Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

cloudlvr1 t1_ix9vz32 wrote

Sadly hospitals nationwide have been understaffed for decades. Nurses, CNA’s,Techs etc all could use a 50% pay raise!!

60

KevinCarbonara t1_ixaq0mm wrote

Nurse: I want 25$ an hour or I quit

Hospital: Best I can do is 20$

Nurse: puts on hat I'm a traveling nurse

Hospital: We can pay you 150$ an hour

108

KBAR1942 t1_ixaqwl1 wrote

I have mixed feelings about the travelers. I have family that works in the medical field and I am constantly told how muc more they make above the regular staff. Not only that, paying them so much more is draining the budgets of hospital departments. At some point the hospitals will need to end the use of travelers or, at least, cut down on the amount of time they are used. It simply isn't sustainable to employee such people at high rates.

27

KevinCarbonara t1_ixasps8 wrote

> Not only that, paying them so much more is draining the budgets of hospital departments.

I agree, it's not ideal. But it's a very not ideal situation that the hospitals are 100% responsible for. I would be fine with ending travel nursing if they also ended stupidly low pay caps. But I don't know why there are any nurses who aren't travel nurses at this point. Those are the ones being rewarded by the hospitals.

30

KBAR1942 t1_ixau7ip wrote

There are those staff members who have family and therefore cannot travel. You can't do that if you have kids and a partner who also works.

8

creativelyuncreative t1_ixav3ms wrote

Every single hospital system in the area uses travel RNs, and I myself do local travel. If we’re going to be understaffed and overworked wherever we go (and still in a pandemic), I’m not going to pick a job that’s $39 vs $69/hour

16

KBAR1942 t1_ixavf8g wrote

Which is your right. And, yes, I am well aware of the use of travelers. That doesn't change the financial impact on the medical in system. It still isn't sustainable.

4

creativelyuncreative t1_ixavw6m wrote

I agree that it’s not sustainable at all, and until hospital admins start paying their regular staff more, there’s just going to be more travel positions everywhere. Unfortunately most of their heads are up their own asses and they continue to give themselves bonuses while refusing to increase wages. At my last job we got a 4% raise in 2 years (when inflation in one year was 8%) and 2% of the raise was from our union bargaining :(

12

KBAR1942 t1_ixawn8o wrote

Oh I agree with you about the management issues. More often than not management, especially middle management, is oblivious to anything that is not staring them directly in the face (and even then that's not always the case).

2

UncommonSense12345 t1_ixb4kja wrote

Ya travelers often aren’t ready to work from day 1 need an orientation period at no fault of their own, they are just new to a job. It is frustrating when the person needing to be trained makes 3x the trainer and more than the provider writing the orders tho. Gets old fast for the permanent staff who either can’t travel (life, kids, house, etc) or like their job. Traveling needs to end as it drains the budgets and perpetuates…. More traveling and lower and lower morale at work.

4

KBAR1942 t1_ixb5sls wrote

Exactly. This is what my family members have told me.

1

eastwestnocoast t1_ixbdsf6 wrote

So, I asked an acquaintance of mine who worked as a hospital admin why they keep getting travelers instead of paying core staff more and their response was that after considering all the benefits they have to pay for their core staff, travelers are actually cheaper (short term). I don’t know how true this is or if I was getting smoke blown up my @ss, but that was what I was told. Issue is, travelers aren’t really temporary anymore, they seem like they’re here to stay unless they can actually keep core staff, which they won’t be able to unless they pay them more.

16

KBAR1942 t1_ixbejlv wrote

I find that very suspect, but admittedly I don't know. Also, each hospital may be different in terms of where they stand with a budget. As far as travelers being more than just temporary I would also doubt that from what I have been told. Again, this could be a hospital by hospital basis.

3

eastwestnocoast t1_ixbf9er wrote

Yeah, it probably def depends on the individual hospital or system. I am also suspect. The ED I used to work at brought in a ton of travelers during COVID, supposed to be temporary to “get us through” but now, according to my friends who are still there, they’re still hiring majority travelers. An inpatient floor I was recently at at Prov had maybe 50% travelers for day shift and nights was 90% travelers. Though supposedly they are trying to get rid of travelers, which should be interesting considering they’re hemorrhaging core staff right now. Not sure who will be left to care for patients.

6

KBAR1942 t1_ixbfw14 wrote

And this is my concern as well. If a hospital can't afford with regular staff and/or travelers then what will it do?

1

eastwestnocoast t1_ixbgp2v wrote

That’s the million dollar question.

I mean, I’d happily volunteer to teach an overpaid administrator how to insert a foley cath, hang IV meds, calm down a pt in the middle of a mental health crisis, etc. if they think it’s such an easy job. Hell, I’d PAY to teach them how to care for a pt with a leaky rectal tube.

8

KBAR1942 t1_ixbgxzo wrote

Yeah, I wouldn't get your hopes up on that! 😂

3

whitepawn23 t1_ixds63z wrote

Part of the issue is working conditions. Violence. Hospitals really should do weapons screenings at the door. Few if any want to. It will take a state mandate.

Ratios. Oregon is golden. California is golden. Washington is flailing.

The language needs to be stated correctly. There isn’t a nursing shortage. There’s a shortage of nurses willing to work bedside.

Sure, OR takes 9-10% in state income tax. But I’ll happily pay it on those contracts for the better, safer working conditions.

3

whitepawn23 t1_ixdr7s5 wrote

The other issue is many contracts pay less than staff so there’s no reason to go. Especially out here. Stipends for Seattle Metro / west side if the sound do NOT cover rentals and the taxed pay isn’t worth it.

1

jojoclifford t1_ixfxj56 wrote

It’s cheaper than raising wages permanently for all staff. They will do anything to continue screwing healthcare workers over. The joke is on them too though. They have fucked us all into a corner and we will never hire enough non contract staff to sustain the workload.

2

whitepawn23 t1_ixdqtq6 wrote

Travelers get health insurance. 401k is payed by the agency.

1

islandlalala t1_ixdyumn wrote

But this is all on admin. Pay your staff well, boom-no need for travelers. Admin is promoting staff cannibalizing travelers. Keeps the poo off of them. Keep the serfs infighting, give themselves another raise.

1

Uncoolx2 t1_ixa3h0d wrote

Nursing and NAC pay has actually grown pretty well over the last 10 years because of demand.

I know NACs in my facility make over $20/hour.

I'm paid fairly well, and giving me a 50% raise isn't going to fix the problem: we aren't, and haven't been, licensing enough nee nurses for decades.

Washington is looking at a stepped internship program, but they still need to lay it out and get the bodies in line to get it going.

Looking at executive pay at the provider level, and administration pay at the university level is one part, and then increase pay for nursing teachers so we can increase student capacity.

The work is always going to have an attrition rate, and often times bedside is a gateway to other areas of nursing.

When I advocate for people to consider nursing, that is the real seller: an RN license has damn near infinite applications, and they are all short.

−2

SparrowAgnew t1_ixaklig wrote

Wow $20 whole dollars per hour!? Does that come with a top hat and monocle or do they have to provide their own?

27

wolf1moon t1_ixaofcx wrote

That's not enough for Everett, but that's pretty good in rural areas. You can't really judge salary if there's not context of where you are. It's like teacher and cop salaries are pretty good in Seattle but Texas is a whole other world.

1

KevinCarbonara t1_ixaq3z8 wrote

> That's not enough for Everett, but that's pretty good in rural areas.

That is awful anywhere in the nation. Any person doing any job in any area whatsoever.

20

Nixx_Mazda t1_ixaq8fl wrote

Did they also go to a (nursing) school in a cheaper, rural area?

2

Uncoolx2 t1_ixavvbk wrote

NACs don't go to nursing school.

6

Nixx_Mazda t1_ixaxo7y wrote

Yeah OK, I should have put another question mark.

The point still stands, I think, at least sometimes.

I'm not sure on specifics, so maybe I'm wrong and it doesn't stand! I can admit that I'm wrong, if so. :)

1

wolf1moon t1_ixb30lj wrote

Yeah. School for these positions is pretty cheap. At least I know my self-described trailer trash ex's mom went into nursing on the cheap without leaving that cheap town.

1

Nixx_Mazda t1_ixb3wks wrote

Interesting, thanks.

I was asking a real question. I kind of guess that there were cheaper, more local options, but wasn't sure.

1

wolf1moon t1_ixdstgs wrote

Np, I found this link. I was thinking of the associate's degree version. The different levels of education might cloud the picture here. I think the person I was talking about went to community college for it because the neighboring town had one. https://simplenursing.com/nursing-school-cost/

Out of curiosity, I looked up housing costs. A home there has increased a lot lately - I'm betting because they started catering to retirees. But a good sized house is about $500k now, on redfin, which is anywhere from $800-1200k in the greater Seattle area. Rough estimate.

2

Uncoolx2 t1_ixawswc wrote

$3200/month when you can get an apartment for $1100/month is right about on par.

0

SparrowAgnew t1_ixdzeum wrote

For any job you had to get training for that's a pretty pathetic wage. Don't care where it is in the country.

1

Babhadfad12 t1_ixa4g0l wrote

Even $30/hour is not enough when WA minimum salary is $65k in 2023.

7

Uncoolx2 t1_ixa5t0b wrote

Washington State minimum wage for 2023 is $15.74/hour × 40 hours/week x 52 weeks/year = 32,739.20/year.

Now, I will argue that $20/hour isn't going to be a good pull for NACs when Walmart or McDonald's are offering the same.

But I have no idea from which orifice your number was produced.

11

Babhadfad12 t1_ixa66qn wrote

https://www.lni.wa.gov/forms-publications/F700-207-000.pdf

Working in a hospital, especially patient facing role, is not comparable to a retail or fast food or hospitality job that one can do in their spare time during the week.

I assume the people we want as nurses and NAC are more career minded, not to mention the higher stress working environments and odd hours, nights, weekends, and holidays. So presumably, those people are weighing their options at finding a nice salaried job for $65k, or working in a hospital for $20 to $30 per hour.

And if we are not going to pay them more than a standard salaried office 8 to 5 Mon to Fri job, then watch all the better workers go do that.

11

Uncoolx2 t1_ixa82ve wrote

That is the minimum salary threshold for employees to be exempt from overtime pay.

If you take a job that pays the exempt salary, you can damn well guarantee you will be working overtime. Positions like that have shit like 6 day requirements or 50 hour requirements.

If you are not overtime exempt, the actual minimum salary is minimum wage × 40 hours per week, and all time over 40 hours is paid as overtime.

So, for nurses, this is a DNS/DON type salary where they are on-call 24/7 for their job.

Though, smart nurses set up their contract that they get an hourly rate for covering thr floor.

4

wolf1moon t1_ixapb84 wrote

When the state changed what are exempt roles, some of my dad's colleagues became hourly and made absolute bank in overtime. Overtime is how cops make so much money (some over $300k)

5

Uncoolx2 t1_ixaxef6 wrote

And overtime exempt salary positions is how you bilk the same people out of tons of overtime pay.

At a minimum wage of $15.74/hour a person would have to work over 26 hours a week in overtime to meet the exempt rate.

2

Babhadfad12 t1_ixa92yw wrote

> If you take a job that pays the exempt salary, you can damn well guarantee you will be working overtime. Positions like that have shit like 6 day requirements or 50 hour requirements.

Not in my experience. Lots of white collar office or government type jobs do not require more than 40 hours per week. Hell, if you count the time people spend on Reddit, they are probably 30 hour per week jobs.

Either way the lack of people jumping up and down to become nurses or nursing assistants is all the proof that whatever the pay is or was is not enough comparable to that of other options in the market.

2

wolf1moon t1_ixaozyl wrote

It really depends. Usually there are busy times and slack times. In tech, if you're only doing 30, that just means you're a slacker.

0

Uncoolx2 t1_ixacsp1 wrote

I would question how many of the jobs your mention here are the minimum exempt salary versus just being above the minimum salary.

"In my experience" people receiving salary are usually management or administration. Retail managers, HR, administrators, assistant administrators, etc.

These would be the majority of the workers covered by this, a lot closer to blue collar with a white clip.

−1

tamarlk t1_ixabj2v wrote

Bah I wish is was that much. Not even close.

1

Proffesssor t1_ixasxo2 wrote

> make over $20/hour.

Well since the minimum wage is over 19 in parts of the state, 20 or so is pretty sad.

7