Beware iof NEMSA!

[Scaramedic]

180% pay raise and plasma TV's, umm no. BS. Crap. Maybe just a union rep (Labor Relations Representative) trying to cover their ass.

:wink:

Gee I wonder where these high expectations came from...

August 28, 2007

To all NW NEMSA Members,I wish to express appreciation to those of you who attendedthe meetings recently held with myself and other representatives from NEMSA. Although the first set of meetings were high in energy and emotion, they were not as productive as I had hoped. The second set of meetings were much more productive and I wish to thank those who attended.

What was unique about the second set of meetings is not the information provided by NEMSA, but the information that we received from the members who attended. Tim Talbot (NEMSA Attorney), Jeff Misner (Labor Relations Representative), and I received very valuable information that unfortunately was not available to us during negotiations. This information included expectations within the bargaining unit and the appearance of promises and guarantees of bargaining results that have become canonized as fact within the bargaining unit.

When NEMSA ran the certification election to represent EMS professionals in the Northwest, we knew expectations were high. We at NEMSA worked hard to meet those expectations while AMR changed ownership to a new, non-labor friendly model of the new publicly traded EMSC. While negotiations slowed down both locally and around the nation, expectations within the Northwest bargaining unit continued to grow unchecked locally and unknown to the National leadership due in part to a mistake in depending on inexperienced rank and file members who may have purposefully or inadvertently created promises and expectations of bargaining results that did not exist in reality. These promises and expectations have created an undue hardship on your bargaining unit.

While it is unknown whether having this knowledge would have changed the tentative agreement, it has certainly given us a much better understanding of why the membership is so upset about the tentative agreement and, in particular, my responses to the members in the first two meetings. My responses to the members at those two meetings, based on the information that I now have, were not the most appropriate responses and I completely understand the members’ negative reaction.

Please accept my sincere apologies regarding how these matters have come to light and my responses to them. Based on the information that I now posses, this union will not talk of or contemplate disclaiming or walking away from the NW based on whether the tentative agreement is approved or rejected. Instead, NEMSA will undertake some much needed fixing and education, both to and from the membership. Our goal is to repair our relationship with our NW members and to better provide representation that seeks to benefit the entire bargaining unit. To that end, the first thing we must do is address the tentative agreement and cast votes based on accurate and objective information. Additional meetings with both local and national NEMSA personnel will be held soon to allow NEMSA members every opportunity to fully and completely understand this contract offer.

We acknowledge that certain representations were made to the members that created unrealistic expectations and were not fulfilled by this tentative agreement. That being said, the current tentative agreement based on all the circumstances remains the best possible contract that can be attained from AMR at this time. Simply rejecting the current tentative agreement will not fulfill unrealized expectations and, for a variety of reasons, not yield the best results for the members. In all probability, such a response will have a negative impact on the members both as a practical and financial matter.

Despite all that has occurred, NEMSA is committed to seeing this through to the best possible outcome for all the NW members.

Respectfully,

Torren Colcord, President

National EMS Association (NEMSA)

Keep this quote in mind the Oregonian story

"Union President Torren Colcord dismissed the complaints. "The expectations of these workers are unrealistic," he said in a written statement."

Original letter is here...

Colcord Letter

If you want to bash people please don't juse facts from a newspaper, I think we all know how biased they are. It is partially my fault for posting that article from The Oregonian.

Having said that these expectations are what NEMSA was throwing around to get people to vote for their union. It had nothing to do with the rejection of the contract.

As far as the original poster working for AMR, well DUH. That does not make his argument any less valid.

Peace,

Marty

[Scaramedic]

Exactly. Labour Unions are for labourers. I am not a labourer. I am a medical professional. Therefore, I have no need for a labour union.

For those who want to be nothing but a labourer, go be a firemonkey and enjoy your IAFF brotherhood. Leave the profession to the rest of us. We intend to move the profession forward, not backwards.

Nursing Journal Study Shows Nurses Unions Improve Patient Outcomes in Hospitals. Patients Treated for Heart Attacks Have Lower Mortality Rate at RN-Unionized Hospitals

Patients with heart trouble would be wise to seek care at a hospital with a nurses union according to a recent study of the impact of nurses unions and the mortality rate for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI, the medical terminology for heart attack). The study, which was published in the March issue of JONA (Journal of Nursing Administration), studied hospitals in California and found that hospitals with a nurse’s union had a "significantly predicted lower risk-adjusted AMI mortality."

The study’s authors, Jean Ann Seago, PhD, RN and Michael Ash, PhD, concluded that "this study demonstrates that there is a positive relationship between patient outcomes and RN unions." Editor’s Note: for a fax copy of the study, contact the MNA at 781.249.0430.

"Thirty-five percent of hospitals in California have RN unions. The significant finding in this study is that hospitals in California with RN unions have 5.7% lower mortality rates for AMI after accounting for patient age, gender, type of MI, chronic diseases and several organizational characteristics. This result includes controls for number of beds, AMI-related discharges, cardiac services, staff hours and wages.

In discussing how unions impact the quality of patient care, the authors stated, "unions may impact the quality of care by negotiating increased staffing levels…that improve patient outcomes. Alternatively, unions may affect the organization nursing staff or the way nursing care is delivered in a fashion that facilitates RN-MD communication. This is the ‘voice’ function of unions…Yet another possible mechanism by which unions can improve care is by raising wages, thereby decreasing turnover, which may improve patient care."

The authors conclude, "perhaps having an RN union promotes stability in staff, autonomy, collaboration with MDs and practice decisions that have been described as having a positive influence on the work environment and on the patient outcomes."

"We at the MNA couldn’t have said it better ourselves,’ said Karen Higgins, RN, MNA President. "In fact, we have been saying this for years - a patient’s greatest advocate is a unionized nurse, because a unionized nurse has the protected right and the power to stand up for their practice and their profession. The fact that this same message is being delivered through a research study published in a journal for nursing administrators is even more telling. These are the folks who often fight tooth and nail to prevent nurses from forming a union. Perhaps now they will see the value of having a union at their facility. We know the staff nurses here in Massachusetts have seen the value."

Higgins points to a number of examples in recent years of where the strength of nurses unions, and the ability of nurses to stand up to health care administrators over patient care issues have had direct impact on the quality of care patients receive.

She points to specific provisions nurses have negotiated into MNA union contracts. These include:

* Limits on the Use of Unlicensed Personnel - Throughout the early 1990’s hospitals across the country and throughout Massachusetts attempted to cut costs by implementing care delivery models that involved replacing registered nurses with lesser qualified, unlicensed personnel. In 1996, nurses at Brigham & Women’s Hospital drew national attention when they took a vote to go out on strike to prevent implementation of such a plan at their facility. The nurses won language in their contract to prevent this practice and since then, a number of other MNA hospitals secured similar language, which protects patients from receiving care from someone unprepared to meet their needs.

* Limits on Mandatory Overtime - Again, as hospitals cut costs by laying off nurses and operating with a skeleton nursing staff, the practice of using forced overtime to compensate for lack of staff proliferated through Massachusetts hospitals. Patients throughout the state began receiving care from exhausted and overworked nurses, who were more prone to make errors. In 1997, nurses at Boston Medical Center voted to go out on strike over the issue. In 2000 and 2001, nurses at St. Vincent Hospital/Worcester Medical Center and Brockton Hospital did go out on strike over this issue. The result of these actions was the negotiation of landmark language in contracts to require appropriate staffing, limit mandatory overtime and to allow nurses the right to refuse overtime should they feel too tired to provide safe care.

* Improvements in Staffing - The most important factor contributing to a nurse’s ability to provide safe, quality patient care is the number of patients he or she is assigned. Because of health care cost cutting measures, most nurses in Massachusetts are being asked to care for too many patients. Here again, MNA local bargaining units have been able to negotiate a number of provisions to help improve nurses staffing ratios. At Boston Medical Center, the nurses’ union and management work together to determine appropriate staffing levels, at St. Vincent Hospital/Worcester Medical Center actual staffing guidelines have been established. Unionized nurses are also leading the effort to pass legislation that will mandate safe nurse-to-patient ratios in all health care facilities, union or non union, to ensure that all nurses can practice safely, and that all patients have access to quality patient care.

* Inappropriate Floating of Nurses - As hospitals have cut back on nurses, they have attempted to compensate for short staffing by forcing nurses to move from one area of the hospital to another to cover for vacancies on a given shift. Very often they move nurses from unit to unit without any effort to ensure the nurse being floated is prepared to practice in the new area. For example, a medical surgical nurse is moved from her floor to cover in the emergency room, even though she has no training or experience in emergency nursing. A number of MNA bargaining units have used the collective bargaining process to negotiate limits on this activity and/or to force the hospital to provide appropriate orientation to a nurse before he or she is floated to an unfamiliar unit.

According to Higgins, the biggest and most obvious advantage unionized nurses have is the ability to say "no." "If you work in a non-unionized hospital and management decides it wants to impose mandatory overtime, replace your colleague with an unlicensed person, or ask you to care for 12 patients when you should be caring for five, there is really nothing you can do to stop them. In fact, many nurses in non-unionized facilities have found themselves without a job when they speak up about such conditions. When that happens, the patients being cared for in that environment are the ones who suffer. Their health and safety depends on the conditions the nurse is asked to practice in. If nurses lack a protected voice and cannot truly advocate to make those conditions safe, then the patient will not be safe."

So Nurses aren't Medical Professionals?

UFCW Represents more than 40,000 nurses & other healthcare workers

UFCW 141 Nurses Represents nurses in Washington State NEW SITE!

HACSU Represents the majority of employees in psychiatric, alcohol, and drug and disability services in Victoria, Australia

SEIU Nurse Alliance More than 110,000 nurses from every health care setting

American Federation of Teachers

Doctor's Council Who says unions aren't for professionals?

Committee of Interns and Residents Once again . . .

Teamsters International Union Represents 60,000 nurses in all areas

MUMN Malta Union of Midwives & Nurses

MNU Manitoba Nurse's Union

QNU Queensland Nurses' Union

UNAP United Nurses & Allied Professionals

ONA Ontario Nurses Association represents 50,000 nurses

NYPNU NewYork Professional Nurses Union

SEIU Service Employees International Union

NSNU Nova Scotia Nurses Union

UNA United Nurses of Alberta

NLNU Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses Union

AFSMEUnited Nurses of America represents 45,000 RNs and LPNs

Federation of Nurses/UFT

OPEIU Represents a diverse membership including nurses

UAW Represents registered nurses and other health care professionals

[Just Plain Ruff]

I totally agree marty, I don't use facts just from the newspapers but hey, when that is all that is posted and it's hard to get other objective facts you go with what you have presented.

The expectations as presented seem to border on the absurd but if those truly were the expectations, the 180% salary increase, the big screen tv's and the bereavement leave for pets, and these were bona fide expectations, how did you expect us to respond.

I like to wait till we hear from someone who is directly involved in the situation but since that seems to not be forthcoming then we go with what we have.

If the expectations were less than listed then what exactly were they?

It would be nice if we got both sides of the story here, the side of the story on the employees and the side of the NEMSA people

But remember, the original poster called nemsa a negative name and immediately this colored everyone's response and demeanor on this post.

Please, can someone somehow give us both sides to the story and then we can all make a educated opinion.

[Dustdevil]

And it took them two centuries to become recognised as professionals too.

This is one issue I'd like to see EMS take a shortcut on.

And come on, Marty. You know enough about statistics to not fall for any spurious claims of a cause-effect relationship here. That's beyond absurd.

[Scaramedic]

I agree ruff and I am sorry for only posting the article I first posted.

The Plasma and 180% are crap. I never heard that.

As far as being involved have you noticed where I live?

The OP is just someone with an agenda and a website trying to get back at NEMSA. I agree it could have been handled better.

Also, I am not a union person, I just think people got screwed over by false claims to promote and spread a union.

I refer to this thread...

EMT CITY - NEMSA wins oregon thread

Peace,

Marty

[Scaramedic]

And it took them two centuries to become recognised as professionals too.

This is one issue I'd like to see EMS take a shortcut on.

And come on, Marty. You know enough about statistics to not fall for any spurious claims of a cause-effect relationship here. That's beyond absurd.

Yeah I know Dust, my bad. It's just I am in a really bad mood. Idiots rejected a good contract based on lies initially told by the union. AMR is giving a 5% raise since the union left. That's down 3.6%, now I can't buy my Ferrari.

Peace,

Marty

[Dustdevil]

...I just think people got screwed over by false claims to promote and spread a union.

That's pretty much the point I have maintained in all of these union discussions here. Unions are like politicians. Their one and only goal is self perpetuation. Anything they do for you is just a byproduct of what they are doing for themselves. And although individual employees may indeed reap benefits from the union, the profession as a whole never benefits. In fact, it continually suffers.

I'm looking forward to hearing what Hugopreuss and GulDukat have to say about this.

[Scaramedic]

I'm looking forward to hearing what Hugopreuss and GulDukat have to say about this.

So am I. :twisted:

Peace,

Marty

[zzyzx]

I don't believe that stuff about the 180% pay raise and the plasma TV's. It sounds like this union rep is trying to make these guys look bad.

Many people may not like unions, but you need someone to represent you when you work for AMR. AMR only cares about making its shareholders happy.

[flight-lp]

Many people may not like unions, but you need someone to represent you when you work for AMR. AMR only cares about making its shareholders happy.

See this is where I disagree. AMR is a private for profit business. Of course it has to make its sharholder's happy. Thats basic corporation economics. Medics who take the time to educate themselves about their career providers know this information. They cans see the big picture beyond the ambulance. If an employee is working for a company that does not satisfy their basic heirarchy of needs, then they need to change their environment. If they CHOOSE not to, then they only have themselves to blame......