| |
Pre-Negotiation Survey Now Online
We are still collecting your thoughts and ideas. It is not too late to take the Pre-negotiation Survey. We review the updated results as more responses come in and we use this survey to get a sense of what is important for bargaining. If you lost your access code you can do one of two things. Call ONA at (503) 293-0011 and ask for P.K. She will provide you with a log-in code. You can also just use your name as the log-in. Even if you use your name your individual responses will still be anonymous. The computer logs the results of the survey and does not attribute your responses to the log in. All we will know if you use your name, is that you logged on to take the survey, not how you responded.
To take part in the survey, go to the ONA Current Surveys page and click on the OHSU/AURN survey link.
Bargaining Updates
July 22, 2010
We spent the bulk of our session this Wednesday finishing up an issue around changing FTEs and writing joint problem statements to help us get ready for our next session on August 4. You can read the details about changing FTEs on the back of the barganing unit update document below.
As a reminder, you can find the main topics and themes for our bargaining with OHSU on the bargaining update below. This is not everything we are bargaining, but these topics highlight our most important or significant concerns.
July 14, 2010
As a part of the interest based bargaining approach, ONA and OHSU agreed to set up four different work groups around the topics of unscheduled absences (dealing with attendance), vacation scheduling (making it easier to take and cover the annual accrual), shared governance (finding more and better ways to involve nurses in operations and patient care planning), and recruitment and retention (how will we attract and retain nurses to work at OHSU).
The idea behind the work groups is to make it so that more people can get involved in the bargaining process and address problems and issues that have not always gotten attention. They were charged with having discussion about the topic and making joint recommendations to the bargaining team for contract proposals, process improvements, task forces, etc. for the mutual consideration of both ONA and OHSU’s bargaining team members.
Each work group met several times and involved both staff RNs and nurse managers and human resource professionals. All of the work groups have completed their work.
June 30, 2010
Our fifth session was held on June 30. We presented ten additional concerns for problem solving, as did OHSU.
June 23, 2010
Our fourth session was held on June 23. We presented ten additional concerns for problem solving and worked on a few more “housekeeping” issues. We also started substantive discussions about what should happen to RNs who experience a temporary closure of their unit due to low census that will not lead to an on-going closure. Both ONA and OHSU suggested this concern needs to be addressed. Thus, it made for a good problem concern to tackle initially.
June 2, 2010
Our third session was held on June 2. We finished up most of the “Housekeeping” discussion (minor changes to the contract) and continued our work on the issue of ONA staff access to OHSU. We presented several concerns for problem solving. The housekeeping items and the concerns presented can be found in the June 2, 2010 Bargaining Update.
May 20, 2010
OHSU presented around 40 proposals that they deemed “house keeping”. This means they were either very minor changes or wording suggestions that update language in the contract to conform to current practice, but do not change anything substantively. For example, they asked to change “job incurred disability” leave to “worker’s compensation leave”. (We agreed to this change). House keeping proposals were made around dues deduction, following state and federal laws, travel policies, and bereavement and CNI.
Other proposals included sick leave upon reinstatement when you return within 90 days, military leave, and incorporating some of the memorandums of understanding in the back of the contract into the main body (other articles) of the contract. We agreed to make many of these changes thatwere suggested.
Not everything that OHSU thought as minor or house keeping was either from our perspective. For example, there were several proposals made around shift curtailment and cancellation that we are reviewing before we agree to the suggested changes. The same is true for changes that were proposed around health and safety. We agreed to address the remainder of the house keeping issues at the next session.
May 7, 2010
Our first session was held on May 5. We discussed ground rules (things like 1.) no interruptions when people are speaking 2.) using the principals of interested based bargaining to resolve problems 3.) how we will signify agreement on an issue 4.) the role of visitors, etc. See page 2) and the how the work groups will operate (process and scope of their work) and be facilitated. We used the interestbased bargaining process to address these matters and reached agreement on both of them. Our next session is scheduled for May 19. We plan to hear pening proposals from OHSU that they consider housekeeping (usually uncontroversial changes that only update the contract where items are out of date or inaccurate) and their thoughts about issues to tackle using the interest based process that are not being addressed by the Work Groups.
May 6, 2010
The AURN and OHSU Bargaining Teams met for the first time last week to participate in an Interest Based Bargaining training. Interest Based Bargaining is intended to be a more collaborative process for bargaining. The parties begin by describing problems and why they are problems. The problem is then turned into an issue statement that the parties attempt to solve. This is done together. The parties then share why working on the problem is important, referred to as their interests, which can reflect overt or underlying concerns about the problem. The parties then focus on mutual interests and meeting theconcerns of both parties involved. Then they try to find consensus around contractual changes that support those mutual interests and even interests that might not be mutual but are important to either party. Once a solution is identified that both sides can support, that solution is reduced to contract language. We are excited to try bargaining in this manner with OHSU. We believe it will work and lead to better outcomes in bargaining.
Your Negotiation Team
In 2008 Oregon PERS, along with other pension systems around the country, suffered a disastrous investment year when the U.S. stock market endured its worst year since the Great Depression. As a result of those losses — some 27 percent of the PERS’ value — the system’s actuarial unfunded liability increased to over $16 billion by the end of 2008. Although good market performance in 2009 (and to date in 2010) has begun the process of a return to financial health, nonetheless some are arguing that the 2011 Legislature should once again, as in 2003, take up the task of “fixing” Oregon’s Public Employee Retirement System.
But the two situations are not parallel.
As the 2003 legislative session convened, Oregon PERS had just suffered through three difficult investment years, causing a rapid increase in the unfunded liabilities of the system that topped out in the spring of 2003 at approximately $17 billion, leading to significant increases in employer contribution rates. In addition, Marion County Circuit Court Judge Paul Lipscomb ruled (in the City of Eugene case) that the PERS Board had not followed the statute in administering the PERS system. In turn, the 2003 Legislature made significant changes to PERS that were challenged in the Oregon Supreme Court, with the Court eventually rejecting certain changes and holding that others were, in fact, constitutional. As a result of these changes — as well as improved market performance — the financial health of PERS quickly improved.
The purpose of this discussion is to point out how different today’s PERS is from the system addressed by the 2003 Legislature. In 2003 active PERS participants were receiving a “Money Match” benefit significantly more generous than the historical benefit provided by PERS. In contrast, in 2011 over 80 percent of active PERS participants will receive a “Formula” benefit that is in line with historic PERS standards. Therefore, any attempt to “fix” Oregon PERS in 2011 will face a very different set of challenges from those that were addressed in 2003.
This information comes from the PERS Coalition and was written by Greg Hartman of Bennett, Hartman, Morris & Kaplan, LLP.
AURN Officers
As announced in January, we solicited for new AURN Officers. The positions of President, Vice President, Treasurer and Member at Large were uncontested and elected by affirmation. They begin serving in their role/office on June 1, 2010. All Officers serve on the Bargaining Team. Four (4) other nurses are also helping with negotiations and serving on the Bargaining Team. We still need a Secretary. If you are interested please contact Courtney Niebel at ONA at (503) 293-0011 ext 341.
New ONA Labor Relations Representative for OHSU/AURN
Julie Kettler, OHSU Oregon Nurses Association Labor Representative, submitted her letter of resignation to ONA on Friday April 9th. She has been a dedicated and key contributor to both AURN and ONA’s Labor Staff in her capacity as an exceptional representative for over 7 years, since December of 2002. We wish her well in her new professional endeavor as a Federal Mediator with the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS).
The timing of Julie’s resignation has allowed the ONA to reassign the OHSU/ONA negotiation that is scheduled to begin this month to Rob Nosse, ONA Labor Representative (currently assigned to the Providence Portland Medical Center). Rob is a skilled and experienced negotiator who has been employed by ONA for 5 years, and has been a labor leader and representative for over 15 years. Additionally, Tresa Cavanaugh has been temporarily hired as an ONA Staff Labor Representative full-time for OHSU to handle contract administration. Tresa has her JD from Lewis and Clark College and comes to us with representational experience from UFCW. Courtney Niebel, ONA Labor Representative, will continue in her current assignment at OHSU, as well. Finally, to assure a smooth transition, Julie will continue to work in her current position for the next few weeks through May 7th.
With these staffing changes in place your team anticipates being able to maintain the negotiating schedule that had been agreed to with OHSU, with the intent to complete negotiations for a successor agreement by the current contract’s expiration date of September 31, 2010. The team is confident that the new representatives will effectively represent and protect our nurses’ interests during this period of transition.
ONA Talent Bank
The Talent Bank is a central file in which ONA members can register their interest in serving in elected and appointed positions. A completed and signed Consent to Serve form is required of nominees for elected or appointed positions. Links to the consent forms can be found below.
Consent to Serve (PDF)
Consent to Serve (ONA Web Site)
|
