The New Union Movement
Posted by Patti on April 13th, 2007 / Print This Post
About SEIU in California:
The California agreement was set to expire at the end of last year; the union and the nursing homes are currently negotiating a possible extension. Whether, or how, the agreement will be extended may have been thrown in doubt thanks to complaints about the current agreement coming from Rosselli’s UHW-West.On the SEIU’s side of the 2003 bargain, the union agreed to use its clout with Democratic legislators in Sacramento to accomplish three goals of interest to nursing home owners:
The SEIU pledged to use its lobbying muscle to pass a 2004 bill increasing MediCal subsidies to nursing homes by more than $2 billion over four years, according to patient advocates. The bill passed, creating a windfall for nursing home owners.
The union also agreed to attempt to pass tort reform legislation that would have limited patients’ right to sue in the event they were neglected, raped, abused, or killed. (The union’s tort reform lobbying efforts were put on hold, however, after a 2004 SF Weekly story led union members and advocacy groups to complain.)
The SEIU also pledged in the 2003 pact to staunch any efforts by patient advocates to push for legislation or regulations requiring nursing homes to provide enough staff to keep patients safe and healthy, unless the nursing home companies agree to such reforms in advance. The SEIU will “oppose any long-term-care-specific staffing and reimbursement legislation or regulation that fails to meet mutually agreed objectives,” the agreement states.
According to lobbyists for nursing home patients, the union has indeed been successful in repressing efforts by nursing home advocates to pass legislation that would have tied increases in state nursing home subsidies to improvements in the quality of care.
In return, the nursing home chain owners agreed to allow the SEIU to recruit workers into their union. Under ordinary circumstances, nursing home owners vigorously resist union organizing drives by occasionally intimidating and firing union-sympathetic workers, and by attempting to convince them that union membership isn’t in their interest. Under the lobbying agreement, however, the nursing home chains would refrain from these tactics in a certain number of facilities if the union helped to pass the 2004 funding bill, and in more facilities if the union got tort reform legislation passed.
This is specific to CA. Other states as well, have fallen to the new union movement…which basically is all about getting you to sign onto a union, taking your money in the form of dues, and allowing management to still call the shots. People should be very concerned about this. Not just SEIU, but all of them. They are trading their values for memberships. Is it worth it?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:21 am
Patti I’m surprised this post hasn’t got more comments.
The SEIU also pledged in the 2003 pact to staunch any efforts by patient advocates to push for legislation or regulations requiring nursing homes to provide enough staff to keep patients safe and healthy, unless the nursing home companies agree to such reforms in advance. The SEIU will “oppose any long-term-care-specific staffing and reimbursement legislation or regulation that fails to meet mutually agreed objectives,” the agreement states.
I thought this was ONE thing the unions were going to push for- better and mandated staffing levels? How can they not, and keep members?
I think everyone should read this because there is much more. For one thing, the Union agrees to a NO STRIKE CLAUSE as well. That is the bargaining tool unions have. Strike is the about the only thing people can do when they don’t get what they want…in this nursing world that means higher pay, raises that are meaningful and benefits. If union members cannot strike, what else can they do?
April 26th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
I think the union is trying to do whatever it can to increase funding to nursing homes. I also think the unions will fight tooth and nail to make sure the funds go to direct care- aides, supplies and the like.
I don’t think this union will actually write off it’s ability to strike, if worse comes to worse. If it did that it would hold no power over management.
I think unions are the only way we’re going to get decent wages and benefits, and the respect of management.
April 26th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
The reason the union is allowing management so much leeway here has nothing to do with getting more funds for nursing homes David. Hardly. The unions are looking for memberships and the dues that come with them. Union membership has declined over 12% in the past three yrs alone…and over 70% in the past 20 yrs.
Mind you unions with a lot of people DO have some clout…so in that sense, IF this union got a lot, and it would have to be an awful lot, of new members it might have some pull with the members of Congress who write the checks…but even then the other program lobby groups always have more “clout” so…nursing homes and medicaid suffer.