Op-Ed: Nurses object to FRHG chairman's tactics allegations

Jim Kennedy, the new chair of the board of directors for Fremont-Rideout Health Group, delivered a statement to the Appeal-Democrat (published online April 29) accusing the California Nurses Association and its members of using delay tactics in bargaining. I am extremely disappointed that I and other RNs first heard this allegation in the A-D.

I find it disrespectful that Mr. Kennedy's first order of business was to publicly bash CNA and the RNs they represent. Nurses had hoped to have a better relationship with the BOD. This public castigation is not a good start. If Mr. Kennedy had wanted to be constructive he could have requested to meet with the bargaining team and administration to aid both parties to resolve our disputes, instead of once again creating division between RNs and administration.

Mr. Kennedy also talks about CNA filing unwarranted unfair labor practice charges against FRHG. CNA has filed charges on behalf of FRHG RNs. But it is the National Labor Relations Board that is prosecuting FRHG on the charges. Mr. Kennedy alleges CNA filed the charges to prevent RNs from having a democratically held decertification election. RNs have always acknowledged that not every RN wants the union at FRHG. That fact was reflected in the original vote. However, a reality check for Mr. Kennedy: FRHG has ignored every election we have had — our first election for CNA was by an overwhelming majority, our second, third and fourth elections to reject FRHG's offers and to strike three times have also been by extremely large majorities. These are four democratic elections that Mr. Kennedy and FRHG continue to ignore.

My colleagues and I believe that FRHG and its BOD do this under the guise of respecting everyone's rights. They argue that those who don't want to pay dues or a service fee should not have to do so, even though they know that they benefit from everything CNA does for them, and that CNA must provide them with the same representation as every other RN. An overwhelming majority of RNs believe that the majority should decide, and the CNA/FRHG contract should provide for Union Security, as the other approximately 150 CNA contracts representing 80,000 RNs have done.

This leads me into my final point. FRHG have done their best through the newspaper advertising and A-D letters/Op-Ed pieces, and their own fliers within the hospital to make this about one issue — a union security provision. The reality is that although a union security clause is an essential issue that divides us, there are several other significant provisions remaining. We want a fair arbitration process with a third-party arbitrator who can take into account things like length of service and previous evaluations. We want a cancellation policy that favors all FRHG RNs over travelers and registry. I can't think of any other profession where temps work before regular staff. Why should a staff RN have to suffer because somebody made a business decision to hire a temporary nurse for more guaranteed money than regular RNs?

Despite the issues left on the table, none are insurmountable. The hospital likes to tell people how much money they have spent on us and how much they respect us, quoting Mr. Kennedy, "we are justifiably proud of our nurses who work hard and long hours to provide the highest quality of care to our patients." If that is indeed true, then why through a year and a half of negotiations, three strikes and four union votes are you still not listening? When the NLRB charges are adjudicated and settled, there will be a vote. If Mr. Kennedy and FRHG want that vote sooner, they will settle our contract fairly, remedy the charges, and we will all move forward to have happy RNs provide safe, patient care in our communities.

Darren Cardoza is an RN at Fremont ICU and a member of the CNA bargaining team