Massachusetts Nurses Association (MNA)

Almost 3,000 nurses from the Massachusetts Nurses Association (MNA) recently ratified a new contract with the hospital. Significantly, the nurses at Brigham and Women’s Hospital wanted to be represented by the state affiliated nurses’ association because it supported high-quality patient care and the professional interests of nurses. Because of their numbers, coherence, and communal goals, nurses had more bargaining power. The primary goal of this collective bargaining agreement was not monetary; rather, it was to enhance working conditions and patient safety while also assuring safe staffing levels. Some of the underlying issues that led to the dispute included incidents of unprotected patient care, lack of enhanced hospital security, unsuccessful attempts to implement non-union benefits for the new nurses and lack of a fair wage increase. The nurses retaliated that hospitals should seek to value patients over profits. It is evident that to date, many reimbursement programs including Medicare as well as Medicaid, fail to completely cater for the costs of care with the consequence that hospitals, as well as other organizational providers, are compelled to cut back on staffing and services. At Brigham, there was a reduction of nurse staffing that affected the safe care of some of the hospital’s sickest patients, these patients required consistent vigilant nursing care. Faced with such constraints the MNA nurses opted to vote for a one day strike.

Additionally, the Brigham nurses were compelled to raise the issue of improved security following the disastrous shooting death of a Brigham physician. Moreover, the nurses were also being assaulted rampantly throughout the hospital. The dispute was also contributed by the hospital’s proposal that would have encouraged a double-tiered, union-busting benefit system; flex insurance and benefit period. Notably, the Flex insurance was not subject to collective bargaining (Massachusetts Nurse Advocate, 2016). The nurses were also concerned about the devices arranged for the NICU, including potentially dangerous delays in client care as a result of alarms bouncing between the nurses.

Nursing and all other healthcare services are declared essential services in the public sector, consequently raising ethical issues regarding the nurses right to strike. Therefore, the hospital administration may have been reluctant to avert the looming strike because they knew that nurses acknowledged that events of neglect of patients occurring during industrial action may render the nurse liable to disciplinary as well as professional conduct action. According to Huston (2013 ), critics of nurses having the capacity to strike suggest that it is unethical because it leaves patients without care providers. Unions’ underline that strikes ought to be considered because they are utilized only as the last resort and after careful consideration of every factor. The nurse bargaining committee, on the other hand, continued to motivate their fellow nurses regarding their willingness to stand up for their profession as well as patients consequently leading to a strike vote while negotiations were still underway. There is no sufficient evidence that there was lack of responsiveness by the administration to solve the everyday problems experienced by the nursing staff.

The Brigham nurses dispute was settled through the ratification of a new collective bargaining agreement. In this agreement, the Brigham hospital agreed to reinstate core nurse enrollment levels to December 2015 levels, with elasticity in light of the patient volume, alertness among other factors. Additionally, the organization also determined that the mobile alarm devices arranged for the NICU as well as devices with similar capacities in other entities would only be implemented after negotiating with and consent of MNA and Brigham nurses. Further, the hospital also pledged to make significant security changes including signs at each hospital entrance that indicated the prohibition of weapons. Panic alarms were installed followed by training the staff and regular testing. The two factions also settled their dispute by agreeing that nurses who are affected by workplace violence should be contacted by the managers as soon as reasonably possible and the organization will ensure that the victims who have experienced such security incidents receive reasonable medical as well as psychological care. It was also agreed that on request, the hospital shall be available to meet with the union representatives to discuss safety as well as security concerns.

Additionally, the hospital also agreed to withdraw two proposals that would have encouraged a two-tiered, union-busting benefit system; flex insurance as well as benefit time. Regarding the wages, there was a new step added to the top of the scale that is 1.25 percent above existing top step. One percent across the board increase was also in effect. Ultimately, the year contract between MNA and Brigham hospital had a start date of October 1, 2015, and will expire on September 30, 2018.

There was no third party involved in the resolving of the bargaining agreement. The negotiations clearly defined the rights of management as well as those of the employees thus facilitating and strengthening the relationship between the two parties (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2015). In retrospect, this dispute was solved in a constructive fashion considering that it averted a scheduled industrial action. The parties negotiated based on mutual challenges, issues, interests, and values thus finding a common ground.

References

Huston, C. (2015). Professional Issues in Nursing. Baltimore: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Massachusetts Nurse Advocate. (2016). Brigham Nurses Ratify New Collective Bargaining Agreement. Massachusetts Nurse Advocate.

Porter-O’Grady, T., & Malloch, K. (2015). Leadership in Nursing Practice. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.