Seachange Bulletin #126

February 19, 2004

Seachange Bulletin Archives

Email the editor

Seachange Bulletin #126: Hardball Time for US Nurses
California, Hawaii, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania

Editorial Comment: With the rolling out in California on January 1, 2004, of
mandated minimal RN-to-patient ratios for all acute care settings, sectors of
the hospital industry there are still fighting to derail patient safety, while
the Massachusetts Hospital Association has mounted an intense campaign of
disinformation to keep H1282 from moving forward as the July 31st deadline for
legislative action looms on the horizon. The evidence continues to mount that
mandated minimal RN-to-patient ratios save lives, save money and save nurses. On
other fronts, staff nurses continue to organize, to win victories and to
position themselves to become better able to advocate for their patients and for a
healthy society. - SE

Nursing is focus of patient safety
One researcher says nurses and staffing ratio
play a significant part in the quality of care.
Susan Aschoff, Saint Petersburg Times, February 10, 2004
<
http://www.sptimes.com/2004/02/10/Floridian/Nursing_is_focus_of_p.shtml>

Linda Aiken, PhD, one of the featured speakers at the recent national
conference at the University of Florida on "Nursing and the Future of Health Care,"
says the oft-reported nursing shortage is not so much about numbers of nurses
as it is about facilities' unwillingness to hire enough of them. Aiken, a
professor and director of the Center for Health Outcomes and Policy Research at the
University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing, studies patient outcomes at
hospitals in the United States, Canada and Europe and what makes a difference in
getting people well.

Here are some of her insights:

Q: Do we have a shortage of nurses?

We have more nurses than we've ever had before. But it's easier to blame the
shortage of nurses than it is to solve the problems in the health care
industry. We have a perceived shortage because hospitals have not budgeted enough
positions. The average patient is sicker than they used to be. Shorter lengths of
stay create this short cycle of admission and discharge that falls on nurses.
Looking at the early '80s to the mid '90s, nationally nurses have declined by
7 percent (based on staffing at every facility). In some states it's been as
much as 25 percent.

Q: Isn't it a given that if you have too few nurses you will have lower
quality care?

There is now increased interest in trying to improve patient safety (at
hospitals). An Institute of Medicine report found that medical errors are prevalent
in our health care system and among the five main causes of death in the
United States. Most efforts (to reduce errors) have not recognized the important
role nurses play - the link between understaffing and problems in care. About
two-thirds of nurses say their hospitals don't have sufficient numbers of
nurses. Still, we find hospitals, when they get into trouble financially, reducing
the number of nurses.

Q: So how do you keep nurses from becoming a line item to be cut?

Our research program has been trying to build an irrefutable data base that
links nurse staffing and mortality rate. Journal of the American Medical
Association published that for every patient added to the workload of a nurse the
mortality following surgical procedures increases 7 percent. There is a 31
percent difference in mortality between hospitals where nurses care for eight
patients compared to hospitals where nurses take care of four.

Q: Those patients aren't dying because of nursing mistakes.

No. (Nurses) are the surveillance system. Most errors detected in hospitals
are detected by a nurse, about 85 percent. One of the things they bring to care
is the ability to assess a patient's condition and to separate important
signs ... from unimportant signs. ...

California:

Minimums for nurses necessary
Deborah Burger, RN, Los Angeles Daily News, December 1, 2003
<
http://www.pennanurses.org/12-1-04%20minimums%20for%20nurses%20necessary.pdf>

For the first time in years, California patients and their families have a
reason to look beyond the doom-and-gloom stories that have dominated reports
about the decline in the quality of hospital care and a seemingly intractable
nursing shortage. As of Jan. 1, all hospitals will be required to maintain safe
staffing levels - minimum ratios of registered nurses to patients - as a result
of a law sponsored by the California Nurses Association, and the advent of
the ratios is helping spur significant growth in the state’s RN work force. In
recent weeks, some in the hospital industry, who have never liked the new law,
have fanned fears of closures or ambulance diversions by hospitals unwilling
to comply with the law by claiming a lack of available nurses. It’s their hope
that public alarm will encourage Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to delay or weaken
the ratios. Any such moves would be shortsighted, could abort the progress
California has made in tackling the nursing shortage and put patients at risk.
Recent data show the landscape for nurses has changed in California. Since the
Safe Staffing Law was signed in 1999, there has been a dramatic influx of RNs
into the state. Coupled with the 5,100 new RNs graduated every year by state
nursing schools, the number of active RNs is growing by 10,000 a year. ...

Hospitals make last-ditch push against nurse-patient ratios
Judy Silber & Andrew LaMar, Contra Costa Times, December 29, 2003
<
http://www.pennanurses.org/hospitals%20last%20ditch%20effort%20against%20rati
os%2012-29.pdf>

The hospital industry has taken its frantic fight against the state’s new
nurse staffing law to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, but the pro-business Republican
has signaled he won’t intervene. The industry says the new law, set to take
effect Thursday, could shake the fragile health care system by forcing closures
of emergency rooms and other units. Hospitals say they support the principle
of the law - regulated staffing to ensure patient safety. However, they’re
bothered by its stringency. At all times, in all wards, hospitals must meet
required minimum nurse staffing rules. "There is not one ounce of flexibility in
that law," said Jan Emerson, spokeswoman for the California Healthcare
Association. "If a nurse has to go to the bathroom and there isn’t someone to fill in
for her, technically, the hospital is in violation. It’s that continuous
compliance that’s going to be problematic." But for the time being, the
Schwarzenegger administration appears unmoved by the hospital industry’s stepped-up
lobbying effort. That’s even though Schwarzenegger campaigned for office by
promising to improve California’s business climate and criticizing unions’
influence over his predecessor, Gray Davis. ...

Fines could make hospitals feel unwell
Daniel S. Levine, San Francisco Business Times, January 12, 2004
<
http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2004/01/12/story5.ht
ml>

As California's new nurse-staffing law took effect, the California Nurses
Association has stepped up efforts to give the new law teeth. The nurses' union,
the driving force behind the requirement that hospitals maintain specified
nurse-to-patient ratios, expects legislation to be introduced this month that
would create penalties of $10,000 per shift if a hospital demonstrates a pattern
of violating the minimum staffing ratios. A pattern would be four or more
violations within six months. An attempt by Assemblyman Daryl Steinberg
(D-Sacramento) last year to do that died when the assembly couldn't reconcile
differences with the state senate. The nurses' union blames this on a dispute between it
and the Service Employees International Union, which was supporting a
competing bill that also stalled. The two unions have since announced a truce and
agreed to work together on legislative issues. "We expect this bill to sail
through," said Jill Furillo, director of national affairs for the California Nurses
Association. Hospitals, which opposed the previous bill as well as the one
backed by the SEIU, expect to mount a strong campaign to defeat any new attempts
to create financial penalties for hospitals out of compliance with the
staffing law. ...

(Cf. <
http://www.revolutionmag.com/newrev2/engineering.html> - SE)

Hospitals: Ratios leave us at risk
Troy May, Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Journal, January 12, 2004
<
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2004/01/12/story4.html>

Most California hospitals say they can't heed the new nurse-to-patient-ratio
law, meaning their lack of compliance leaves them vulnerable to lawsuits, loss
of reimbursement dollars and cutbacks in patient services. In response, a
hospital trade group has filed a lawsuit against the California Department of
Health in an effort to ease the law, which took effect Jan. 1 and requires
round-the-clock compliance. The specific nurse-to-patient ratios vary by unit within
a hospital. The lawsuit filed by the California Healthcare Association
specifically addresses the requirement that the ratio be met at "all times,"
including during breaks and lunches. Traditionally, nurse would cover for one another
when one goes on break, to lunch or to the rest room. The suit seeks to
loosen the regulation to require that the ratio me met only at the beginning of a
shift. Hospital officials say the state's nursing shortage has made it
difficult to hire enough nurses to cover breaks, says Jan Emerson, spokeswoman for the
California Healthcare Association, which filed the lawsuit Dec. 31 in
Superior Court in Sacramento. The association represents 350 hospitals in California.
...

Nurse-to-patient ratio survey begins
Union asks RNs
Rebecca Vesely, Alameda Times-Star, January 14, 2004

The California Nurses Association - the country's largest union representing
registered nurses - on Tuesday began a survey of RNs at every hospital in the
state to determine if facilities are complying with a new staffing law that
went into effect Jan. 1. "With the audit we hope to provide a more detailed
answer for patients and their families to assess how their local hospitals are
faring on compliance with the law," the association's president Deborah Burger
said in a release. The staffing law, signed by former Gov. Gray Davis in 1999,
establishes set ratios on how many patients can be assigned to each nurse.
Ratios range from one nurse for each patient on the trauma unit to one nurse to
every eight patients in the well-baby nursery. The ratios were determined by the
state Department of Health Services with input from hospitals and nurses. The
law is aimed to improve patient outcomes and reduce nurse burnout and
turnover. Survey questions will address whether hospitals are providing the same
staffing for all shifts, as required by the law. Nurses will also be asked whether
hospitals are closing beds, limiting patient admissions or displacing aides
and other caregivers to meet the ratio law. The audit will be completed at the
end of January and the results will be made public. ...

Too few nurses could very well mean too many deaths
Deborah Burger, RN, Alameda Times-Star, January 14, 2004

Nearly 100,000 Americans die every year as a result of avoidable medical
errors - at a time when insufficient monitoring of hospital patients, caused by
poor working conditions and the assignment of too few registered nurses,
increases the likelihood of patient deaths and injuries, reported the National
Academies of Sciences last November. Inadequate staffing precipitated one-fourth of
all unexpected occurrences that led to patient deaths, injuries, or permanent
loss of function reported the past five years to the private agency that
accredits hospitals. Dissatisfaction with staffing levels and heavy workloads are
major factors contributing to a mass RN exodus from hospitals and the much
discussed nursing shortage, the General Accounting Office informed Congress in
2001. ...

Agency bogs down as nurses rush to register
Kathy Robertson, Sacramento Business Journal, January 19, 2004
<
http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2004/01/19/story6.html>

With hospitals across the state scrambling to find enough workers to meet new
nurse-to-patient ratios, a record 220 nurses showed up at the Bureau of
Registered Nursing in the first week of January to get state approval. Most were
out-of-state nurses seeking temporary licenses. If appropriate credentials were
sent ahead of time, most got what they wanted in a few hours. Permanent
licensing is another matter. The wait time for that has grown to six weeks or more.
Budget cuts at the state agency that licenses registered nurses reduced staff
by 15 percent last year, creating a backlog of work at a time when demand for
its services is at an all-time high. "We don't want to be a bottleneck in the
process, that's for sure, but we are having to do things a little different,"
said assistant executive officer Susan Brank. "Licenses are not issued as
quickly as we'd like." In October 2003 - the last time the backlog was reviewed -
there were 2,100 applications pending. The oldest dated back five months. The
board's goal is to issue most permanent licenses in 10 days to two weeks,
although complex cases can run three or four months, Brank said. Due to the
backlog, the work now takes four to five weeks longer than usual. ...

Hospital lobby would undermine state's patient protection law
Deborah Burger, RN, Pasadena Star-News, January 21, 2004

Executive insiders at the lobbying arm of the state's hospital industry are
waging a high-stakes gamble in their drive to roll back a landmark patient
protection law that if properly enforced almost certainly will save the lives of
thousands of Californians. In an announcement widely disseminated by the
industry lobbyists, officials at Santa Teresita Hospital in Duarte recently
announced plans to close, blaming the new safe staffing law. The announcement failed
to point out that the hospital has reported losses in six of the past nine
years, an aggregate total of $11.1 million, and that the facility has been
downsizing for years, all long before the new rules to protect patients were in
effect. At best, the timing of the hospital's announcement six days after the
operative date of the minimum registered nurse ratios raises questions that cry out
for a broader context. Last fall the California Healthcare Association (CHA),
the industry lobby group, held seminars across the state for local
administrators, ostensibly to inform them about the law. But there was a hidden agenda
as well, laying the groundwork for a strategic campaign to erode public support
in hopes of persuading the governor and Legislature to repeal or weaken the
safe-staffing law. In the seminars, the CHA handed out sample press releases
with blanks to fill your name in here announcing a unit closure due to the
reputed inability to adhere to the law. If hospital industry opponents of the law
are encouraging hospitals to shut down or restrict access to care as a strategy
for achieving political ends, that bears investigation by our elected
leaders. Closures are just one apparent tactic. Some hospitals are also canceling or
delaying elective surgeries and using lesser-licensed staff who do not have
the professional expertise of registered nurses to meet the requirements of the
law. The CHA has reportedly also been holding meetings of member hospitals in
an effort to keep everyone in line on their interpretation of the law and
coordinating common responses. ...

County says quick closure violated law
Report: Hospital violated state law
Pasadena Star-News, February 3, 2004
<
http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/Stories/0,1413,206%257E22097%257E1933823,00.h
tml?search=filter>

Duarte - Santa Teresita Hospital's abrupt closure violated state law, but
officials have no authority to fine or penalize the facility, health officials
said Tuesday. The hospital, which closed Jan. 9, "failed to comply with the law
and county policy," according to a county health department report released
Tuesday. "Even more egregiously, it failed to notify its patients, its community
and even its own staff members of the closure in the manner required by law."
The county investigation will continue to determine the credibility of
allegations made by nurses who worked at the facility that the hospital's obstetrics
unit violated state law by operating without pediatricians for 10 births in
November and December, officials said. A state investigation into the closure
is ongoing, said Lea Brooks, spokeswoman for the California Department of
Health Services. Santa Teresita Hospital CEO Mike Costello gave health officials
three days' notice before closing its 39-bed acute care facility. Employees and
residents were given less than 24 hours' notice. State law mandates that a
facility with an emergency room give 90 days' notice and hold public hearings
before closing. Costello said he had to close the facility immediately because of
a financial crisis that threatened bankruptcy and the closure of its
150-patient skilled nursing facility. Costello blamed the closure on a state-mandated
law increasing the nurse-to-patient ratio, which he said was too costly for
the financially troubled facility. Costello did not return calls for this story,
but previously said he knew the immediate closure violated state law. ...

Staffing Improved at Nearly 70% of California Hospitals
Safe RN Staffing Law 'Off to a Good Start,' Says CNA
California Nurses Association, February 4, 2004
<
http://www.calnurse.org/cna/press/2404a.html>

Just one month after its effective date, California patients are already
benefiting from the state's landmark law requiring safe registered nurse staffing
ratios in California hospitals, the California Nurses Association said today.
Staffing conditions are improved at 68% of the hospitals surveyed by CNA, and
59% were generally in compliance with the requirements of the law. The CNA
survey covered 111 hospitals, nearly 30% of the general acute care hospitals in
California from mid to late January. The results were based on interviews with
RNs in the hospitals. "Our survey demonstrates that the Safe Staffing Law is
off to a good start," said CNA President Deborah Burger, RN. "A sizable
majority of hospitals we looked at are making a good faith effort to abide by the
law, and most have already seen results with improved conditions. That should be
welcome news to all Californians and their families who are in need of
hospital care." "If we continue this trend," said Burger, "the law will undoubtedly
save the lives and promote the safety and therapeutic healing of thousands of
Californians." ...

New staffing law helps, nurses say
Evan Pondel, Los Angeles Daily News, February 5, 2004
<
http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200%257E20950%257E1938501,00.html>

The California Nurses Association said Thursday that nurse-to-patient staff
ratios have improved at hospitals throughout the state, though hospital
officials themselves say they've seen no change. Since Jan. 1, California hospitals
have been scrambling to meet the new state requirements for fewer admitted
patients for every nurse. Though the law encountered resistance from hospital
operators who continue to grapple with rising health care costs, the California
Nurses Association says ratios are improving. A CNA report says more than half
of the 111 hospitals it surveyed in California are "generally in compliance
with the requirements of the law. ... This information shows we are making
progress. It also disputes the hysteria and destabilization that is being promoted
elsewhere," said Chuck Idelson, a union spokesman. The CNA surveyed its members
by gathering anecdotal information about each hospital's nurse-staffing
situation. Many of the nurses revealed scenarios that vastly differed from the grim
realities depicted before the ratio laws went into effect. Myrna Valmeo, a
registered nurse at Glendale Memorial Hospital, said not only does she see the
difference in ratios, she feels the difference. "I'm happier now, and so are
the other nurses around here," Valmeo said. "Because of the nurse staffing
ratios, the quality of care has greatly improved." That sentiment isn't echoed by
the California Healthcare Association, a Sacramento-based organization that
represents the interests of hospital operators. The group has been collecting
questionnaires from about 300 hospitals since Jan. 1. The most recent data
available reveal that 86 percent of the hospitals surveyed are not in full
compliance with the law. ...

Survey: Most hospitals meet safety,
nurse-to-patient ratio requirements
Annette Wells, San Bernardino County Sun, February 5, 2004
<
http://www.sbsun.com/Stories/0,1413,208%257E12588%257E1938284,00.html>

San Bernardino - A year ago, it wouldn't have been uncommon for a registered
nurse to handle up to a dozen patients at St. Bernardine Medical Center. That
is no longer the case. "Today, it is down to six, and I really have to hand it
to our administration because I know some hospitals are still dragging their
feet," said Beth Holzberger, an intensive care unit nurse at St. Bernardine
about her employer meeting the state's new nurse-to-patient ratios. "It's not
like we don't still have some problems, but things have improved tremendously at
St. Bernardine." St. Bernardine was one of three hospitals in San Bernardino
County surveyed by the California Nurses Association last month in compliance
with the new law which took effect Jan. 1. Community Hospital of San
Bernardino and St. Mary Medical Center in Apple Valley were the other two hospitals,
said Chuck Idelson, a California Nurses Association spokesman. In all, 111
hospitals, about 30 percent of general acute care hospitals in California, were
surveyed from mid- to- late January. The results, based on interviews with
registered nurses, showed that 68 percent of the hospitals have improved staffing
conditions and 59 percent of them are generally in compliance with the
requirements. "There's still a lot of misinformation being propagandized by the
hospital industry against the law, but what needs to be understood is without it, it
could mean severe consequences for public health," Idelson said. "When this
law is fully implemented it has the potential for saving thousands of patients'
lives as well as promoting health and safety. That is certainly what the
public wants and deserves." ...

Nurses' working conditions improving
Union study shows
Rebecca Vesely, Alameda Times-Star, February 5, 2004
<
http://www.timesstar.com/Stories/0,1413,125%257E10859%257E1936772,00.html>

Registered nurses at California hospitals are reporting improvements in
staffing conditions since a nurse-to-patient ratio law went into effect Jan. 1, the
largest union representing RNs said Wednesday. The California Nurses
Association is interviewing nurses at hospitals around the state to gauge compliance
with the new law. Out of 111 acute care hospitals - 30 percent of all hospitals
in the state - surveyed so far, registered nurses are reporting improved
conditions at 68 percent of those facilities. Nearly 60 percent of those hospitals
are in compliance of the new law, the nurses reported. "A sizable majority of
hospitals we looked at are making a good faith effort to abide by the law,
and most have already seen results with improved conditions," Deborah Burger,
president of the California Nurses Association, based in Oakland, said in a
statement. CNA praised Kaiser Permanente and the University of California Medical
Centers for their preparedness in meeting the ratio law. Enacted in 1999, the
law made California the first state to establish the maximum number of
patients that can be assigned to each nurse. Ratios range from one patient per nurse
in trauma and intensive care units to eight patients per nurse in well-baby
nurseries. ...

Nurses file suit over fast layoffs
Marshall Allen, Pasadena Star-News, February 9, 2004
<
http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/Stories/0,1413,206~22097~1946268,00.html>

Duarte - Seventeen nurses have sued Santa Teresita Hospital, claiming they
were sacked without notice when the maternity unit and acute care facility were
abruptly shut down in early January. The nurses claim CEO Mike Costello broke
labor laws by providing no notice before a mass layoff. The hospital is
already under county and state investigation for possibly failing to follow legal
guidelines before closing. Chris Sayler, a maternity nurse on the night shift,
said she initiated the lawsuit after she applied for unemployment benefits. On
investigating the labor code, Sayler said, she realized that institutions with
more than 75 employees must give 60 days' notice before a layoff of more than
50 employees. In all, more than 100 employees were laid off when Santa
Teresita closed Jan. 9. No one got more than one day's notice and some weren't
notified until afterward, Sayler said. Under the provisions of the labor code, the
employees are entitled to 60 days' severance pay, plus compensation for
benefits they would have accrued during that time period, said Charles Zetterberg,
the plaintiff's attorney. He called it a "clear-cut case.' Sayler said she was
off duty when the maternity nurses were laid off Jan. 2, so she received no
notice. According to Sayler, the on-duty nurses said it never was clear they
were being laid off. Someone just took their timecards and issued final checks.
Of 26 maternity nurses laid off that day, only 10 received any severance, and
no one was paid more than two weeks salary, she said. The next layoffs occurred
a week later, when Costello who's also named in the lawsuit announced that a
financial crisis forced him to close the 73-year-old hospital's 39-bed acute
treatment facility the next day. Costello said the crisis was caused by a new
law mandating higher nurse-to-patient ratios, which would have been too
expensive for the hospital. The closure was the only way to save Santa Teresita's
150-patient skilled nursing facility and stave off bankruptcy, Costello said at
the time. ... In addition to running Santa Teresita, Costello operates two
other companies, Regis Real Estate Holding Co. and 120-employee Apollo Healthcare
Corp. ...

Staff infection
Downstroke, CN&R Newsreview.com, February 12, 2004
<
http://www.newsreview.com/issues/chico/2004-02-12/down.asp>

At the beginning of the year, Enloe Medical Center was under pressure by law
to meet new nurse-to-patient staffing ratios, and despite the hospital’s
initial doubts, it is apparently meeting the requirements. "It’s going as well as
could be expected, given the amount of work it took to implement the law[‘s
requirements]," said Ann Prater, Enloe’s public relations director, adding that
that requirement has sent hospitals across the state "into a tailspin." She
said a couple of hospitals closed their doors last year, anticipating that
they would not be able to meet the requirements. If found "steadfastly" out of
compliance, Prater said, a hospital would be punished not by fine but by
possible loss of its license to operate or restrictions on its ability to collect
payments from the government. The ratio is enforced by the Department of Health
Services and by California Nursing (sic) Association monitors working in the
hospitals. Prater said that as of Jan. 31 Enloe employs 644 registered nurses
as compared to 622 one year ago. Another 54 are scheduled to begin work before
the end of May.

HEALTHCARE

Rally to Protect RN Staffing Ratios

RNs from around California are being asked to plan now to join a rally,
sponsored by CNA, in Sacramento March 19 to protest a lawsuit by the hospital
industry to roll back the new RN-to-patient staffing ratios. The California
Healthcare Association, the lobbying arm of the hospital industry, filed suit against
the safe staffing law December 30, 2003, just hours before the final
implementation of the ratios. The rally coincides with the first Superior Court
hearing on the case.

Date: Friday, March 19, 2004
Time: 8:30 am - 9:30 am and 12:00 noon
Where: Sacramento Superior Court
720 9th Street, Sacramento

CHA wants the court to throw out the requirement that the hospitals must
adhere to the ratios "at all times." The industry wants hospitals to have free
rein to understaff in any unit whenever an RN is on break,when a patient
emergency occurs elsewhere in the hospital, when new patients present in the ER, and
at other unspecified times. In other words, the hospital could be out of
compliance with the ratios "at all times." If CHA succeeds, this would seriously
undermine the ratio law, and would be a first step in a broader industry
campaign to drastically revise or repeal the new patient protections established by
the law.

Sign up now to join the rally

For more information, contact your labor rep and see the CNA website,
www.calnurse.org.

Save the Date – March 19

Hawaii:

Scheider stepping down at nurses' union
Pacific Business News (Honolulu), February 13, 2004
<
http://pacific.bizjournals.com/pacific/stories/2004/02/09/daily71.html>

The chief negotiator for the Hawaii Nurses Association, which represents
3,700 registered nurses, licensed practical nurses and other health care workers,
will step down in less than a month. Sue Scheider is director of the
Collective Bargaining Organization of HNA. She has notified the board of CBO-HNA that
her last day will be March 5. Scheider took the post in January 2002. Union
participation rose during her two-year tenure and negotiated member wage
increases worked out to about 20 percent. "The Collective Bargaining Organization has
made some very significant and progressive improvements under the tenure of
Ms. Scheider and will continue to recognize the benefits of her influence long
after her departure," CBO Board Chairman Bill Richter said.

Latest News from Hawaii:

* The three staff-nurse dissidents who had been expelled from the nurses
union, the Collective Bargaining Organization (CBO) of the Hawaii Nurses
Association (HNA), have been reinstated by the arbitrator. Gail Ramiscal, Michelle
Paik and Mary Hackney had been charged with "dual unionism" and summarily
expelled by the CBO board meeting in kangaroo court. Gail had been the chair of
that body at the time and is now reinstated to her leadership position.
* CBO director Sue Scheider, seeing the handwriting on the wall, has
announced her resignation. Imported from DC early in 2002, she had precipitated a
wave of poorly prepared and weakly conducted strikes. She has been a strong
advocate of HNA’s CBO joining ANA’s labor arm, the United American Nurses (UAN).
* ANA is intensifying its campaign to prevent disaffiliation of HNA from
the ANA federation. Just like nurses from Maine to California had experienced
when preparing their own departure from the elitist and moribund ANA, the deluge
of false claims and hollow promises has begun, including the usual big lie
that ANA has surveyed the nurses of Hawaii and found that the majority want to
stay in ANA.

For background on developments in Hawaii, go to Seachange Bulletin #121.

Iowa:

Nurses in Dubuque choose to join union
Nurse-patient ratios at Finley Hospital and other patient care
issues were the focus of the organizing effort, one nurse says.
William Ryberg, Des Moines Register, December 16, 2003
<
http://desmoinesregister.com/business/stories/c4789010/23026705.html>

Nurses at Finley Hospital in Dubuque have voted in favor of being represented
by Local 199 of the Service Employees International Union. Finley nurses will
join the same union local that represents nurses and other employees at
University Hospitals in Iowa City. The Dubuque hospital employs about 300 nurses.
The union representation vote was 169 to 115, union officials said. Contract
talks are expected to begin after the holidays. Linda Merfeld, a Finley nurse
and a leader of the union movement at the hospital, said patient care issues
such as nurse-patient ratios, rather than wages and benefits, were the main focus
in the organizing effort. The union believes the hospital needs more nurses
to adequately care for patients, Merfeld said. Today's treatment practices mean
that patients in hospitals are sicker than they were 10 years ago, she said.
In addition, hospital stays are shorter, meaning patients have less time to be
taught about treatment practices they will have to follow when they return
home. ...

Kentucky:

Kentucky Labor Cabinet Fined Norton
Hospital for Overtime Violation
Nurses Professional Organization, December 22, 2003

Louisville - The Kentucky Labor Cabinet fined Norton Hospital $500 for
violation of overtime law and required the hospital to issue back pay of $2,413.55
to employees. Last February Norton Hospital ordered hundreds of nurses and
other employees to remain in the hospital overnight after their shifts were
completed. The hospital claimed it needed to assure that there would be staff for
the following day in the face of a bad weather forecast. The hospital
threatened discipline if employees did not stay overnight in the hospital, and the
hospital did not pay employees their regular wage, but instead paid them $3 an
hour. When nurses arrived at the nursing stations in the morning in their clothes
from the day before, they found that management had placed tubs of new
underpants for those who wanted them. The Nurses Professional Organization assisted
employees in reporting the events to the Kentucky Labor Cabinet which found
that the hours spent at the hospital would have to be counted as time worked.
While not finding any violation in the forced overtime nor in the $3.00 an hour
payment, the Kentucky Labor Cabinet did find that there was a violation when
the hours were counted and there was no time and a half paid after 40 hours.
Twenty-seven people received the additional overtime pay. Sue Yost, NPO
Executive Director, and a registered nurse at Norton noted that excessive hours hurt
recruitment and retention of nurses as well as posing a risk to quality patient
care. She cited the recent finding by the National Academy of Sciences that
reported that fatigue was a major cause of errors that harm patients. The
report, from the academy's Institute of Medicine, said, "Long work hours pose one
of the most serious threats to patient safety, because fatigue slows reaction
time, decreases energy, diminishes attention to detail, and otherwise
contributes to errors."

NLRB: Norton Healthcare Must Allow
Employees to Discuss Grievances
Nurses Professional Organization, January 12, 2004

Louisville - In response to a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decision
to issue complaint against it for violation of federal law, Norton Healthcare
must post an NLRB notice to employees in the five Louisville Hospitals -
Suburban, Norton, Audubon, Southwest, and Kosair Children’s. Norton Healthcare had
placed in its employee handbook a rule that prohibits employees from
discussing their grievances. Such a rule violates workers’ rights under federal law to
act together with others for mutual benefit or protection. Speaking with each
other about their job concerns is a crucial right under the federal law that
protects the right to organize. The Nurses Professional Organization filed the
unfair labor practice charges against Norton Healthcare pointing to the
hospitals’ continuing efforts to curtail the freedom of speech of nurses and others
employees. The NPO has long contended that this freedom to act together to
improve conditions is vital to nursing and to patient care. The NLRB notice to be
posted for 60 days in each of the five hospitals affirms that federal law
gives employees the right to form, join or assist a union and to act together
with other employees for mutual benefit and protection. The NLRB notice which
must be signed by a responsible official of Norton Healthcare, asserts: "We will
not maintain in our employee handbook any rule or policy that prohibits
employees from discussing their grievances." The notice also includes the commitment
that: "We will not in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or
coerce you in the exercise of the rights guaranteed you by Section 7 of the
Act." Norton Healthcare has a poor record of compliance with labor law. The
NLRB has previously found that Norton Healthcare violated the law on a number of
occasions. Norton Healthcare has not yet reinstated NPO activist, Jane Gentry,
RN, nor settled other outstanding compliance issues.

Nurses Professional Organization Wins RN
Jane Gentry’s Case at Highest NLRB Level
NLRB Orders Reinstatement, Back Pay
and Reimbursement for Legal Fees
Nurses Professional Organization, February 4, 2004

Louisville - On January 30, 2004, the highest level of the National Labor
Relations Board (NLRB) ruled unanimously for the Nurses Professional Organization
(NPO) and ordered Norton Healthcare to reinstate RN Jane Gentry with back pay
and other benefits plus interest. Norton Healthcare had appealed a lower
level decision rather than comply with it. In addition, the NLRB ruled that
because Norton Audubon Hospital unlawfully reported Gentry to the Kentucky Board of
Nursing, the hospital must also reimburse her for the expenses she incurred in
defending her nursing license from Norton Healthcare’s charges. Gentry is an
officer of the NPO and an outspoken advocate for her patients, her co-workers,
and her union. She worked in the Coronary Care Unit, and later the Open
Heart Unit, at Audubon Hospital for 18 years. In July of 1999 Norton Healthcare
terminated Jane Gentry and reported her to the Kentucky Board of Nursing
accusing her of administering a medication without a doctor’s order and without
charting it. The "medication" was normal saline. Nurses routinely use normal
saline to flush IV lines without an order and without charting. There was no harm
to any patient. Gentry won the long legal battle for her license when Jefferson
Circuit Court and the Court of Appeals ordered the Kentucky Board of Nursing
to dismiss the charges and the Kentucky Supreme Court let that ruling stand.
The NLRB upheld Judge Arthur Amchan’s strongly-worded decision, signed December
9, 2002, that Norton Healthcare "has a proclivity for violating the Act
(Federal Law)" and that Norton Healthcare’s "egregious misconduct" demonstrates
"a general disregard for the employees’ fundamental rights." The judge ruled
that the testimony of "Cis" Gruebbel, the Chief Nursing Officer at Norton
Audubon Hospital, "is generally incredible." He also deemed Nurse Manager Randa
Bryan, the supervisor who fired Gentry, "not to be a credible witness." Norton
Healthcare has repeatedly violated the law in its effort to block nurses and
other employees from speaking out and winning collective bargaining. This NLRB
decision is final unless Norton Healthcare takes it to the 6th Circuit Court
of Appeals. The NPO calls on Norton Healthcare to comply swiftly so that
nurses can organize to address their crucial concerns on patient care, staffing,
conditions of practice, overtime, respect, fairness, pensions, and benefits.

For further info: Kay Tillow (502) 459-3393 Nurses Professional
Organization
1169 Eastern Pkwy, #2200, Lou. KY 40217
nursenpo@aol.com

Norton to let nurses discuss grievances
NLRB ruling settles charge lodged by union
Patrick Howington, The Courier-Journal, January 13, 2004
<
http://www.courier-journal.com/business/news2004/01/13/biz-front-norton13-293
4.html>

Norton Healthcare has agreed to rescind a company rule admonishing employees
not to discuss their grievance cases. The agreement settles a National Labor
Relations Board case that was brought by the Nurses Professional Organization.
NPO, which has been seeking to organize nurses at Norton Audubon Hospital
since 1989, claimed Norton's employee handbook broke the law by making workers
keep grievance matters confidential. The law gives workers the right to act
together for their protection and benefit. "This has been a real problem, that they
keep telling people, `You can't talk about things,'" said NPO organizer Kay
Tillow. "A part of how you organize is, you're able to speak with fellow
workers about your concerns. So if you can't talk about your grievances, how are you
going to organize?" Earl Ledford, acting director of the NLRB regional office
in Cincinnati, said his office approved the settlement last week. It requires
Norton to post a notice at its five Louisville hospitals saying it will not
prohibit employees from discussing their grievances. The notices must stay up
for 60 days. In addition, Norton will remove the no-discussion rule from its
employee handbook. ...

NLRB orders Norton Healthcare to reinstate nurse, pay legal fees
Patrick Howington, The Courier-Journal, February 5, 2004
<
http://www.courier-journal.com/business/news2004/02/05/biz-frontB-nurse05-357
5.html>

The National Labor Relations Board has ordered Norton Healthcare to reinstate
a nurse the board says was fired from Audubon Hospital in 1999 for union
activity. In addition to paying Jane Gentry her lost wages, the board said, Norton
must pay Gentry's legal expenses from her successful fight to keep her
nursing license. Norton said yesterday it will appeal the ruling to a federal
appeals court. The labor board's Jan. 30 order upheld a December 2002 decision by an
NLRB administrative law judge and added the requirement that Norton pay the
legal fees. Gentry's lawyer, Irwin "Buddy" Cutler, said it is unusual for the
NLRB to order an employer to pay legal fees. Gentry, who worked at Audubon for
18 years, was legislative director of the Nurses Professional Organization at
the time of her firing. The NPO has been trying to organize nurses at Audubon
since 1989. She was fired for flushing a heart patient's intravenous line with
saline solution without clearing it with a doctor first. Such flushing by
nurses is routine, but Norton said she did it as a placebo and acted outside the
scope of her license. In addition to firing her, Norton reported the incident
to the Kentucky Board of Nursing for possible disciplinary action. ...

Healthcare for All!

You’re invited to a powerful movie: "Damaged Care"

"Laura Dern (Jurassic Park, Blue Velvet) gives a scintillating performance in
DAMAGED CARE, the true story of Dr. Linda Peeno, a woman pushed to the edge,
risking her career and family to punish the ruthless companies who valued
profit over human life." From DVD Paramount

Meet Dr. Linda Peeno

Following the film Dr. Linda Peeno will answer questions and lead a Call to
Action.

Thursday, March 4, 2004
Film: 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM
Dr. Linda Peeno: 8:00 to 9:00 PM
Central High School
1130 West Chestnut Street
Louisville
Admission free

Everybody has a right to quality healthcare!

There is a solution!

Learn how you can help pass HR 676, Medicare for All, legislation by
Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), which provides for a single-payer system with
universal coverage.

Event sponsored by: Kentuckians for Single Payer Healthcare

Contact persons:

Kay Tillow (Nurses Professional Organization) 459-3393
nursenpo@aol.com
Laura McSpedon (Jobs with Justice) 625-3724
kyjwj@kyjwj.org
Jan Taylor (KY Rainbow/PUSH)
kyrainbow@att.net

Massachusetts:

Nurse-patient staffing ratio bill progressing
Shaun Sutner, Worcester Telegram & Gazette, December 7, 2003

Legislation that would require hospitals to hire more nurses is moving again
on Beacon Hill after languishing since the 1990s. The progress of the bill
that would mandate what advocates say is a safe level of nursing care comes as
California hospitals prepare to comply with the nation's first nurse-patient
ratio law, which goes into effect Jan. 1. The measure received a unanimous vote
of approval Nov. 19 from the Legislature's Joint Committee on Health Care, and
was sent to the House Ways and Means Committee. A key obstacle was removed
when state Sen. Richard T. Moore, D-Uxbridge, the health committee co-chairman
who opposed the legislation, agreed to let the bill out of committee and
abstained from the vote. Backers, including the state nurses' union and many
patients' and health care groups, maintain that patient care has slipped dangerously
because hospitals have refused to put enough nurses on patient floors. "The
average number of patients assigned to a nurse on any given day is much too high
and we cannot provide on a consistent basis safe patient care," said Sandy A.
Ellis, a member of the Massachusetts Nurses Association board of directors and
a psychiatric nurse at St. Vincent Hospital at Worcester Medical Center.
Supporters concede that imposing specific ratios of nurses to patients would
increase hospital overhead costs, but say "safe staffing" would save money in the
long run by preventing medical errors and rehospitalization. "What's the cost
of a patient's life?" Ms. Ellis said. "What's the cost to a health care system
or hospitals when a patient gets sicker and has to be hospitalized again or
requires greater health care intervention?" The hospital industry, one of the
best-organized political lobbies in the state, has vigorously fought safe
staffing bills for years. Hospital officials say cost is not their major objection,
but rather that such legislation would restrict their ability to move nurses
from floor to floor and among units to best handle patient levels. "We're
opposed to the bill for the simple reason that mandated staffing ratios limit the
availability of hospital professionals to decide how best to assign nurses,"
said John G. O'Brien, president and chief executive officer of the
Worcester-based UMass Memorial Health Care Inc. system. "Ratios are too simplistic and too
rigid as we plan for patient care." Mr. O'Brien said, however, that UMass
Memorial Health Care recognizes the need for more nurses as the number of patients
with serious illnesses increases. Meanwhile, the hospital system - which runs
Central Massachusetts' largest hospital, in Worcester - is trying to reduce
turnover by providing more support to nurses and to recruit more nurses into
the profession by working with colleges and high schools, he said. "We are
looking at nurse-to-patient ratios and strengthening them," Mr. O'Brien said. The
city's other major hospital, St. Vincent Hospital at Worcester Medical Center,
implemented contractual nurse staffing guidelines after nurses struck for 49
days in 2000 over issues including mandatory overtime and nurse-patient ratios.
The contract states that "the hospital will ensure safe registered nurse
staffing levels on all shifts within each patient care area." The clause gives
nurses the right to file a grievance if they believe the hospital is not doing
its best to maintain safe staffing levels. For Ms. Ellis, the contract, while a
step in the right direction, is limited because it includes no threat of fine
or penalty for noncompliance. "We're the lucky ones because we at least have
that, but there is nothing binding the hospital to maintain them," she said.
Ms. Ellis also countered hospital officials' arguments that ratios would be too
restrictive, pointing out that the bill provides for different ratios
depending on the type of hospital unit or department. For example, the proposed law
calls for one nurse for every four patients in medical and surgical units. In
emergency departments, the measure would require between a 1-to-1 and a 1-to-3
ratio depending on the severity of the patient's condition. Ratios are 1-to-1
in labor and 1-to-2 for intensive care, while other units range from 1-to-1 to
1-to-5 ratio. Mr. Moore said he remains opposed to the safe staffing bill and
is pushing what he said is a more thorough legislative approach to meeting the
nursing shortage. However, the Uxbridge legislator conceded in a statement
after the committee vote that the measure "may offer a start toward improved
quality of patient care." Mr. Moore called the legislation short-sighted because
it ignores the complexity of patient care delivery. Some nurses are more
experienced or physically strong than others, and some patients are sicker than
others, he noted. It would also financially burden hospitals, which are already
struggling, as well as the state, by further driving up Medicaid costs, Mr.
Moore said. "I don't think it solves the problem. It's only a piece of the
problem of providing quality care," he said in an interview. "And our costs will go
up. Some of the hospitals will end up closing, so there will be fewer options,
and insurance will go up." For patients' advocates, though, putting more
nurses on the hospital floor is a simple matter of taking better care of patients.
"If you're a nurse and standing there trying to mind 20 patients and three
buzzers go off, someone's going to go to the bottom of the list," said Carlos
Alvarez, executive director of the American Lung Association of Massachusetts.
"Most people need an acute level of care."

Hospitals need adequate number of nurses
Sandy Eaton, RN, Quincy, The Patriot Ledger, January 1, 2004
<
http://ledger.southofboston.com/articles/2004/01/01/opinion/opin03.txt>

Your Dec. 20 edition highlighted the small number of bills enacted into law
so far in the current legislative session. One reason may be the intense
pressures applied to legislators by champions of the status quo. Take health care,
for example. After seven years of increasingly intense efforts by nurses and
other patient advocates, with steadily mounting evidence that proper staffing
saves lives, H-1282, An Act Ensuring Quality Patient Care and Safe RN Staffing,
finally emerged from the Joint Committee on Health Care on Nov. 19 with a
favorable report, moving on to the next stage, the House Ways and Means Committee.
If the Massachusetts Hospital Association and its constituent institutions
expended as much energy on supporting fundamental health care reform, such as
S-686, the Massachusetts Health Care Trust, as they are spending to block
passage of appropriate RN-to-patient staffing ratios, we would have achieved a just
health care system in Massachusetts by now, one in which there would be
virtually no one without health insurance, and health care financing would be
stabilized. How much is a life worth?

Editorial Comment: A short while ago, the chief lobbyist of the Massachusetts
Hospital Association sent a message to all affiliated hospital executives
affirming the intensity of the war ahead: "As has been indicated in previous
communications, the MNA is putting all of its resources into passing this measure.
Your continued efforts over the coming days, weeks, and months are needed to
counter their efforts and to help defeat this harmful legislation." Attached
to that email was a copy of the most recent weekly propaganda piece being sent
to all two hundred Massachusetts legislators. Either the executives of MHA
have not yet read H1282, or they don’t care a whit for the truth. They’re
desperate. Their statement highlights the following fallacies:

* Nurse managers need the flexibility to make the right decisions for their
patients. (Well, nurses at the bedside have continuously demanded flexibility
in staffing as acuity and numbers of patients rise, only to be told by
nursing executives and managers to "do the best you can" and "there isn’t anyone
else to send, but you must take those admissions anyway." Hospitals staff
according to budget and according to average daily census, and rarely have any
backup plan for bumping up.)
* We have to grow our workforce and ensure that we have the educational and
training programs to produce an adequate supply of caregivers. (Of the fifty
states, California ranks 49th in per capita nurse population, and CNA reports
that most facilities have succeeded in hiring and retaining enough nurses to
meet the demand. Massachusetts ranks first, with many of its RNs having been
driven from the bedside by incredible workloads, but willing to return to the
bedside or increase hours or defer thoughts of early retirement if safe staffing
standards are guaranteed.)
* Because the nurses that would be needed to satisfy the ratios do not
exist, hospitals would have to close units to ensure an adequate number of staff.
(See above.)
* Nearly every hospital in the state was out of compliance with the law the
moment it went into effect. And one hospital - Santa Teresita in Duarte, CA -
has closed because of it! (Simply not true. Some independent hospitals and
systems dragged their feet, hoping that safe staffing legislation would be
defeated or revoked. Others, such as Kaiser-Permanente and the University of
California systems, have been working on improving their staffing ever since the law
was passed in 1999, and are doing just fine. As to the one hospital that has
closed in California since January 1st, its CEO is under investigation and
litigation on several fronts. If this is the best MHA can do to discredit safe
staffing and sow panic, it should give up now and join the nurses in
implementing basic patient protections.)
* There are no scientific studies that conclude that specific mandated
staffing ratios are a requirement for assuring high-quality patient care. (Regular
readers of Seachange Bulletin are well aware of the growing pile of
unimpeachable studies to the contrary. Most can be accessed via the MNA web site
<
http://www.massnurses.org>.)
* Do we know the true medical or financial costs? (We have a pretty good
idea. The nurse-economist who did the original number-crunching for the
California Healthcare Association analyzed the available figures from Massachusetts
and concurred with our initial judgement that start-up costs for implementing
safe staffing ratios would amount to a 1% to 1.7% increase in a hospital’s
budget initially, but would soon be offset in better patient outcomes, shorter
hospital stays and reduced number of RN turnovers. MNA’s estimate was presented as
part of its presentation before the Joint Committee on Health Care last
spring, and the MHA did not attempt to refute it.)

Answer to MHA Propaganda about Layoffs of Ancillary personnel
Massachusetts Nurses Association, February 17, 2004

The latest propaganda by MHA against H. 1282 claims that if the bill passes,
there will be massive layoffs of LPNs and other ancillary personnel. The
answer to this claim is quite simple: this is specifically prohibited under the
bill. See paragraph below. We intend to develop postcards with this information
for distribution to fellow employees in the bargaining units.

The Truth about H. 1282:

Contrary to a recent MHA statement that H. 1282 would result in the layoffs
of support personnel and LPNs if passed, a close reading of the bill shows that
such practices would be prohibited.

Specifically, subsection (L) of the bill states: "The setting of staffing
standards for registered nurses is not to be interpreted as justifying the
understaffing of other critical health care workers, including licensed practical
nurses and unlicensed assistive personnel. The availability of these other
health care workers enables registered nurses to focus on the nursing care
functions that only registered nurses, by law, are permitted to perform and thereby
helps to ensure adequate staffing levels."

Editorial Comment: For the text of the bill, go to
<
http://www.massnurses.org/safe_care/Safe_Staffing/billtext.pdf>.

New York:

Association calls for more nurses during liver transplants
Eric Durr, The Business Review (Albany), December 3, 2003
<
http://albany.bizjournals.com/albany/stories/2003/12/01/daily26.html>

A state Department of Health plan to mandate nurse to patient staffing ratios
for live-patient liver transplant operations doesn't go far enough, the New
York State Nurses Association said Dec. 3. The state should set new nurse to
patient staffing ratios for every procedure, said Janet Haebler, senior
associate director of the association's practice and government affairs program. The
New York State Nurses Association will be pushing hard during the 2004 state
legislative session for legislation which mandates these staffing ratios and
would force hospitals to hire more nurses. "What about all the patients in New
York? Aren't they entitled to the same level and standard of care," she said. On
Dec. 4 the State Hospital Review and Planning Council expected to approve
mandatory nurse-to-patient staffing ratios for operations involving live liver
donors. The staffing ratios - calling for one nurse for every two donors in
intensive care and post-anesthesia unit, and one nurse for every four donors in
general medical units - are part of a larger series of regulations addressing
the procedure which involves taking part of a healthy person's liver and
transplanting it. The state's living liver transplant programs came under scrutiny
after the Jan. 13, 2002, death of Times Union reporter Mike Hurewitz at Mount
Sinai Hospital in New York City. The call for mandatory staffing ratios
piggy-backs a Nov. 13 press conference held by the Nurses Association in which they
called on hospitals to hire more nurses in response to a survey conducted by the
state Department of Education. According to that survey, New York is short
15,420 registered nurses and almost 37,000 of the 165,640 RNs working as nurses
will retire in the next few years. Hospitals should eliminate mandatory
overtime for nurses and pay more in order to encourage more of the state's 225,000
registered nurses to practice the profession full time, Haebler said. Mandatory
staffing ratios would go a long way towards eliminating mandatory overtime
which chases nurses away, she said. ...

Pennsylvania:

Deal could end MCP nurses' strike
Philadelphia Inquirer, December 17, 2003
<
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/7510126.htm>

Striking nurses at Medical College of Pennsylvania Hospital in East Falls and
Tenet Healthcare Corp. yesterday reached a tentative agreement on a labor
contract that could end a five-week-old strike by nurses. A spokeswoman for the
hospital said the tentative agreement was reached during a negotiating session
that also included a mediator. Details of the agreement were not disclosed
last night. A ratification vote has been set for tomorrow, the hospital
spokeswoman said. The strike, which began Nov. 11, involved the facility's 268 nurses
and centered on the workers' opposition to mandatory overtime. The strike has
had a significant effect on the hospital. Last week, the hospital said it would
lay off 165 workers and reduce the hours of 35 because of a lack of patients
it blamed in part on the strike. One of the region's oldest hospitals, MCP
began in 1850 as the nation's first medical college for women. Drexel University
now controls the medical school, which uses the campus for teaching and
research, and Tenet owns the hospital.

MCP, nurses reach tentative accord
Simone Weichselbaum, Philadelphia Daily News, December 17, 2003
<
http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/news/local/7510069.htm>

Nurses at the Medical College of Pennsylvania Hospital have reached a
tentative agreement with hospital officials, possibly ending their month-old strike.
MCP spokeswoman Maria Iaquinto confirmed last night that the two sides have
reached an agreement, but it won't be finalized until the nurses vote tomorrow.
The main dispute between the two sides was over mandatory overtime and
staffing issues. Iaquinto would not comment on what issues were roughed out by
negotiators. The Daily News was unsuccessful in contacting union spokesman Mike
Bodinsky. On Dec. 1, nurses voted down a proposed contract because it gave the
hospital the right to ask nurses to work beyond their scheduled shifts.

Web Directory:

AARN
<
http://www.aarn.org>
Australian Nursing Federation <
http://www.anf.org.au>
California Nurses Association
<
http://www.calnurse.org>
Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions <
http://www.nursesunions.ca>
CCDS
<
http://www.cc-ds.org>
Committee for Health Care for Massachusetts
<
http://www.healthcareformass.org>
Irish Nurses Organisation <
http://www.ino.ie>
Labor Party
<
http://www.thelaborparty.org>
LabourStart
<
http://www.labourstart.org>
Maine State Nurses Association
<
http://www.mainenurse.org>
Massachusetts Ad Hoc Committee
<
http://www.MassDefendHealthCare.org>
Massachusetts Green-Rainbow Party
<
http://www.green-rainbow.org>
Massachusetts Nurses Association <
http://www.massnurses.org>
MASS-CARE
<
http://www.masscare.org>
New York Professional Nurses Union <
http://www.nypnu.org>
New Zealand Nurses Organisation <
http://www.nzno.org.nz>
PASNAP
<
http://www.pennanurses.org>
PNHP
<
http://www.pnhp.org>
Québec Nurses’ Federation <
http://www.fiiq.qc.ca>
Revolution Magazine
<
http://www.revolutionmag.com>
Saint Louis Area Nurses Coalition <
http://www.slanc.org>
Seachange Bulletin
<
http://www.seachangebulletin.org>
Southern Arizona Nurses Coalition
<
http://SAZNC.homestead.com>
Union Web Services
<
http://www.unionwebservices.com>
Women’s Universal Health Initiative <
http://www.WUHI.org>

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has
not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making
such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental,
political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice
issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance
with Title 17 US Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research and educational purposes. For more information go
to: <
http://www.law.cornell.edu/asked/17/107.shtml>. If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair
use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.