Home >Newsletters >May 1998
 
ASA NEWSLETTER
 
 
May 1998
Volume 62
Number 5
 
PRACTICE MANAGEMENT

When Nurse Anesthetists Unionize

Karin Bierstein,
Practice Management Coordinator



The "Practice Management" column in the March issue of the ASA NEWSLETTER examined some of the issues relating to physician unions. The biggest obstacle to the formation of such unions is the independent contractor status of most physicians. Only employees are guaranteed the right to bargain collectively through labor unions (with a few exceptions noted in the March column).

Unlike anesthesiologists, many nurse anesthetists are employees. If a majority of nurses working for a common employer such as an anesthesiology practice or a hospital elects to be represented by a collective bargaining agent, the employer must negotiate the nurses' working terms and conditions with that agent.

Two groups of nurse anesthetists working for anesthesiologists recently joined or formed unions. Both appear to have been motivated by the insecurity attendant upon anesthesiology practice mergers and consolidations.

In Metairie, Louisiana, two-thirds of the nurse anesthetists employed by a group of a dozen anesthesiologists voted several months ago to form an independent union. They had begun organizing when they learned of the group's plans to merge with three other groups in the area. Although the four anesthesiology groups eventually called off the merger, concerns for job security led the nurses to go through with the election. If the union is certified by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which is the likely next stage in the process, the anesthesiologists will be obligated to enter into good faith contract negotiations with the union.

Another group, this one in the mid-Atlantic region, has already entered into a contract with nurse anesthetists newly represented by a local of the Teamsters union. The one-year contract was the culmination of nine months of bargaining in 1997, resulting in a compensation increase for the nurses of less than 4 percent, according to one of the members of the group. As in the Louisiana case, the prospect of a merger triggered the organizational activity (the three groups here, working at three hospitals, completed the merger). The contract did not, however, significantly enhance the nurse anesthetists' job security or opportunities; the group can use either independent nurse anesthetists, who are outside the union because they work on a per diem basis, or anesthesiologists to perform bargaining work.

Indeed, none of the parties to this collective bargaining agreement seems to have accomplished their objectives. The anesthetists' terms and conditions of employment have not changed markedly. The Teamsters worked very hard to win the election and now represent a unit of just 16 employees. There were 36 who voted, two-thirds of them in favor of the union, but 20 nurse anesthetists have either left the practice or been excluded from the bargaining unit by the NLRB's definition of eligibility. Only half of those in the union, as of the date of this writing, had signed the papers required by the union, which would ultimately have no choice but to drop the nurses if the signatures are not forthcoming.

The 25 shareholder anesthesiologists have faced considerable legal and management expenses, and they are finding the ongoing management costs onerous. Most importantly, and unfortunately, the organizational campaign undermined the trust between the two groups of nurses and physicians.

A third group, the anesthesiologists at Fairfax Hospital in Falls Church, Virginia, has worked with an independent nurse anesthetist union since 1980 and is now into its seventh or eighth contract. Day to day, the labor contract is not an impediment to the smooth functioning of the department or to the relationships between anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists. The anesthetists are responsible for their own scheduling, within the parameters of contract provisions ensuring adequate coverage. The contract preserves the group's right to hire and utilize part-time nurse anesthetists. The other management rights reserved to the anesthesiologists include the right to establish and administer policies related to patient care, education, training and operations; the right to discipline or terminate employees for just cause; and the right to determine the number needed and the qualifications of employees. The anesthesiologists have found that there are advantages in being able to negotiate compensation, benefits and other employment conditions with a single representative rather than with each individual employee during the three-year life of the contract.

Contract negotiations for the Fairfax group, however, inevitably have been more adversarial than the professional relationships. At one point, the union complained to the NLRB that the group was not bargaining in good faith, evidently because salary demands were rejected. A hearing resulted, and the charge was dismissed. (Note that the certification of a union does not impose a duty to agree on any particular terms. It merely imposes the duty to sit down at the table and attempt in good faith to reach agreement.) Rejected demands can generate ill will, but the group has tried to contain, outside the workplace, the hostility that may surround bargaining.

If a nurse anesthetist union appears on the horizon, anesthesiologists would be well-advised to retain experienced labor counsel right away. The president of Fairfax Anesthesiology Associates, Robert Barth, M.D., is very clear on this point, as was the spokesperson for the group whose nurse anesthetists were organized by the Teamsters. ASA members seeking guidance from a colleague who is an expert in this area are welcome to contact Dr. Barth at (703) 698-2630 or <robert_barth@fanes.org>. The box accompanying this column contains some of the applicable basic labor law principles.



What Does Labor Law Require or Prohibit When Employees Join a Union?

Before an organizational campaign begins: Employers who understand their employees' grievances and who address them satisfactorily may avert any union activity. In the context of nurse anesthetists, where job security and professionalism may be the biggest issues, it may be enough to create a contractual process for preserving jobs or to establish an internal dispute resolution mechanism.

Before the election: When an employer begins to suspect that an organizational campaign is under way, it must immediately refrain from activities that could be interpreted as:

  • Threats - promising or warning of job loss or other adverse consequences should the union prevail. The employer cannot tell the employees that bargaining through a union would be fruitless.
  • Intimidation - creating an insecure environment without making direct threats. Polling employees as to their intentions is dangerous. In an insular department, anesthesiologists may need to be careful about what they say to anesthetists in a social context, because anything vaguely anti-union is apt to be repeated and misinterpreted.
  • Promises - there can be no quid pro quos, even implied, for an anti-union vote. The anesthesiologists generally will know the major employee grievances before a campaign starts. They should not attempt to fix these grievances once the union has appeared. Conversely, they cannot withhold any promised improvement in terms or conditions of employment.
  • may present their views and provide certain information, for example, regarding the advantages of nonunion status, even while an election is pending, but they need to be very careful. The limits of what is lawful vary between federal courts, and it is imperative to clear any proposed statements with counsel.

If the union wins: the parties are required to bargain in good faith. This involves listening to each other and attempting to reach agreement. It does not mean that either side must concede on any given point. Some major issues to bear in mind are:

  • The union does have important tools to support its demands. The threat of a picket line may inspire the hospital to put some pressure on the anesthesiologists; the hospital will probably have a fair number of unionized employees of its own who would refuse to cross a picket line. If there is a strike over the failure to reach a labor agreement, the anesthesiology group is free to hire permanent replacements.
  • The contract will inevitably restrict some of management's prerogatives. It is important to preserve management rights in such areas as patient care and staffing and coverage decisions. The group should think through some worst-case scenarios, in terms of nurse anesthetists' shift and vacation scheduling and make sure that management maintains sufficient flexibility to meet foreseeable needs.
  • Another provision to draft imaginatively relates to employee termination. Since any arbitrator before whom an employee challenges his or her firing will read into the contract a requirement that there be "just cause," the group should define the conduct that will lead to termination. A system of progressive discipline should be included.


Hospitals May Not Ask You for Kickbacks - But Some Do

If a hospital asks its anesthesiologists to pay rent, to waive fees or to provide uncompensated on-call services, it may be violating federal antikickback law. This statute makes it illegal to offer, pay, solicit or receive remuneration for referring patients or for recommending or initiating the ordering of any service payable by Medicare or Medicaid.

In the August 1996 issue of the ASA NEWSLETTER, this column drew readers' attention to a Management Advisory Report (MAR) issued in 1991 by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the Department of Health and Human Services. The MAR, titled "Financial Arrangements Between Hospitals and Hospital-Based Physicians," provided numerous examples of arrangements that appeared to violate the law.

Although many hospitals knew of the rules and specifically of the MAR, some of them were not shy about asking anesthesiologists, radiologists and pathologists to contribute to the hospitals' bottom line because the OIG never signaled any intent to enforce the law.

The environment appears to be changing, however. In February, the OIG published its "Compliance Program Guidance for Hospitals," listing a number of "risk areas" for which it recommended that "individual policies and procedures be coordinated with the appropriate training and educational programs." Among the risk areas were "financial arrangements between hospitals and hospital-based physicians." The OIG explained:

"Another OIG concern with respect to the antikickback statute is hospital financial arrangements with hospital-based physicians that compensate physicians for less than the fair market value of services they provide to hospitals or require physicians to pay more than market value for services provided by the hospital. See OIG Management Advisory Report: Financial Arrangements Between Hospitals and Hospital-Based Physicians. OEI-09-89-0030, October 1991. Examples of such arrangements that may violate the antikickback statute are token or no payment for Part A supervision and management services; requirements to donate equipment to hospitals; and excessive charges for billing services."

You thus have renewed support from the OIG in the event that your hospital seeks to make you purchase equipment or practice management services at more than fair market value or seeks to cut a stipend for medical director services to a below-market level (these are some examples that members have given to the ASA Washington Office). Remember that it is illegal to give as well as to solicit a kickback, so you should make sure that you have a written opinion from counsel (preferably the hospital's counsel) before you agree to any financial arrangement of this nature.

The OIG's Compliance Program Guidance for Hospitals can be found on its Web site: <http://www.dhhs.gov/progorg/oig/>.



CSA Publishes Monograph on Economic Issues

Managed care contracting and payment, legal issues, academic practice and the role of the anesthesiologist are among the topics covered in a monograph published by the California Society of Anesthesiologists (CSA). Active and resident members of CSA were previously sent one complimentary copy. The monograph is available for purchase by nonmembers for $95.

To order "Current Economic Issues for Practicing Anesthesiologists," contact: CSA, 1065 E. Hillside Blvd., Suite 410, Foster City, CA 94404-1615; telephone (650) 345-3020; or fax (650) 345-3269.

 


return to top


 


FEATURES

Answering "The Cry" of Pain

ARTICLES


DEPARTMENTS


The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views, policies or actions of the American Society of Anesthesiologists.

NL Archives

Information for Authors