Town Square

Post a New Topic

Stanford Hospital gives 'final offer' to nurses

Original post made on Apr 6, 2010

Nurses at Stanford Hospital and Clinics and Lucile Packard Children's Hospital are at a heated impasse with hospital administrators over a proposed contract, which includes a wage raise but also sets new barriers for nurses seeking promotions.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Monday, April 5, 2010, 1:02 PM

Comments (7)

Like this comment
Posted by watdth
a resident of another community
on Apr 6, 2010 at 9:14 am

CRONA Nurses will vote to REJECT this offer. It's full of take-aways and devalues and downright insults nurses, especially senior nurses who have made incredible life-long contributions to the hospitals.

From the article:

Christopher Dawes, president and CEO of the Lucile Packard Children's Hospital, said in a statement that he believes the new offer "achieves the goal of establishing a generous and comprehensive contract for our nurses that advances nursing practice and programs."

"Advances nursing practice and programs?" First, since when does either hospital have a school of nursing? Second, this professional development program is meant to drive out invaluable senior nurses who cost the hospitals more - and deservedly so - to make room for less-experienced and therefore more inexpensive nurses.

Some of the criteria for the bedside nurse to meet the Nurse III and Nurse IV levels include authoring original research articles, writing a chapter in a textbook, editing textbooks, writing evidenced based policy or an editorial in a journal. These are just a few of the unrealistic requirements for the bedside nurse. And not only do nurses have to accomplish these things to be promoted, a CN III has to do it EVERY YEAR to maintain her/his Clinical Nurse level. CN IV's have two years because they need to meet even more requirements.

So not only do the hospitals expect nurses work all of their 8, 10 or 12 hour shifts every week, they will be required to do formal academia type work on their own time?? How does this make one a better bedside nurse. Does the patient lying in that bed or their distraught family really care if the nurse who is managing their care has done these types of things or stressing over getting these things done?

If it were me or my loved one, I would want my nurse focusing on me.

As evidenced by these unrealistic and unattainable goals for almost all nurses at Stanford and LPCH, almost every nurse - no matter their senority - will be demoted and be unable to advance at all...what this whole thing is really all about.

Without a doubt, the clinical ladder for Stanford and LPCH nurses needs updating, but not like this.

Like this comment
Posted by Wilma
a resident of Blossom Valley
on Apr 6, 2010 at 5:06 pm

In a meeting with Nancy Lee she stated that the Professional Nurse Development Program "is competitive with nursing excellence at other academic medical centers across the nation." However, "Stanford still needs to develop their criteria"; evidently Stanford’s PDNP model doesn’t model the other medical center. Martha Marsh, CEO of Stanford Hospital and Clinics said the offer "reflects the high regard we have for our nursing staff and our commitment to nursing excellence." If this were true then Stanford would have involved the “Magnet Awarded” nursing staff in the development of this new career ladder instead of ramming down our throats at contract time.

I have three degrees; a BS in Human Performance, AD in Nursing, AD liberal arts. I am a working mother of a pre-teen, a wife and I annually maintain five mandatory certifications for my nursing position. All of which will not count towards my “new career ladder”.

Cost cutting measures during hard economic times are understandable. It is Stanford Administration's disrespectful, misleading, and poorly planned process that I find distasteful. It hurts the nurses the patients and the community!

Like this comment
Posted by David
a resident of another community
on Apr 8, 2010 at 12:19 pm

So far the two comments here basicially state that those people don't have the time to do what is being proposed for the new clinical ladder. What is a clinical ladder for? It should be something where the top level is difficult to attain and much work and time is put into it when you do. It should NOT be just another senority driven "I've been here a long time and I'm a good nurse" way to increase pay. A high level RN SHOULD spend more time working on their profession. If you can't, then you can't, but you shouldn't get the same pay as those who can and choose to.

Like this comment
Posted by SUH
a resident of Martens-Carmelita
on Apr 8, 2010 at 7:30 pm

David, yeap the pay should not be the same, first your experience and skills then additional pay if you opt to continue schooling but it shouldn't be cutting the pay of nurses after 20-30 years of working so the nurses with master will be payed higher,No matter what if you say you have to agree that having a masters degree makes you a better bedside nurse.For those who gears to the management team yeap, they need to and should be doing that, and for bedside nurses if anybody opt to continue thats good and should be paid addtional pay for having it,but Don't tell me that a masters degree equates bedside skills. I have a master degree and when I started working as beside nurse I realize that non of the bediside skills needed to function effectively to save lives in critical times were thought in the masters program.
A matter of fact, the one who trained me was an ADN and I have high regards and respect to Her and for the rest of the crew, and I would say they deserve to be paid more than me who have masters.Maybe if I were as experience like them and I have masters then of course I will be paid more but other than that, don't be silly.

Like this comment
Posted by SUH
a resident of Martens-Carmelita
on Apr 8, 2010 at 7:40 pm

correction for DAVID's comments by SUH .
1) error- you have to agree that having masters degree does not makes you better bedside nurse.
3) error-non of the bedside skills needed to fucntion effectively to save lives during critical times were taught, not thought.

Like this comment
Posted by CaliNurse
a resident of another community
on Apr 21, 2010 at 9:19 am

To David,
The CURRENT "Clinical Ladder" does indeed address a higher level of functioning by the beside nurse. And it rewards the nurses that have accomplished that higher level. Stanford feels there are to many higher level nurses (i.e. higher pay). But those nurse did indeed earn that. This was evidenced by the fact that those nurses earned the Hospital the "Magnet Hospital" designation in 2007. Only 5% of hospitals nationwide have achieved that status. What the new proposal entails is an unscrupulous way of demoting nurses, reducing their wages and discounting the value of experience and skills. Or keeping those qualified nurses at a reduced level and reduced pay scale to increase their profits. What their plan consists of is over 35 pages long and puts more value on writing a paper than saving a life. It does not promote quality care. Just one example... A nurse would get one point for volunteering on a two week medical mission to Haiti and 15 points for writing an original research paper. 45 points are needed for just one area of their Plan. Do you really think this is reasonable?
You really need ALL the facts before you can truly understand where the nurses are coming from in their disapproval of this contract offer. We do not mind doing the work. Just let the expectations be reasonable and be in line with promoting what we do, BEDSIDE NURSING!

Posted by Name hidden
a resident of Sylvan Park

on Sep 25, 2017 at 2:03 pm

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Burger chain Shake Shack to open in Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 17 comments | 4,466 views

The Cost of Service
By Aldis Petriceks | 1 comment | 986 views

Couples: When Wrong Admit It; When Right; Shut Up
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 487 views