it's bullshit, also, since, at least in the case of my mother, this professionalization thing was _precisely_ the tack nurses took more than twenty years ago. If you recall, 20 years ago and more, nurses were poorly paid. The way they fought that was to professionalize (for good or ill....), demanding respect especially from physicians, etc. And it was the professionalization ethos that helped build a sense of solidarity and sense of _deservingness_. (I have issues with professionalization as a tactic groups have historically used to gain power, but the fact is, it's the way that has worked -- and in fact did work. Nurses turned their field into one people went to because of the relatively decent pay, etc. etc. -- which wasn't something you could say 30 years ago about nursing. When I was teaching sociology of work to nursing students in the mid- and late-90s, they were all also very active in making sure that orderlies, etc. were part of the professionalization process, too. IOW, they were already very aware that they didn't want to reproduce the relationship they'd once had (and still have sometimes) with doctors -- who looked down their noses at them) -- with orderlies. As Idelson says below, too, it's not based on thin air: it's based on the principles of patient care -- they make some attempt to figure out what are best practices for the patient (and their families), which is why they work of nursing is being increasingly hiearchized into various layers: Nurse Practitioners, RNs, LPNs, Nurse's Assistants, etc. It definitely has its drawbacks, but it can be a necessary thing. E.g., right now my mother is going through a series of training programs on something or other as required by law to keep her license up-to-date.
Anyway, this was what I found fascinating about watching my mom graduate from nursing school: they way they built into their code of ethics an identification with the public trust. that, in exchange for being given the degree and title and right to perform certain procedures on people's bodies, they were entrusted with power and had a responsibility to wield that power in a way consistent with public needs. yadda.
At 11:02 AM 4/16/2008, Doug Henwood wrote:
>I asked Chuck Idelson, CNA's communications director, to comment on
>the SEIU criticism that they're snobby about appealing to nurses'
>professional status, to differentiate them from mere orderlies.
>Here's his response.
>
>Doug
>
> > It's a specious and self serving argument by SEIU. We in fact
> > appeal to
> > nurses as a professional association and as a union. We strongly
> > work to
> > protect and improve, obviously, their professional practice (more
> > on that in
> > a minute), but also their working conditions, wages, retirement,
> > and we and
> > our members support the rights of other health care employees.
> >
> > The California ratio law, for example, requires minimum staffing
> > ratios for
> > RNs; some hospitals have responded by laying off other nursing
> > staff, we have
> > consistently opposed and protested that and say it violates the
> > intent and
> > purpose of the law, which is a full team of caregivers needed for
> > patient
> > safety.
> >
> > We have also fought against hospital closures that hurt all health
> > care
> > workers, sponsored bills to protect whistleblower rights for all
> > health care
> > workers, opposed the ongoing efforts of hospitals in California to
> > evade
> > seismic repairs to their hospitals so they don't fall down on all
> > hospital
> > workers and patients as they have in the past. That is in marked
> > contrast to
> > SEIU which has signed deals with employers to erode and undermine
> > the rights
> > of their own members, much less public safety.
> >
> > We also support the unionization and rights of all health care
> > workers, and
> > have worked with other unions to help organize other workers, i.e.
> > California's second largest private hospital, Long Beach Memorial,
> > where we
> > represent the RNs and helped the Steelworkers organize the other
> > staff.
> >
> > Finally, a word on professional status for RNs. Under corporate
> > medical care,
> > all health care standards are under persistent, savage attack by the
> > healthcare industry in its pursuit of profits. RNs are in a unique
> > position
> > to defend patient safety because of their legal obligation and
> > rights to act
> > in the interest of patients, not on behalf of their employer. That
> > right is
> > under constant attack by employers, but it is crucial to public
> > safety.
> >
> > We further believe that unions only have the confidence and trust
> > of the
> > public when they are seen as having the same interests as the
> > public not the
> > narrow self interest of their employers. Part of protecting public
> > safety is
> > defending the ability of RNs to be able to protect patients through
> > their
> > legal professional role and their professional scope of practice.
> >
> > What RNs have found in many hospitals where they are part of SEIU
> > is that
> > since they are a minority of the bargaining unit they see SEIU
> > ignoring their
> > professional needs, and SEIU has also conspired with employers to
> > erode RN
> > practice and oppose bills to enhance public safety and the role of
> > RNs (such
> > as their opposition to the ratio law in California and a ratio bill in
> > Massachusetts). Ignoring and sabotaging the needs of your members,
> > not to
> > mention the consequences for public safety, is hardly the
> > progressive stance
> > SEIU pretends it is advocating when they attack us for class snobbery.
> >
> > Charles Idelson
> > Communications Director
> > California Nurses Association
> > National Nurses Organizing Committee
> > www.calnurses.org
> > Guaranteed Healthcare for All. For life.
> > www.guaranteedhealthcare.org
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)