Unions and management

[WiccanLiberal]

This is a personal issue for me, something going on now where I work. My hospital is a union shop. I accept that because I want to work there. I have always thought unions served a purpose for some but not necessarily for professionals. The contract signed a couple of years ago, and up for renegotiation soon, was a reflection of the economic situation. The union did not get a percentage salary increase immediately but maintained all health benefits as 100% paid by the employer. The trade off was we were to get three lump sum checks, in November last year, April this year and November this year. The one last November was late. The April one was also not forthcoming for the RNs hired after 1996. We only found out about this by complaining when the checks didn't arrive. We were told that one of the union VPs had come up unilaterally with a plan to let management keep the moneys and arrange a slight percentage increase for the newer RNs to bring them closer to the ones hired before 96. They tell us the management has made a 'commitment' to continue the new rate. We signed a petition to the union and the management to insist on our contracted arrangement. When I went to an informational meeting, I was told this VP was not going to send the petition to management. Just flat out not going to do it. She was going to instead have the RNs vote on the alternative plan. Of course what she is not saying is that the primary drawback is that this plan of hers has nothing in writing with management to guarantee it. Also a vote further delays the payout and keeps the money in management's pocket and not in the members'. My opinion was that the leadership of a union that used to have a reputation as completely tenacious in getting the best for it's members is now firmly entrenched in the maintainance of their positions. Our dues constitute a contract with them to do the best they can for us. I don't think they are. Guess I just wanted to vent a little bit. It's a poor situation where you can't rely on the management to take care of it's supposedly valued employees without the union in place and you can't trust the union to put it's members first.

[logroller]

Yeah that's frustrating, but hardly surprising. The union is an entity unto itself; self-preservation rules. The elites in the union and the elites in management conspire to do what is best for themselves first, and hopefully (though not necessarily) that is keeping the membership/employees contented. I would suggest taking a good long look at things from management's perspective; is it publicly traded company; government owned? What's overhead like: are there long-term debt obligations like pensions? Rarely is it just greedy management tying to hoard money. Of course it can be that; but often it's managers trying to keep costs down so they don't get fired. And not that nurses don't earn their pay, but they are well compensated. I've seen a few union negotiations in the public sector and, more often than not, it's the workers that are being greedy, not management.

[WiccanLiberal]

I am sure it is a combination of factors but I am suspicious that the union brass are getting something from the management under the table. They have been so underhanded in the way this was done that I find it smells of corruption to me. As for the compensation, our hospital has the lowest base salary rate for RNs compared to other comparable facilities in the area. If they want to keep the good staff they have, the next contract is going to have to offer a more serious increase. The union is already aware how displeased we are. In addition to our required dues, they ask staff to contribute to their PAC. Everyone I know who was doing so, filled out the paperwork to withdraw that contribution and cited this dispute as the reason. As for me, I never fell into that trap in the first place.