Another challenge by SSM Health asks the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to review St. Mary’s nurses’ union election certification.
The challenge marks the second from SSM Health since the union election on June 11. Nurses at St. Mary’s voted to unionize under the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Wisconsin to address ongoing issues at the hospital that include pay disparities, staff retention and poor patient care outcomes caused by the former. SSM Health previously challenged the results of the election on grounds that charge nurses should not have been eligible, but the NLRB rejected the challenge and certified the union election.
Now, SSM Health throws another challenge at the election results under claims of “fairness during the process leading up to and during the election,” SSM Health said to Madison365 in a statement.
It continues its claim on charge nurses’ eligibility, but offers two other examples it claims violated fairness. SSM Health pointed to four witnesses — Sandie Ferrigno, senior HR Director; Eric Thorton, president of St. Mary’s; and two election observers.
According to SSM Health’s request to review, Ferrigno will testify to charge nurses’ supervisory duties. This does not make charge nurses ineligible unless those nurses have the ability to hire, fire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward or discipline another employee, the NLRB ruled in 2006.
According to SSM Health’s own description, “Charge nurses directly assign patients to clinical staff, use their skill and experience to determine appropriate staffing for specialized patients, and maintain authority to reassign staff and call in additional staff based on patient census.”
None of those coincide with the NLRB’s standard for non-eligible charge nurses.
Thornton is willing to testify that a charge nurse reported to him that another charge nurse placed a ballot directly into the ballot box without being challenged. The two election observers are willing to testify to charge nurse presence in the voting area, union supporters attempting to enter the voting area and a “cookie incident.”
The “cookie incident” involved cookies being given to voters by union supporters. This is the second time SSM Health has fought against cookies being donated to the hospital’s employees.
SSM Health’s entire argument banks on the notion that charge nurses should not have been eligible voters, and that any conduct they engaged in, proven via testimony or otherwise, violates the sanctity of the election.
It argues that due to their supervisory position, they have a “coercive” sway on other staff.
“An employee who, on a daily basis, is assigned, evaluated, and directed by a charge nurse cannot realistically be expected to disregard that charge nurse’s expressed preferences about the Union when casting a ballot,” SSM Health said in its request for review.
However, SSM Health lost its ability to challenge who is considered an eligible voter due to it failing to file its Statement of Position, which has caused its subsequent challenges to the NLRB to be denied.
SSM Health has called the NLRB’s decision “incorrect” and “erroneous.”
“During the election period, SSM Health raised objections regarding conduct that we believe affected the election environment and disrupted hospital operations. We do not believe these concerns were adequately investigated before regional NLRB staff dismissed the objections and certified the election,” SSM Health said in a statement.
Even if the NLRB would overturn the election results based on charge nurse eligibility, it would not be enough to change the overwhelming 89% in favor vote. Totals for the election included 89 charge nurses out of 574 eligible voters. 511 voted in favor; 53 against.
Nurses at St. Mary’s have called SSM Health’s continued challenges as trying to undermine its voice as a union.
“They need to drop their objections to our union election and do what is right for our patients, our profession and our community,” said Zach Zahalka, a nurse at ST. Mary’s for 17 years. “St. Mary’s nurses voted by 89% to form our union, and we have a clear mandate to sit down and negotiate a contract with urgent improvements in staffing and retention. We’ve been very disappointed that SSM has instead filed a with the federal National Labor Relations Board. SSM has also continued their pressure tactics inside our hospital, which have included threatening nurses with disciplinary action for union activity, destroying our union information and confiscating our union materials.”
Nurses plan to continue to move forward with the process in preparation for its contract negotiations. It is still working on filling out surveys to determine its contract priorities.
