• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Photo

Nurses demonstrated in Westwood last week after a strike planned for July 21 by the California Nu

A judge’s order blocked the University of California nurses’ scheduled July 21 strike, requiring the nurses’ union and the UC to attend legal proceedings in August before a strike can be reconsidered.

The temporary restraining order, issued by the Sacramento Superior Court just one day before the planned walk-out, called for the nurses’ union to stop sanctioning the strike and for the UC to refrain from taking any retaliatory action against employees involved in the strike plans. The restraining order is in effect until a hearing scheduled for August 11.

UC representatives said the university has been bargaining in good faith, but said the California Nurses Association’s strike plan itself was illegal, as contract negotiations are still officially underway.

Nurses at eight UC medical facilities held pickets and rallies on July 21 instead of proceeding with their planned one-day walkout, complying with the order while still emphasizing their desire for wage increases, guaranteed staffing ratios and secure pensions and benefits.

Work attendance was notably high that day, requiring hospitals to use very few of the temporary nurses contracted by the university, said UC spokesman Noel Van Nyhuis. He added that although a strike did not occur, the preparations made in anticipation of a walkout were very costly.

The strike plans and subsequent rallies did not disrupt normal hospital activities, but expenses included travel costs and accommodations for the temporary nurses as well as lost revenue from canceled procedures, said Thomas Rosenthal, the UCLA Medical Center’s chief medical officer.

“We weren’t sure how many nurses were going to come in as scheduled,” said Van Nyhuis. “They wanted to be prepared just in case some nurses didn’t show up.”

Many non-emergency procedures scheduled for July 21 had been cancelled or postponed in anticipation of low staffing and temporary nurses had to be paid regardless of whether they worked a shift, Rosenthal said, adding that the costs to the medical center were “in the million-dollar range.”

Nurses say they are pleased with how the rallies proceeded.

CNA officials informed nurses of the rallies and dissuaded them from staging a “sick-out,” in which significant numbers of nurses would call in sick, said Kathy Daniel, a nurse in the UCLA Medical Center home health department and a CNA statewide director.

“There’s a right way and a wrong way to do this,” Daniel said. “We want to make sure we’re doing this the right way.”

The Westwood rally enjoyed the support of politicians and representatives from several other unions. Three California assemblymen and the heads of two unions – the Coalition of University Employees and the University Professional and Technical Employees – spoke to the crowd assembled at Westwood Boulevard and Le Conte Avenue.

Nurses at the rally stressed their desire for wages and benefits comparable to those being offered by nearby hospitals such as Cedars-Sinai and Kaiser Permanente.

“We get the sickest patients in the community,” said Gloria Schibel, a nurse at the UCLA Medical Center’s cardiothoracic intensive care unit, adding that the salary the UC has been offering is not enough.

The university disagrees, saying that the UC’s salary proposals ensure that all UC nurses will be paid competitive wages.

There was no friction between the nurses and the university representatives present at the rally, Daniel said.

“They were very respectful, as were we,” she said. “Everyone was very diplomatic.”

The CNA contract expired on July 8, after having been extended three times. The UC and the CNA have been negotiating a new contract for nearly six months, but negotiations stalled, and the union passed a strike vote on July 7.

UC spokesman Paul Schwartz said the proposed strike was illegal since negotiations had neither reached an official impasse nor been mediated by a third party, both of which must take place before a strike can be legally declared.

“We’re still in the first phase,” Schwartz said.

Last week, the university took the issue to the state Public Employment Relations Board, which found in favor of the UC and filed a complaint against the strike on July 19. The next day, a Sacramento judge issued a temporary restraining order against the strike and scheduled an injunction hearing.

But the CNA says that the planned strike would have been legal were it not for the restraining order, and that the university’s recent actions have widened the rift between the UC and the nurses.

“The strike was planned in response to certain violations of labor law that the UC committed during negotiations,” said CNA spokeswoman Liz Jacobs. “Because of these unfair labor practices, we believe we acted legally in calling a strike.”

Spokesmen from both sides expressed confidence that the August injunction hearing will be decided in their favor.

No negotiations had been scheduled as of Sunday.