average of 9.2% unemployemnt and there wouild be more money in joe public's pocket to spend. I think we have the Anti-union people to blame for this. or the 1% vs the 99%. The playing field would be alittle more equal. Just my 2 cents.
I disagree. Yes, union wages are generally higher than non-union, but this comes at a price: namely, fewer jobs and heavier workloads. And wishing for the hospital CEO to give up his yacht and his bonuses so that more nurses can be hired just isn't compatible with real life......We all know that ain't gonna happen. It's not fair---but then, LIFE is not fair, and I can't recall where God or anyone else said we're entitled to fairness, at least not on this side of eternity.
There is nothing wrong with trying to better the profession, and I salute both union and non-union nurses in working together for the good of ourselves and our patients. It's just that there is no single way to accomplish that goal, and the pro- and anti-union forces have wasted so much precious energy fighting each other that there's little left over to fight for manageable working conditions and the respect we deserve.
i lost my job because i supported the union idea, in a small northern california town rn schedules were being replaced by hi pay travelors, some of us counted up about 42 nurses that we thought should have not been let go, that led to off cite union interst meeting. i was considered part of managemnt, i lost my dream job. i never say the uniion word now!
I agree with lindarn. If you lost your job recently, you should have legal recourse for damages. Employers may not punish workers for showing interest in unions.
I feel that if nurses were unionized- there would be a manadatory safe staffing law across the board/country not just in small pockets of the country where there is a union and the employers have a fear of union retribution (ex: Calif) if those safe staffing laws are not observed. Safe staffing laws indirectly demand more nurses need to be employed for those laws to be complyed with. What we have now in most areas are nurses assigned to ungodly #'s of patients and flying around to the point where they can't concentrate on what their doing or supposed to be doing. Patients are getting substandard care, and are at a greater risk of life threatening mistakes. A sentinel event is just a matter of time. Unions also demand orientation for new employed nurses- they don't let a new to hospital nurse or inexperienced nurses be turned loose these units/floors they are not prepared to handle. I think a union provides/assures certain safguards are inplace instead of the free for all money game of the CEO's.
America's healthcare instutions have traded good( term used loosely) healthcare( which is not even competent anymore- lack of experience, on the job preparation and substandard safety ) for CEO profits and bonuses. Where's the Healthcare???? With as complex and sick as patients are today - there should be no nurse, NP, PA or doctor out of work today!!! Does that put a perspective on the true meaning of what these CEO's really think about patient satisfaction. Herd them in with flashy advertising and gimics, collect their money from the insurance company, perform hamberger care for Fillet prices and DISPOSE of them once they have collected their money from them. Maybe they think people are sooo stupid they don't know the difference. Which goes back to what the "MBA/business/CEO really thinks about the people they are "supposedly" servicing who line thier pockets and fatten bank accounts- the Patients. And these MBA's/business/CEO's are going to USE our licenses and jeapordize our livelihood to do it. It's time every nurse in this country was union. On so many levels. Safe patient care- to where we ourselves would feel secure in letting our families go to a hospital, license protection, jobs, fair wages and benes, medical and moral ethics and accountability of the administration. Unemployment and poverty is not going to breed healthier patients!!
I agree with lindarn. If you lost your job recently, you should have legal recourse for damages. Employers may not punish workers for showing interest in unions.
Note that this nurse says she was considered part of management. In labor law it's actually illegal for someone who is a statutory supervisor to be involved in a union campaign and they have no legal protection if they are.
I've been involved in organizing campaigns when low-level supervisors who were sympathetic to the union showed up for a meeting. We get them out right quick for their own protection and ours.
As a general rule, it's utterly routine to fire workers in many parts of the country for supporting unions. Illegal, but routine. The enforcement of the law is so weak and the penalties so slight that employers have no incentive to obey the law. And lawyers have no incentive to take the case either, since monetary damages aren't awarded. The most you can get, IF you prove that was the reason you were fired, is your job back, no punitive damages.
Most American workers who haven't been through it have the imaginary belief that some law protects employees against unfair termination. In most of the united states, absent a union contract, you can be fired for any reason, or no reason, except for a short list of protected reasons. You can't be fired because of your race, gender, age, national origin, some places sexual orientation. But you surely can be fired just because your boss feels like it, or is tired of seeing you, or thinks you're a smart-alec, or happens to be in a bad mood. No legal protection for that at all. It's called being an "at will employee"
But, for nurses at least, the climate is changing bit by bit. The NNU is growing fast and moving into so called "right to work" states. Not easy, but it's coming.
It is because a Union will increase costs for the facility and once on board are harder to get rid of than C-diff. Add that to the fact that many healthcare unions are run by known communists who have actually caused hospitals to close in areas where they were needed, is reason enough for me to challenge and rebuke as Unamerican the fellow travellers who have regurgitated, direct from the CNA, NNU, SEIU and CPUSA the Party Line. We need to do something alright: Run the Communists and Socialists out of Nursing and Nursing Unions and get Big Government out of health care.
Someone's been watching a little too much Fox News.
Someone's been watching a little too much Fox News.
Not only that, but really old episodes - we haven't heard much about the Red Menace in the last 20+ years since the wall went down and all the former eastern block countries started opening McDonalds and Starbucks. I'm always amazed at the far-right's identification of SEIU with far-left socialism, since anyone in the labor movement knows they're the most corporate freindly union out there. Some reason why Andy Stern was welcomed with open arms onto corporate boards when he retired from being head of SEIU. It's where he was meant to be. I'd challenge anyone to show me a clear example of a hospital forced to close by unions. Lot's of examples of hospitals closed or threatened with closure to maximize corporate profit - St Lukes in SF being a good case in point. Lot's of examples of hospitals closed because there were just more hospitals than an area could support. Here in California, the most financially successful hospitals with the strongest bottom lines have the best union contracts - proving that paying nurses well, making them feel secure in their jobs, giving them decent working conditions and staffing levels that allow for good care actually is good for business.
The situation's very different in Australia, where one union represents all nurses. Considered a professional body, the Australian Nursing Federation is consulted by government on policy development, conducts accredited education programs, represents individual nurses in workplace disputes, and negotiates the terms and conditions that cover all nurses in the state.
One agreement covers all nurses working in the public system, with separate arrangements covering private hospitals or groups. To keep staff in private health pay and conditions are similar in both sectors.
Victoria was the first place in the world to have legally mandated ratios - it's reversed the international trend of an aging workforce (Victoria's average age is three years younger than the national average and dropping), increased nursing numbers, and improved throughput. Ratios have also been threatened by every state government since their introduction, including the Labour (leftish wing) government we're currently in negotiations with.
I have no doubt that without the power of collective action nurses in Victoria wouldn't have a career structure, safe work practices, safe work loads, appropriate remuneration, current leave allowances... or nurses returning to work.
I thank MN-Nurse for the post that started
Because neoconservatives have convinced millions of workers that unions are evil and socialist.
because that helped clarify why there's such a strong anti-union reaction from some American members.
And Rodoon - my response to the "union = blue collar" concern is that the Australian Medical Association is a union - it represents doctors' interests, and members here have taken industrial action to improve working conditions.
It is because a Union will increase costs for the facility and once on board are harder to get rid of than C-diff. Add that to the fact that many healthcare unions are run by known communists who have actually caused hospitals to close in areas where they were needed, is reason enough for me to challenge and rebuke as Unamerican the fellow travellers who have regurgitated, direct from the CNA, NNU, SEIU and CPUSA the Party Line. We need to do something alright: Run the Communists and Socialists out of Nursing and Nursing Unions and get Big Government out of health care.
good example of not letting your opinion be effected by facts . As Chico mentions far more hospitals have been closed in the name of corporate profit , than ( if we accept this unproved statement )any possible union / communist activity could have caused .
kcmylorn
991 Posts
I just want to throw this out there. I heard the other day that the hospital I used to work at, which was union when I worked there but is no more, are hiring younger less experienced nurses because they are cheaper, eventually with the managment's across the country craze of short stafffing, these young nurses are burning out and a whole new crop of new inexperienced nurses are hired for cheaper and stay until they burn out and this pattern has repeated itself. When the union was there, I remember us nurses had seniority, longevity and the doctors trusted us with the care of their patients because, yes, this phenonomen was said to me by a doctor I used to work with there and that doc is still there. That doc also said- you nurses are my eyes and ears- I can't be with that patient infront of me 24/7. I asked that doc how he/she dealt with this ( the young inexperienced cheaper nurses with out us older nurses around) the response was "I pray alot!!"
This turn over did not take place when the union was there-The union had alot to do with that. keeping turnover rates down. When we fought and negotiated our contracts- that was unbeknownst to us then, an emotional investment in our workplace. Not something that is valued today. We knew our jobs and we knew it well. I think unions encourage longevity in employees not something today's employers want. They only want a few yrs out of an employee and then it's time to work on that employee to get rid of them.( outrageous write ups, accusations of wrong doings, criminal behavior, false charges, threats and intimidation) Unionized workers cost hospitals (MR CEO) money- Mr CEO doesn't get as much to suck out of healthsystem and stuff his personal pockets with. The union makes sure an employee gets a fair wage for a fair day's work. and that an employee is dealt with in a legal manner( Federal Labor Laws) not by rules subject to individual interpretation and "at whim"by a bunch of managment self serving crackheads.A manager can not falsify a write up, a manager cannot accuse a nurse of wrong doing without concrete proof, if it is done, the union can file charges on that nurses behalf. Managment has to answer to the union contract. Managment doesn't like that- it take the wind out of thier free sailing.
I think it is very foolish to blame the current economic situation on unions. Unions have not been very popular for years, their numbers have been dramatically decreased. Employers have been enjoying free rein for some time, approx a decade. And look at the mess this ecomony is in- look at the unemployement rate and the poverty rate. I think it may be a fair observation to say- the Unions stopped alot of this. If there wee more unions- I don't think there would be a national average of 9.2% unemployemnt and there wouild be more money in joe public's pocket to spend. I think we have the Anti-union people to blame for this. or the 1% vs the 99%. The playing field would be alittle more equal. Just my 2 cents.