I have an honest question about Unions (i don't know much about them)

I'm getting ready to graduate nursing school in June, and there are only 2 hospitals in my town (and within driving distance), and both of them are (I don't know the right term) union-only hospitals, meaning that they can fire you if you don't sign up to be in the union within X days of being hired.

No one in my family has ever been in a union. I grew up in the South, and don't know much about them other than what I've read on DU. I agree that unions are a needed thing, and I think that more occupations should be collectivized (I wish there was a cooks union when I was a chef, and a low-end worker union when I was a hostess and waitress, as those jobs were always low paid and abused by the boss).

But I don't understand how a business can be union-only. With only 2 hospitals in town, if I didn't want to join a union (for whatever reasons), I'd either have to work at a nursing home for 1/2 the pay, or drive 3 hours to the next closest hospital.

I thought it was against the law for businesses to keep unions out (like Walmart). If that's the case, then why is it legal for businesses to be the oppisite of No-Union at all, and be nothing but union?

At any rate, I don't know much about the unions that represent the hospitals, and everyone who works at the hospitals seems really happy with their union and representation.

But here are some questions I have (aside from the one at the top about union-only places):

1) roughly, how much are union dues? What do these dues cover?
2) if there is a strike, do I get paid for the days I'm not at work and "striking"? By being in the union, am I forced to strike if there were a strike, even if it's for a reason I don't agree with? Would I be considred a scab if I were to work during a strike (Remember--I'm going to be a nurse, and honestly, patient welfare comes above pay and benefits ((in many cases)) in my book. I could not live with myself knowing that patients were going without care while I held up a sign outside the hospital)
3) What are the benefits of, and drawbacks to being in a union?

When I ask these questions around the hospital, the nurses tell me to contact the union rep (who is never in) and they'll answer my questions. I've left literally about 15 messages for the union rep and they've never been returned, so I'm asking DU.

Any words of advice?

i got strike pay of $200.00 per month, if the state you work in has the right to work law, like IOWA, then you dont have to join a union in a union shop....in my case the health benefits, COLA (cost of living allowance), and safety (OSHA)....were the perks....well, the pension is too.....they had 30 and out......hope this helps.....

about 3 hours east of Seattle

I might be wrong.

If so, I'm pretty sure their union dues aer 1.5% of your gross pay, with a cap of $75 per month.

I'm pretyy sure there is also another union in the area that is just nursing.

Washington State Nurses Association or something like that.

Thanks for the info.

My father-in-law worked with unions in SC, and he's an anti-union republican, and made it out like union dues were in the THOUSANDS of dollars every year....like, 9,000 a year or some shit.

He's also a liar :D

One of the biggest argurments corporations use against unions is about the dues. They are a tiny contribution....literally tiny. They are used for various things, for instance, my husband's union spent $10,000.00 on the Christmas party. And yes, they do make political contributions with them also.

You don't get paid on strike, however some unions do have a fund to help you out. Yes, you would be considered a scab if you worked during a strike.

Benefits are that you have an organization backing you....corporations cannot win when workers are organized. I am the wrong person to tell you about drawbacks, because I don't see any.

That means the union legally represents all employees. Sometimes you can opt out of joining the union (depends on the state), which means you don't pay dues, or you pay reduced dues, but all that means is you can't vote at union meetings. You still are bound by the union's collective bargaining agreements. The answers to your other questions (dues, etc.) depend on the contract the union has negotiated with the employer. The benefits to belonging to a union are (among other things) that you can't be fired at the whim of the employer; you are guaranteed certain pay rates (usually higher than if there were no union) and benefits that the employer can't take away just because they want to save money; and if you are laid off you have recall rights. If there is a strike, however, you would not be paid for the days you don't work (though some unions have strike funds), and if you crossed a picket line you would definitely be considered a scab.

The union probably has a web site that could answer your more specific questions.

A union and employer CAN agree to an open shop (union membership optional) or a union shop (membership not optional).

Of course for most unions this would be a dealbreaking issue, because it impacts their revenues.

'nurse unions'. Lot of good info there.

I did work some in the medical field but was never a union member, (Exempt payroll).

I can tell you that all of the benefits we exempt employees enjoyed were/are a direct result of unions of one type or another.

Do not hesitate. Join the union-be protected-be treated fairly. You will not regret it.

180

I was a member of the NEA all the years I taught school full time, and served as a local officer. The reason you have a "closed shop" is that it adds to bargaining power when it comes to negotiations for contracts, etc. When I was in the NEA, my dues paid not only for our negotiating team come contract time, it also paid for us having union reps there if something happened and we got into despute with the management. The dues were there to pay for legal representation if it came down to that. We also got good deals on insurance, credit cards, etc, etc.

$1160 a week salary. I'm a phone man though. Union dues vary by union. The UAW pay a lot in dues, but they have more bargaining power than the CWA. I have no idea about nurses unions, but considering that many Hospitals look for any excuse to fire people (my earlier experience in my 20s), I'd say join.

It makes you part of a collective voice of many, many when it comes to bargaining for things like benefits and wage increases...that's why it's called collective bargaining. Also, if you should happen to be let go for unfair reasons, a union rep will fight for you and your right to be treated fairly. (If you were a monkey and deserved to be fired, then you're on your own).

The patient to ratio issue has been taken on my the california nurses union...if they didn't have the bargaining power of their union, they would get dumped on by the hosptital even more than they already are.

(even though I just did a report on them) and yeah, I guess that's true that if it weren't for the nurses' union, they'd have patient loads of 10+ patients.

I don't think either of these hospitals has had a strike of nurses in many years, but what happens to the patients if the nurses strike? If there's a strike, and you have to strike (lest be a scab by working), who takes care of the patients? Nurses that are brought in from temp agencies? That doesn't sound very good for the patient, as temp nurses don't know the protocol of the hospital, where things are, how things run---it seems like a losing situation for the patients (and i suppose it's a losing situation for the patients if they have overworked and underpaid nurses as well).

kept the nurses from striking becasue they were able to negotiate labor disputes succesfully - striking is always the last resort.

IMO, if there are circumstances in which an employer would be bad on these issues, a union may be your best defense.

But, again IMO, a union represents you to your employer, adding a third party with its own interests and agenda to the mix. And unions can make decisions that run counter to the majority of those in the bargaining unit.

I think there are situations in which unions are a powerful force for good and fairness. That said, I have not belonged to one and hope I never do.

To your first question about required Union membership. The Collective Bargaining Agreement covers all members of the appropriate bargaining unit. The core requirements of membership are dues and fees. In other words, you don't get to freeload on the benefits of Collective Bargaining Agreement without shouldering your share of the costs.


1) Depends on the Union - find out what Union represents the workplaces you're interested in. Union dues cover the costs of Collective Bargaining, Contract Administration, and Grievance Adjustment.

2) Some Unions pay strike pay, which is substantially less than your full salary - however, there are two types of Strikes: Economic and Unfair Labor Practice. If your company is found to have committed a ULP, you are entitled to back pay for any time spent on the picket line

3) Some of the Benefits are: Higher Wages, Better Benefits in general, Grievance and Arbitration procedures for violations of the CBA, And your employer can't just fire you on a whim

Some of the Drawbacks: Your possibilities for advancement may be somewhat slower in a union shop due to the seniority system.


That's just a few things though.


A good place to find out more would be:


http://www.aflcio.org/

(I'm comfortable, thanks to my Union)....much may have changed since then, not sure!!!.

...anyway, I helped negotiate a few contracts in my time....the thing that sticks out in
my mind is that our Union dues helped pay for a forensic accountant during contract openers or renewals....
.....and he/she would help ferret out monies that management would swear "just didn't exist".


Tikki

I think you're describing a "closed shop" at the hospitals with unions.

Let's see, you can join a union and get a decent job with decent pay. Or you can insist on going non-union and get 1/2 the pay.

What's the question again??

There's a relationship between decent pay and unions. The unions negotiate the pay scale with management. If you don't want the pay, don't join the union.

There's also a relationship between lesser pay and non-union. No one negotiates with management on the employee's behalf except the individual employee. Management has all the cards. Management dictates the pay.

It's easy to understand that paying union dues get you better pay. Is it a good investment? You make the decision.

workplace to a similar one without a union - she increased her pay pretty significantly in doing so. Her benefits improved also.

Unions can negotiate for pay and benefits, but they can't make a business more successful (with more $ to spend on pay abd benefits).

That is what Economist Leonard Rapping called "spill over" - one non-union employer pay its workers a significant premium to bribe them not to join a union. If you happen to work for that particular non-union employer it's not a bad deal.

I lived in the Steel Valley south east of Pittsburgh PA -- and the unions created the American middle class.

And the unions didn't kill steel or autos -- nincompoop MBA's who didn't have the brains they were born with did.

MBA schools ruin more good engineers ...

were running their businesses, most of which just had to do with how successful they were.

I know a lot about both businesses (of course) and I really don't believe unionization was a factor in what the 2nd company was paying.

(To elaborate, both businesses were non union a few years ago, and there was no apparent likelihood of unionization - their pay scales were set years and years before the union was ever on the scene.)

I'm fairly involved with my labor union, though I'm no expert, I think i can shed some light on these issues, and this info pertains to my union, but yours may do things differently:

COnfusion arrises because there is a difference between being a "union member", and working in a union "shop". As a member, you pay a "full share" to the union, but you can also choose to not be a member, paying a smaller amount know as "fair share". If you opt to pay only the "fair share", you are still "in the union", and are paying the minimum union dues. You have the benefits of having your union negotiate your contract terms, and providing legal protection for you, the grievance and arbitration process, etc. As a full paying member, you also have voting rights, and can become more involved in the policies and direction of your union. It's sort of like the differences between being a registered voter (full share) and a non-voting (fair-share) citizen. Many people in my union fall into the category of a registered voter, who doesn't bother to vote, and spend alot of time complaining about things. I say this because alot of members don't get involved in their union, spending more time complaining about it, but doing nothing to help/improve their union.

Now, some unions do a better job than others. In fact, some unions are actually more "management friendly" than worker friendly. Many suffer from lack of participation, and decades of anti-union rhetoric. In my union, there is a small contingent of anti-union activists, who encourage members to become "fair share" non-members, and anything else they can do to tear down the union. Therefore, my suggestion to you is that, if you decide to get a union job, after your probationary period, start becoming active in your union. Many fear that they will get fired for such activity, but in fact, union activity is protected under the law, and it makes it more difficult to fire someone who is active, so long as they keep their nose clean, and do a good job.

CUrrently, labor unions across the country are "re-structuring", and while some are hopping onto the pro-corporate bandwagon, others are re-organizing and getting ready for the biggest fight of our lives, against the neo-con agenda. I hope yours will be one of the good ones.

Good Luck - :)

One of the main benefits of belonging is collective bargaining. And probably one of the next best things is the grievance process. If you should ever be treated unfairly they've got your back.

Remember that this union bargained for the wages and benefits you will enjoy.




**proud member of the AFSCME since 1992 :D

Okay, thanks everyone for your input.

The only info I've ever gotten on unions is from my father in law who worked with Unions (factory workers, etc) at his job. He's a very anti-union Republican, and of course I know the info he gives me is biased, and he made it sound like I'd be spending thousands upon thousands upon thousands of dollars a year in union dues and get nothing in return. Of course I knew that he was biased because his job was to negotiate with those 'greedy nigger bastards' (his words) about higher pay and decent benefits. Greedy, indeed :eyes:

At any rate, I think the biggest issue I have with being in a nursing union is what happens to the patients if I were to be forced into a strike.

I would assume that if all the nurses striked (stroke?), the hospital would have to bring in temp nurses to care for patients during the strike. I also know that if the nurses strike, it's for a reason like pay, hours, patient load, etc--things that directly relate to the care of patients.

But I have worked with temp nurses, travel nurses, etc, and it takes them a few days to get the hang of how the hospital works, the different procedures and protocols, how to order meds, how to chart, how to use the computer system (since every hospital is different, and every FLOOR is different).

If all the nurses have to strike, then there are no charge nurses to train the temp nurses. I just see that as a double-blow to the patient.

I guess I can see a difference between striking at a plant, and striking at a hospital, since the hospital strike DIRECTLY affects the care and wellbeing of patients--striking at a plant may fuck with the bottom line during the strike, but no one (generally) is at risk of dying, or getting the wrong medicine, etc, because of a strike at a plant.

Although I seem to remember a nurse's strike in SEattle where all the nurses were "on strike" and not getting paid, but 90% of them were working, unpaid, at the patient's bedside while the other 10% were outside striking, and the union rep (I think this was for Group Health in SEattle) said on the record that their first concern was for patients, but they had a duty to bring personnel issues to managment in the form of a strike.

But thanks SO much for everyone's info. I'm not so terrified by the idea of a union anymore :D

bargainers.

I think striking is the least of your worries in regards to unions. How are you leaning at this point?

about in Washington. And I agree with the teachers as to why they strike. Sorry, but a teacher should get paid a bit more than someone making $9.00 an hour at McDonalds.

What do you mean "how are you learning at this point?" -- how am I learning in school, or about unions?

if about unions, everything I've read is positive--which I knew it would be. I had just been unable to get any information from anyone at the hospital, and the nurses in the union were pretty vague--I have a feeling they're the types that pay their dues but don't go to meetings or have any involvement.

I'm glad that DU is such a wealth of knowledge. I can't tell you how many things have been answered for me in the 4+ years I've been here. And it's so much easier to get info from DU'ers than to wade through pages and pages and pages of links from Google.

as to teachers - my husband has been a teacher for years - never striked once. I don't think they strike a lot, actually. Sorry about the typo...

which I was before I asked the question, but I just wanted to get the information I've been trying to get from the union rep for the last year and a half with no success.

I totally see the value in labour unions--hell, if it weren't for unions, I'd be forced to work 3,000 hours a week for $.03 an hour with no vacation and no days off and no benefits and no pension.

I wish that in South Carolina (where I'm from), there was a more union-friendly attitude. Sadly, SC is a right-to-work state and keep to the federal minimum wage of $5.15 an hour--at least in WA state, the min wage is $7.15 an hour, which is nice.

I've worked in some really crummy, low-end, vocational and blue-collar jobs, and none of them were unionized and the managment LOVED that. Of course, working in the service industry, you're working along mostly College and high school students who are happy to make ANY money, which makes it hard for the folks with families to support to get the wages they deserve. Charleston SC is a tourist-driven industry with alot of restaurants and hotels, and is just teeming with low-wage low-end jobs with no chance of promotion or raises. And businesses love that. They get to charge $400 a night for a hotel room, and $75-per-person dinners, but pay the house cleaners and chefs only $5 an hour ($2.15 + tips for waitresses and hostesses) and they're laughing all the way to the bank.

sickening.

As the result of a strike, patient care may suffer short term. If management wins, patient care will almost certainly suffer long term. Management is about cutting costs and corners whenever possible.

If you cross a picket line, you will be undermining the efforts of your fellow workers to maintain a workplace that is of greatest benefit to both employees and patients.

Don't let the battle make you lose sight of the war. Management usually cares about one thing only: $$$$$, the bottom line, healthy profit margins, etc. And if they have to sacrifice the quality of patient care to achieve it, they'll gladly do so.



As for your father, he sounds a lot like mine.

He sure loved to gripe about the Union, but never seemed to complain about getting paid union scale.

If you look at average annual income the 50 states, you will see that the non-union "right to work" states are pretty much the bottom of the barrel for wages nationwide. Within the labor movement "right to work" states are pejoratively referred to as "work for less" states.

And no amount of anti-union rhetoric will change that fact.

a very anti-union, right-to-work state. Has high level of poverty, etc.

Hell, even Washington has a higher-than-federal-minimum wage. I think federal min wage is $5.15, but Wa. state min wage is $7.15.

When I lived & Worked in SC, I nearly creamed myself the first time I got a job that paid $8 an hour. That's like BIG TIME MONEY.

And what you say about patients suffering long term v. short term is true, but I just can't reconcile patients having to suffer under ANY Conditions. Of course, I'm not aware of any reports of patient deaths during nursing strikes.

Of course, if this Administration had any interest in "homeland security", they would do more to make it easier for people to enter nursing school, fund community colleges that offer nursing programs, and make it more appealing for people to become nurses. I mean, howcan you have a secure homeland when so many people don't have health insurance, when hospitals are understaffed---there's an estimated 1 MILLION nursing positions open right now, and that number is expected to double by 2020 IF NOT SOONER>

If there were a major attack on any city in America, those people affected would be fucked. There is not an adequate number of health care professionals in ANY city in the US (or in the world, for that matter) to care for the people that are routinely sick now---much less if even 10% of the population of any city were to suffer at one time.

National Security doesn't mean armies overseas and lots of guns. National Security means just that---national security. You cannot have national security if something as basic as health care is so unobtainable to so many, and so understaffed with qualified and educated personnel ready adn willing to take care of the masses when they're in need.

Where $9.00 an hour was considered a great starting hourly wage.

I spent summers working in factories getting paid $6.50 - $6.80 an hour. FACTORIES!!!

I knew guys who'd been working as Temps at their factory jobs for 3 YEARS, because the company refused to hire them on at permanent employee wages and benefits.


One thing I can tell you is that you don't see crap like that where there's a strong Union presence.

that had factories around the world--europe, mexico, china, etc. And he's bitching because these factory workers wanted $13.00 an hour. He's like "Well, try that shit down in Mexico. You're lucky to get $13.00 a fucking WEEK"---as if that's a GOOD thing.

Of course, in addition to being a republican, he's also a wealthy bastard and feels that anyone who is poor DESERVES to be poor and should just work harder. I asked him once how much harder one has to work maing $7.00 an hour to be "worthy"? And wouldn't it be easier for people to NOT be poor if they were making $13.00 an hour doing repetititve, dangerous, tiring work? ANd what about the factory workers that are retired at 45 because their shoulders gave out on them, their wrists gave out on them, their legs gave out on them from working at the factory for 25 years doing the same thing 50 hours a week.

He was nonplussed. Said they should go to school and get an education and then they wouldn't have to work for minimum wage. Reminded him that if everyone in his plant got a degree and found a better job, then HE would be out of a job and most likely working minimum fucking wage

What is he trying to say? That wages and working conditions in the United States should be more like Mexico?

As for the "they should all go to school" line, we've been telling everyone to go to college for about two decades. Has it resulted in everyone having a high-paying, white collar position? Hardly.

What it's done is create a glut of college grads competing for the same limited number of white collar positions.

Fortunately, those coming before you organized your perspective workplaces winning pay, quality of life and work rules benefits for you. Many are not so lucky. Here’s a couple examples (among hundreds taking place right now in this country) of working people at the beginning of the battle for justice:

The Coalition of Immokalee Workers
http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/2674

Justice for Janitors
http://www.cincijanitors.org/

Dick Meister has been a writer on Labor for 40 years. You can learn much about unions and Labor History here:
http://www.dickmeister.com/id6.html

Finally, Us Labor Against War has been on the front lines of the antiwar movement:
http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org/

back in the ancient times I used to pray that unions would get involved in nursing. The hospitals can do all kinds of dreadful things to you without union protection. Our pay would be docked if we clocked in a few minutes late...but if we worked 5 hours overtime we didn't get a dime. The hospitals didn't care how many patients you took care of. Now hospital administrators would love to go back to those days...the hospital in our time has just cut the no. nurses/patient acuity scale. You need a union to protect you!!!

"I'd either have to work at a nursing home for 1/2 the pay, or drive 3 hours to the next closest hospital."

Union is why the pay is better.

Typically, nurses who work in nursing homes get paid less than nurses who work in hospitals, regardless of whether the hospital is unionized or not. Just as nurses who get paid in Dr's offices get paid less than hospital nurses. I think it's the nature of the job, as a nurse in a nursing home is (generally) going to be passing meds and anything "acute" that occurs will have that patient medivac'ed to the hospital to be taken care of, as opposed to hospital nurses who are doing much more and handling many more patients than a nursing home nurse does.

But I agree that unionzation has its benefits, including increased pay. But even without unionization, hospital nurses would get paid more than nursing home nurses in most situations.

republicans hate unions!