National Nurses United

7/22/09 10:25 PM Page 6 cameras were placed in break rooms. Security and nursing supervisors came into offhour areas to monitor conversations. The hospital became a place of intimidation and harassment for any nurse who dared to support CNA/NNOC. "While RNs were required to attend antiunion meetings, pro-CNA/NNOC nurses were banned from them," said Arlana Stewart, an RN at Saint Agnes. "It was easy to harass and twist the facts to the uninformed. Threats were made which caused nurses to fear that the childcare center would close, benefits would be lost, and salaries cut. You got the feeling you were being constantly watched and monitored. During the campaign our supervisors and security guards were constantly in our break room." In all, RNs estimate that the hospital spent a million dollars to quash their unionizing effort. Hundreds of anti-union attack pieces, labor law violations, delays and appeals followed, and even though a large majority of the RNs had signed cards, the election was lost. A fair election was just not possible under the conditions. CNA/NNOC filed many unfair labor practice charges against Saint Agnes, but even for charges found to have merit by the NLRB, nothing has been done to remedy the hospital's unlawful conduct. Although the election was set aside, Saint Agnes was able to schedule the rerun election at the time it wanted and before any of the unfair labor practices had been corrected. CNA/NNOC and the RNs were notified after the fact, and once again the interests and concerns of the nurses were disregarded. If EFCA had been in effect at the time, RNs can't help thinking they by now would have been covered by a collective bargaining agreement and both the employer and CNA/ NNOC could be addressing issues related to patient care at the hospital. That is why they continue to fight for representation and for EFCA. Their experience provides a dramatic example of why procedures have to be changed to provide employees with a better means of obtaining union representation. "I thought there were laws to protect us but they didn't work this time," said Stewart. "Without a change in our laws and shining a light on this kind of behavior by an employer, this is going to continue. When an employer is allowed a pass to do these kinds of things to their employees, our freedom will be lost." —liz jacobs, rn 6 REGISTERED NURSE CNA/NNOC Testifies Before Congress on Healthcare Reform NATIONAL On June 10, CNA/NNOC Copresident Geri Jenkins, RN, testified before a U.S. House of Representatives Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions subcommittee on the merits of a single-payer-financed healthcare system, compared to the current insurancebased proposals floating around Congress. Following is an excerpt of her comments. T hank you for this opportunity to support single-payer healthcare reform on behalf of the 86,000 members of the California Nurses Association/ National Nurses Organizing Committee. In your consideration of changes to our healthcare system, you should know that registered nurses are the profession most trusted by the American public, as shown consistently in Gallup's annual poll on this question. Nurses are on the front lines of what I can only call a patient care crisis. As a critical care nurse at the University of California San Diego Medical Center, I see patients whose conditions are much worse because they avoided earlier treatment due to the high cost. Though they arrive sicker, they leave quicker than they should because their in surance company won't approve medically appropriate care. I can tell you from my more than 34 years of personal experience, insurance companies ration care; the current system rations care based on ability to pay. It doesn't have to be this way. We agree with presidential candidate Obama who called healthcare a basic human right and we agree with now-President Obama who W W W. C A L N U R S E S . O R G says "healthcare reform is not a luxury. It's a necessity that cannot wait." But right now we are the only nation on earth that barters human life for money. If we were to have a debate on containing costs, improving quality, and universality, the single-payer advantage would be clear. Let's consider the principles President Obama has established: First, reduce costs. In a survey of eight major industrialized countries, the U.S. fared the worst in out-of-pocket costs and the number of chronically ill adults forgoing care because of costs - even though we spend twice as much per capita on healthcare as the other seven (Health Affairs, Nov. 13, 2008). The reason? Premiums, which have been rising four times as fast as family incomes the past decade, and co-pays, deductibles, and other transaction fees the insurance industry imposes that can run to thousands of dollars a year on top of premiums. That, along with denying claims, is how the for-profit insurance companies make money, which, ultimately is their job for their shareholders. You either have price controls on the insurance industry, or you take them out of the equation through single-payer reform. Costs controls are much better addressed under single-payer mechanisms like those contained in HR 676—global budgets to hospitals and clinics based on their patient care operations; negotiated reimbursements to providers; bulk purchasing and negotiated prices for prescription drugs; incentives for preventive care and reliance on primary care. Second, guarantee choice. How many Americans under 65 can go to any doctor of their choice without incurring additional JUNE 2009 BRENDAN HOFFMAN NewsBriefs:2

• Cover