Posted on 07/01/2009 7:13:31 AM PDT by Mobile Vulgus
Unions are spearheading the attack on our healthcare system and none more so than the Service Employee's International Union and its sister organization the CNA. The ten talking points that the California Nurses Association has put out in order to rev up its membership to support a universal, single payer healthcare system is interesting, to say the least. In this posting, I'd like to reply to each of them with a little rebuke of my own.
But first I’d like to remark on the ham-handed style in which these talking points were written. The class warfare rhetoric here is more reminiscent of a protest placard than any serious discussion of public policy. But, be that as it may, here we go…
Read the rest at Publiusforum.com...
Once universal health care is enacted they all lose any bargaining power for higher pay and better jobs. It becomes a collective and no matter how good a nurse you are and how many letters of commendation you get from patients and their families the sloth-like nurse you work with will still get the same pay as you.
Why would the government lower the pay of its employees. If you have an example of a government employee who has had their pay lowered or limited I'd like to see it.
Pure bunk! My wife works at two major hospitals in CT and neither one is union. And, I guarantee they make more than the union nurses in CT.
Top performers will get paid more in their fields if they are non-union. But....most people are not top performers thus is the reason that overall union people make more which is what the union is all about.
Uh, okay. Your speculation is more accurate than my first hand knowledge.
How about reading the rest of my comment. Top performers will see a pay cut but the %90 of the workforce that are not top performers will see a pay increase.
This is what unions are about.
I did read the rest of your comments. However, when one leads with a palpable lack of knowledge on the subject what is there left to say?
Again, the nurses at these hospitals are already making as much as union or better. And they are NOT union.
I have first hand knowledge in the Boston area, my wife is a nurse and so are five of my sister-in-laws. Guess what the union ones make more than the non-union ones.
I guess we are at stalemate on this one.
Why do non-union auto workers make less than union workers? Or am I wrong on this thinking too?
"Sinking down to my level". Is that what you call first hand knowledge? Your behavior is boorish.
I don't really care what the nurses in your family make or do. I am talking about here. You keep challenging something you can't possible have any knowledge of - the pay scale of nurses in CT.
BTW are all those nurses in your family union?
And no they are not all union. When it comes to stats one instance is not a stat. One of the non-union nurses does make more than two of the union nurses but less than two of the others. Not that you care. This non-union nurse does freelance but receives no benefits. The other non-union nurse makes less than everyone.
I guess teachers are unskilled too? How about plumbers and electricians?
I have a hard time believing that the average pay would be lower for union nurses. Why would anyone join a union for lower pay with all the hassles that come with working in a union?
Typically, low performers will see a pay increase once in a union which is the majority of the workforce. Top performers are in demand and get paid more. Once in a union there is no reward for performance.
And the article is about California nurses which neither you nor I have first hand knowledge about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.