Union Exaggerating Support for Strike, Los Robles Nurses Say

Some nurses at Los Robles Regional Medical Center say the union negotiating their first contract is exaggerating rank-and-file support for a strike.

Last month Local 535 of the American Federation of Nurses held a strike-authorization vote to demonstrate worker resolve to walk if the labor dispute could not be settled. The vote was 208 to 44 in favor, union officials announced.

But the tally ignored 153 nurses who didn’t vote--although the union itself warned members that unreturned ballots would count as no votes, nurses said.

Patricia Gautreau, one of several nurses unhappy with the union’s campaign, said many failed to vote because they were afraid of union intimidation. Abstaining seemed like a safe way to object to a strike, she said.

“There are 405 nurses who can vote, so if 208 said yes, that means 197 said no,” Gautreau said. “The union leaves out the fact that many nurses chose not to send their ballots in.”

Dissent over the strike vote is just part of a larger debate among nurses over how aggressive the union should be--and whether a union is needed at all.

“Not that I think the hospital is wonderful, but nurses are educated, professional people who ought to represent themselves,” Gautreau said. “I don’t need a union to speak for me.”

Union leaders declined to discuss the criticism. But Los Robles representative Kris Carraway-Bowman said the hospital is aware the nurses are divided, and some nurses have approached management to ask what they can do to force out the union.

“We advised them of their legal right to request the labor board to hold a secret-ballot election to determine if nurses wish to continue to be represented by the union,” Carraway-Bowman said. “Legally, the hospital is prohibited from reacting to or assisting in this matter.”

When the nurses first voted to unionize in 1995, the vote was relatively close at 167 to 104. Three years later, the union is still struggling to win its first contract.

Among the issues the union has raised are concerns about pay and staffing levels. The hospital is trying to fill 60 nursing vacancies, including 29 full-time positions.

Gautreau and other nurses said they can work out their differences with management without having to strike.

“Striking is very unprofessional,” Gautreau said. “The nurses are right when it comes to staffing ratios, but if we stick together we can accomplish the same thing as a union in a lot more professional manner.”

As for pay, nurses such as Gautreau said they are skeptical any union-brokered raise would do more than just cover the cost of union dues.

“What have you gained other than giving the union money?” Gautreau said. “I’d rather leave and work somewhere else than pay union dues.”

Lois Friss, a University of Southern California professor who studies management of nurses, said Gautreau’s view is common in the profession.

Friss said nurses already enjoy low unemployment rates and flexible working conditions because they are skilled and in high demand.

“Unions do very little for nurses, so why should they have money taken out of their paychecks?” Friss said. “The union’s big thing is job security, but why would a nurse need to hang around for a union grievance to come through when they have fluid skills and can go down the street to another hospital?”

But the nurses at Los Robles did decide to join a union, and Gautreau said many of her colleagues regret doing so. Friss said it is common for nurses facing a combination of issues to get on the union bandwagon.

“Money, workload and personality factors come together, and a union sounds like a good idea,” Friss said. “But once reality hits that they’re going to pay and not get much benefit, many nurses figure out they don’t need or want a union.”