Contract negotiations have broken down, once again, between Kaiser Permanente and workers who are represented by the National Union of Healthcare Workers. This has lead to a workers’ strike. The central issue seems to be about proposed cuts to the worker’s health insurance coverage.
A one-day strike took place recently in Santa Rosa, California. The workers who went on strike were those who were represented by the National Union of Healthcare Workers, or NUHW. This union represents people who work as mental health staff, and opticians, in hospitals.
The strike was supported by Kaiser nurses, who were with the California Nurses Association. That association encouraged its members to strike as an expression of “sympathy” with the goals and viewpoints of the workers represented by NUHW.
As always, there are two different sides, and different opinions, about what this strike is about. The nurses say that they are striking in order to fight for patients. However, the nurses also are in support of the NUHW members’ opposition to the proposed cuts to their health insurance benefits.
On the other hand, Kaiser Permanente feels that the strike has nothing to do with the quality of patient care. The company believes that the entire strike is specifically in regards to wage and benefit issues.
Gay Westfall, senior vice president for human resources at Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and Health Plan, points out that Kaiser got high marks in an annual California state report card on mental health care services. The implication is that those high marks prove that Kaiser Permanente is doing good things in term of patient care. It also implies that the workers who are on strike are specifically focused on the proposed cuts to their benefits.
Kaiser Permanente has proposed that it will cut the retirement medical benefit to union members’ spouses or partners. The company is also unhappy about the desire of the NUHW union to bring the disagreement over staffing levels to be heard before a judge.
Obviously, the workers are not going to be pleased with the idea that their spouses or partners would end up without the retirement medical benefit that they were once promised. This would mean that workers who are near retirement would have to scramble to find medical benefits for their spouse or partner after the worker retires.
Many people choose to work for a certain company, as opposed to a different company in the same field, because of the medical benefits that a company offers. I think that if a worker was promised that his or her spouse or partner would receive retirement medical benefits, then it isn’t nice for Kaiser Permanente to now change its mind about offering them, perhaps years after an employee started working for the company.
The workers also are claiming that, despite what Kaiser Permanente is saying about its high marks for patient care, that the company isn’t doing enough. They feel that there isn’t enough staff to provide the care necessary for the treatment of psychiatric patients.
Image by tedeytan on Flickr