Arbitrator orders Carney Hospital to rehire nurses on once troubled psych ward; Carney sues to block that
An arbitrator says Carney Hospital has to rehire six of the twelve nurses it fired in 2011 in a scandal involving physical and sexual abuse of patients in its adolescent psychiatric unit.
Arbitrator Philip Dunn said that while the hospital proved "a stunning level of dysfunction" in the ward, it was wrong to fire every single worker in an attempt to end a "deviant culture" without at least giving them a chance to prove their innocence.
In response, Carney filed a federal lawsuit yesterday to overturn the ruling.
Carney says it's willing to give the nurses comparable jobs in its adult psych unit - with back pay - but that letting them return to their old jobs in the 5 North unit could jeopardize the progress its made in turning it back into a place for caring for very troubled teens, and possibly even lead to the state revoking its license for the unit.
At the heart of Dunn's ruling and the lawsuit are five specific incidents in April, 2011: One female patient was pulled by the hair from behind and slammed against a wall after she threw water at an aide; a female patient reported a male aide had sexually assaulted her; a male patient somehow wound up with a bleeding lip and loose tooth after an aide went into his room to give him some medicine; two patients had sex, which would have been caught if the aides had done their assigned room checks; the male patient in the sexual encounter then tried to kill himself.
Alarmed by so many incidents in such a short period of time, state regulators stopped sending patients to the unit and threatened to pull the unit's license.
The hospital hired former state Attorney General Scott Harshbarger to recommend changes - he came back with a report calling on the hospital to fire everybody and start fresh with new nurses and aides (also known as "mental-health counselors") because of a culture in which nurses failed to adequately oversee the MHCs or report potential problems:
One of the major underlying sources and causes of operational and performance dysfunction on the Unit is the "code of silence" that exists among all staff. No regular staff or RN supervisor on the Unit ever witnesses inappropriate professional care or behavior by MHC staff or RNs. This code results in a failure to report issues or conceRNs, and to reinforce a general attitude that reporting can trigger retaliation, intimidation, and/or be ignored or unsupported by others. This is true of both staff and RNs. Despite their status as licensed professionals, RNs tend to feel threatened by patients, and do not report incidents for fear that, in retaliation, they will not be protected by MHCs if, for example, a patient becomes violent. ...
MHC staff, while experienced, educated, and generally dedicated to the concept of these careers and fully aware of the nature of the work, and licensed RNs (many of whom are trained for these Units) operate autonomously, and talk aside, seem to lack motivation to perform – and do not perform – at standards of excellence. For example, many RNs spend the majority of their time in the locked nurses’ station, rather than interacting with the patients. Similarly, many MHCs "hang out" together during their shifts, (and) do not perform required checks of patients.... Both RNs and MHCs habitually sleep on the job, particularly on the night shifts. In addition, both RNs and MHCs have resisted – and questioned – efforts over the past year to change and/or implement policies ... designed to enhance patient care
MHCs often arrive late for their shifts, take breaks without notifying the RNs, or take breaks at the end of their shifts and leave the hospital before their shifts have ended. Similarly, MHCs report that RNs remain in their station, isolated from the floor and patients for the majority of the time during their shifts.
In his ruling on grievances filed by the Massachusetts Nurses Association on behalf of six nurses, Dunn said then hospital President Bill Walczak never gave the nurses - one of whom was not on duty during any of the April events - a chance to give their side:
While there appears to be little doubt that some awful things happened on 5N in April 2011, none of these six nurses were the perpetrators in those very serious incidents. Nor has it been shown that these six nurses personally contributed to a "culture of mediocrity and/or a deviant culture." ...
The Union is correct that the Employer failed to meet its burden of proving that any of these six RNS committed dischargeable misconduct.
In its suit, filed in US District Court in Boston, the hospital responded the nurses proved their complicity in the unit's problems through their inaction:
Testimony at the arbitration established that the culture of mediocrity and substandard care had persisted for years on 5 North; that all of the nurses working on the unit were well aware of its massive deficiencies, which were obvious and persistent and included improper delegation of duties by nurses to MHCs; and that none of the grievants ever filed a complaint with either senior hospital administrators or [the state] concerning the substandard care on the unit.
The hospital added the nurses, along with others, resisted the hospital's initial attempts to switch to a different model of patient care during the investigations by state regulators and Harshbarger:
Reinstatement of the grievants to 5 North – which now, due to its lower patient census, is only staffed with approximately seven nurses – will result in the displacement and removal of virtually all of the RNs who have been serving in the reconstituted unit that had been licensed by DMH in August, 2011. All of the gains achieved in 5 North since its overhaul will be in jeopardy.
David Schildmeier, a spokesman for the Massachusetts Nurses Association, claimed the hospital is filing the lawsuit in an attempt to avoid being held accountable:
"It's a terrible insult to a terrible injury to these innocent nurses who only did their job," he said, pointing to the arbitrator's report. "The incidents that led to this, none of them were involved in those incidents."
Schildmeier said union has copies of numerous official reports filed by nurses complaining of conditions on a regular basis. "There was no culture of silence," he said, adding:
You don't get to break the law, attack the people, take away their livelihood and then try to make a deal to reinstate them to another job. The hospital was wrong. The hospital broke the law. And it was found by an independent arbitrator that that was the truth.
Schildmeier said the nurses are owed an apology. "This is nothing short of obscene."
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
Carney complaint | 36.97 KB |
Ad:
Comments
What a clusterf*ck
My head is spinning just reading about this.
Institutions public and private 'save' money by cutting staff levels to dangerous levels, giving bonuses to the administrators who made the cuts, spending 'saved' money on 'improvement' projects [don't start on the serious corruption problems involved with outsourcing and contracts for 'improvement' projects, etc.], then whitewashing the whole thing with BS PR. There is ZERO...ZERO excuse for so-called 'professional' administrators and executives responsible for such policies which result in these debacles to get a pass. Heads should roll. No golden parachutes for those at the top, either. A low level employee would be terminated ASAP for far less negligence and/or f*ck up.
CLUSTER IT IS, NO I IN TEAM
CLUSTER IT IS, NO I IN TEAM THEY ALL KNEW WHAT WAS GOING ON, ALL 4 1 1 4 ALL CUT THE CRAP HERE. CARITAS WAS NOT EMPLOYEE @ WILL IF SO IT WAS UP FRONT, STEWARD SENT LETTERS OUT INFORMING THEY WERE @ WILL. PEOPLE JUST CANT DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO UNION OR NON UNION LEADER OR NON LEADER, CARITAS DID HAVE A POLICY ABOUT RETALIATION THAT THEY TOTALLY DISREGARDED. ST ANNES FORMER PRES MIKE METZLER, I WORKED AT 3 CARITAS FACILITES @ THE SAME S.A.H., GOOD SAM, & CARNEY, GS WAS THE ONLY UNIONIZED THEN THE OTHERS FOLLOWED. I WAS FIRED FROM GS LOCAL 1199 NO BACKING YET WAS EMPLOYED @ THE OTHERS TIL I WENT TO THE BOD AND WAS FIRED FROM CARNEY 3 WKS LATER, I APPEALED THE BOD FINDINGS AND WAS FIRED FROM S.A.H. A SHAME SHAMEFUL YOU GET PAID DO YOUR JOB AND DO IT RITE MAY THE TASK BE BIG OR SMALL DO IT RITE OR NOT AT ALL
Wait what?
Isn't employment at-will here? I mean, maybe they could have made the decision more clear-cut on paper, but wasn't this basically shutting down a program that had problems? Most places I've worked have had a policy of trying to find people a position in another part of the agency when the program they work for shuts down, but I'm pretty sure they aren't legally required to do this, and I know that other programs even within the same agency aren't obligated to hire someone if they feel the skills and personality and whatnot aren't a good match. I thought it was perfectly legal to just eliminate positions.
Perhaps these were union employees.
Thus the arbitrator.
Correct, anon
The nurses were represented by the Mass Nurses Association.
Collective bargaining, getting in the way of patient care - sucks
Yeah...
I definitely support labor laws and collective bargaining, but not when it's abused.
In a lot of places I've worked, most of the nurses are great at what they do, but there's an overarching culture of a few old-school power-hungry nurses being obsessed with union rules and nursing culture and completely forgetting about what they're there to do.
One place where I worked was doing some reorganizing, and there were some nurses who were really angry that they couldn't be transferred from adult medical/surgical work with no psych or pediatric experience to our pediatric psych program, insisting that a nurse is a nurse, they have an RN and that's all that's required to be an RN in a pediatric psych program, etc. They were making all kinds of threats with the backing of their union that they had some kind of magic right to these jobs for which they lacked the experience. It's unfortunate that these types ruin things for so many nurses who ARE really skilled providers and great team players.
unfortunately all too common
What you've just described (very well, I might add) is the case in many, probably most industries where unions have a stronghold.
Ironically, I thought that health care was one of the places where this situation *wasn't* so much the case, but I guess I was wrong about that.
what's more, there are still work sectors which would benefit tremendously from the presence of unions. Retail and office workers come to mind.
Yes and no
Yeah, it's generally not a big deal in healthcare; most providers are not unionized yet we manage to be paid decently and treated decently.
What does become a problem is facilities where nurses are unionized and no one else is. I've worked in two of these and it royally sucked. Again, most nurses were great, but their contracts had stipulations that affected the rest of us. At one place every shift had to be supervised by a nurse because the union wanted it that way. The union insisted that this meant that the charge nurse was not just a point person for the nurses, but was supervising everyone else's work. Many of the nurses would override things they had no training in, like psych diagnoses by psychotherapists and safety assessments by occupational therapists. In another place they would need to leave RIGHT NOW because their shift was over, despite that something was happening and it wasn't really ethical to just bust out without finishing dealing with something.
I've heard from others that being union is more of a hindrance if you're working in a hospital-affiliated community role as a clinician and your union is more geared toward an inpatient setting. I've known people who couldn't go to a meeting at a child's school or something because it would constitute travel that wasn't in the contract or too long of a shift or whatnot.
And YES, better rights for retail, foodservice, etc. for sure. Even better would be just having way stronger labor laws for non-exempt employees. And easier ways to enforce labor laws.
Not just "because the union wanted it that way"
But because the employer AND the union wanted it that way.
That's what the contract does: spells out everything the union and company are in agreement on.
Blaming the union for negotiated work rules is pure BS.
I've seen it, too
A friend of mine worked with a West Coast health system comprised of several hospitals that had joined together. One was union. The nurses' union insisted that they should be in the first round of interviews for any open position, regardless of training or experience. This did not go over well with the rest of the nurses in the health system and led to a huge HR vs. union blow up that lasted for YEARS.
Collective Bargaining
Yes, the union collectively bargained for their agreement with the hospital in this case. Unfortunately, for all of the good things that, in my opinion, unions have done for working class folks out there, this seems to be a situation where the very apparatus that provided those benefits also, in part, allowed these terrible abuses to take place.
The answer to your other question is yes, in most instances, it is perfectly legal to fire an at-will employee for any reason, or no reason at all...as long as it is not a legally prohibited reason (e.g. race, gender, sexual orientation in Massachusetts, etc.).
I will say that I know of
I will say that I know of this case well and the fact is that the nurses on this unit had made complaints to administration about lack of staffing and other matters. It appears that Carney was under new leadership from Bill Walzeck who under his leadership and high price lawyer he hired decided to terminate all these nurses.
Many of these nurses weren't even working when these incidents occurred. If they were made aware of them they spoke up. It appears they didn't care for the care of the adolescents in the unit but more about saving money by not providing the unit with adequate staffing.
Ironically, Mr. Bill Walzeck was terminated in less than a year after making this decision of terminating the staff at this unit.
If these nurses were so negligent why would they be willing to rehire them in different department at Carney. Wouldn't they be risking the care of other patients? Or is it in fact that they really messed up and are attempting to rectify this DIRTY situation.
Something to think about!!!
It is dangerous to be on any
It is dangerous to be on any psychiatric unit these days, for staff and patients, just my opinion.
anti-union
Firing everyone was pure theater. It was designed for the PR of the hospital, not the protection of patients. I am not surprised that it will end up back firing on the hospital.
what does surprise me is that people think that taking away employee rights will improve patient care.
Psych Hospitals
I worked as a psych nurse for 8 years and I have observed that being a Mental Health Technician is an extremely difficult job, they earn a pittance and have no job security. I have worked with fantastic MHT's that could take down a large, violent patient without a scratch on the patient or themselves (compare that to the police). They cheer patients up and can make all the difference in a patient improving. They save lives. How are they rewarded? With ridiculously low pay. I have also worked with awful MHT's, usually the ones who were "I dare you fire me" types. The old woman who would sleep all night instead of washing the children's clothes, the ones who would call out on Super Bowel night, the ones who would disappear off the unit or roll their eyes at me and make comments when I would make small requests. The best way to avoid the incidents described above, is to PAY WELL, and treat the MHT's fairly. Fire the ones who don't work or violate rules.
Also, the patient advocacy group called "NAMI" havs made it impossible to run a psychiatric hospital. Their loved ones are DANGEROUS. They assault others. They refuse to comply with the hospital rules. Yet, the staff is suppose to cater to them and allow them to "take over" the hospital. This is not how things used to be done. Individual patients were not allowed to disrupt the therapeutic milieu. NAMI should stop complaining so much, or better yet, pick up the massive tab for taking care of their loved ones.
Mental Health Technicians are
Mental Health Technicians are ridiculously underpaid. NAMI has unrealistic demands and expectations. It is impossible to run a psychiatric hospital these days. I agree, fire the bad workers, but if the nurse is too strict, the MHT's will run her out of town.