Unions helped improve working conditions in the mid-19th century industrial revolution. But what have they done for PATIENTS lately?
Unions did great things for manufacturing, but have they done ANYTHING to improve service?
In a publicly funded healthcare system, does it make ANY sense to have unions? Don’t government jobs already have good salaries and benefits?
Have unions improved anything for patients?
Have they increased efficiency?
Customer service?
Quality?
Innovation?
Choice?
Do unions improve anything other than salaries and benefits for their MEMBERS? Are unions all about protecting seniority instead of promoting skill? Are all unions the same, or do some care about something other than themselves?
Jeffrey Simpson writes in ‘Chronic Condition‘, that governments can’t “…break union rules that make surgeries happen to fit the convenience of providers instead of patients…” (p. 41).
In a world of evidence-based decision making, is there any proof that unions add value for patients?
Unions drive up wages and create MANY extra layers of bureaucracy in hospitals just to manage union issues. A platoon of nurse leadership and human resources staff spend hours managing unions. Not employees . . . unions. Would the public support the extra costs of dealing with unions?
Increased wages, increased hospital costs, patient access decreased…
We need reform based on patient need.
We need to measure outcomes and hold unions accountable. We need to look at the total cost of unions to healthcare and have them find efficiencies. We need to examine the impact unions have on patient mortality and morbidity due to unions refusing care unless wages go up or work effort goes down.
Unions exist for themselves. Unions do not exist for patients. This has to change.
Should we empower hospitals to get rid of unions or expand them? Do you have evidence showing that unions benefit patient access to care, quality, and customer service? Please leave a comment by clicking Leave a Reply or # of Replies below. Thank you!
