האגודה הישראלית לחקר יחסי עבודה

מחקר, הוראה ומדיניות בתחום יחסי העבודה

header header1
  • שרגא ברוש, יו"ר לשכת התאום לארגונים הכלכליים
  • קובי בר-נתן, מ"מ הממונה על השכר במשרד האוצר
  • השופטת ורדה וירט-לבנה, נשיאת בית הדין הארצי לעבודה
  • עו"ד שלמה יצחקי, הממונה הראשי על יחסי עבודה
  • עו"ד אבי ניסנקורן, יו"ר הנהגת ההסתדרות הכללית החדשה

חיפוש מחקרים

USA : Stalemate continues on Day 2 of nurses strike against Allina hospitals

Allina Health and 4,800 Twin Cities hospital nurses represented by the Minnesota Nurses Association remained at a stalemate Tuesday, the second day of an open-ended strike.

Neither the Minneapolis-based hospital and

clinic system nor the union announced plans to resume negotiations, and both said they want to start where they separately left off when talks resume.

Yet Allina can’t necessarily guarantee that, Allina spokesman David Kanihan said.

“The longer the strike goes on, it puts us in a financial position where we are less able to potentially give them everything that we offered before the strike started,” he said.

“You take a risk when you go on strike, but ultimately you do what you have to do,” said Angela Becchetti, an MNA negotiating team member and nurse at Abbott Northwestern Hospital. “Anything can happen.”

Both sides believe they had made significant concessions over the weekend, before the Labor Day strike began.

The nurses are striking at four metro hospitals: United in St. Paul, Abbott Northwestern in Minneapolis, Unity in Fridley and Mercy in Coon Rapids, plus the Phillips Eye Institute in Minneapolis. Allina has brought in replacement nurses to staff the facilities and some union nurses have crossed the picket lines.

The union says that in agreeing to phase out nurses-only health plans by 2020, they have given Allina what it has requested since negotiations began in February. Allina says that the union’s most recent plan still fails to account for how the costs of the nurses-only plans will be shared until 2020.

In recent negotiations, the MNA agreed to transition from two of its nurses-only plans by Jan. 1, 2017, and to transition from the remaining two plans by Jan. 1, 2020. Allina agreed to maintain the Choice and Advantage plans until 2020. The two sides disagree about how that should be done, and how much oversight the nurses union should have over Allina’s health plans, which serve the company’s other employees as well.

According to their most recent proposals, Allina wants a 3 percent cap on its share of the premium increases of nurses-only plans. The MNA wants Allina to shoulder the cost increases for that period of time.

Allina also wants to exclude new nurses from nurses-only plans beginning Jan. 1, 2017. The MNA wants all nurses to have access to the same plans until they are phased out. Limiting some nurses’ options, but not others — essentially splitting the bargaining unit — is a union-busting tactic, the union says.

On oversight, the MNA wants to make sure the company doesn’t cut into the plans’ monetary value, and wants this to be determined jointly by actuaries selected by both the union and the company. Allina is only willing to promise negotiations on the value of its most popular plan, the First plan, and only wants its own actuary to determine this.

Kanihan said because Allina wants to remain a competitive employer, it has no incentive to reduce the quality of care offered to its workers.

Neither Kanihan nor union officials could provide information on Allina nurses’ overall compensation.

Conflicts also remain in MNA and Allina’s plans to address staffing issues and ratification bonuses.

The union acknowledges that under Allina’s health plans, they would get lower premiums, but also face higher deductibles and more out-of-pocket expenses; in some cases, they would be limited to Allina hospitals and clinics for their own care.

Allina says that the First plan, which covers nearly 73 percent of its enrolled employees, is not a high-deductible plan. While it gives participants discounts at Allina and partner facilities, participants have access to many other providers nationwide, the company says.

Tentative agreements have been reached on other issues. Both sides agreed to 2 percent wage increases to go into effect on June 1 of each year of the new contract. Allina also agreed to provide a dedicated, round-the-clock security officer to the emergency departments at the four hospitals.

THE MOST POPULAR PLANS COMPARED

In an Allina comparison of the company vs. nurses-only plans, the most popular union plan, Choice, lists single coverage premiums at $1,870.18 a year, with the company paying $10,597.86. On the most popular nonunion plan, the First Plan, single premiums would be $1,108.90, with the company paying $6,283.16.

There is no in-network deductible for MNA’s Choice plan, while the out-of-network deductible is $300 per person and a maximum of $900 per family. There is no out-of-network coverage for Allina’s First plan. In-network, there is a $300 deductible per person and a $900 maximum per family.

According to a union spreadsheet, the total out-of-pocket maximum under the MNA Choice plan is $3,000 a year. Allina’s First plan has a $3,500 to $7,000 in-network maximum, plus $1,000 in-network and $2,000 out-network pharmacy maximums

Allina’s First plan is by far its more popular, with about 73 percent of it’s enrolled employees choosing that option, Kanihan said. About 49 percent of nurses who chose MNA plans are currently enrolled in Choice, union spokesman Rick Fuentes said.

In contrast, only 1 percent of Allina’s enrolled employees choose its least expensive plan, which has a disclaimer in its comparison saying it is “only offered so Allina Health can meet the Affordable Care Act requirements.” In addition to higher deductibles, participants pay more before coverage begins, the comparison says.

The MNA’s cheapest plan, the Advantage plan, is a close second to Choice in popularity, with 40 percent of nurses in MNA plans currently enrolled in it.

Both the union’s and the company’s spreadsheets list many other cost and benefit options based on employees’ desired family-coverage size and other factors.

Original Source