Nursing home pay should be election issue

Published 12:00 am Thursday, August 31, 2000

St.

Thursday, August 31, 2000

St. Mark’s Lutheran Home was first.

Email newsletter signup

Then came Sacred Heart Care Center.

Who’s next?

No one should be surprised by the efforts of nurses, service and maintenance workers in residential care facilities who are seeking job protection.

They want union representation because workers in nursing homes are fed up.

The long-term care delivery system needs fixing, but the people on the front lines – nurses, aides and others – need fixing first.

When the Minnesota Legislature approved another small increase in pay for nursing home workers, it was literally a drop in the bucket and it hasn’t stopped the exodus of valued caregivers or the angry talk in break rooms everywhere.

Short staffing is a fact of nursing home life and no issue is more pressing than putting more workers on the floor.

And, overtime isn’t the answer or overtime without pay. One of the complaints to surface recently is that overtime wages do not have to be paid until 48 hours are worked.

Can you imagine the situation? A nursing home is short-staffed, so it is forced to make its workers work overtime, but finds a loophole in a law that does not require overtime to be paid until 48 – not 40 – hours have been worked.

Unless Minnesota’s nursing homes want more of their LPNs, RNs and aides, plus other workers, to seek protection with union representation, they must act quickly to be a part of the solution.

The problems of reimbursement, wages and benefits and increasing nursing home jobs’ attractiveness should not be ignored.

In this election year, every Minnesota senator and representative is up for re-election.

When they come door-knocking for your vote, don’t let them leave home without a good piece of your mind about what needs to be done.

All we have to lose is quality residential care for our mothers and fathers, grandmothers and grandfathers.