 |
September 22, 1998
Employer still stonewalling on language issues
HEABC continues to attack the rights of casual nurses, refuses a reasonable definition of a block, and insists on wasting public money on arbitration panels
Employer negotiators continue to stonewall the Nurses' Bargaining Association on key contract language issues. At stake are the rights of casual nurses and effective spending of health dollars.
Employer refuses reasonable definition of a block
HEABC refuses to consider a reasonable definition of a block, insisting that casuals accept blocks of work based on the length of the vacancy being filled. The system is completely contrary to what prevailed before casuals had the right to call-in by seniority. Nurses who are casual employees have never been forced to work the entire length of a vacancy, even before casual call-in by seniority came into effect. The employer's position is a blatant attempt to sabotage rights that they did not want casual nurses to win in the first place.
BCNU wants a block defined as either a single shift or the days between the regular days off of the person being relieved.
Merged seniority lists make reasonable definition of a block essential
We have offered to merge seniority lists of RNs and RPNs, a move that would result in less work for some RNs because RPNs with more seniority would get access first. But we have told the employer we will not agree to merged lists without a reasonable definition of a block, because BCNU casuals will lose some work due to merged seniority lists, and they need the assurance that they will be able to access the blocks of work they want.
Employer insists on wasting money on arbitration panels
While HEABC claims it's dedicated to the efficient use of health care dollars, it has rejected the nurses' proposal that arbitration hearings be handled by a single arbitrator. The employer is insisting on the right to demand three-person arbitration panels, a much more costly approach to handling grievances when they cannot be resolved at a lower level. BCNU is basing its proposal on the paramedical contract, which has a provision for a single arbitrator for all arbitrations.
Employer refuses justice to client-specific nurses
The employer also refuses to accept that any client-specific nurses in home support agencies are entitled to the status of regular employees. They refuse to improve call-in procedures for client-specific nurses to anything close to the standard under the Provincial Collective Agreement.
They are also insisting that penalties for providing insufficient notice of shift changes will not apply to client specific nurses.
The Nurses' Bargaining Association consists of the BC Nurses' Union, the Health Sciences Association and the Union of Psychiatric Nurses.
|
 |
|
