Free & Fair elections =
quality care and quality jobs

Studies show that a vast majority of Americans would, given the chance, join a union. So why, then, aren’t more workers unionizing? The answer is that when working people attempt to form unions, management almost always reacts with campaigns of intimidation, misinformation and fear.

Fundamentally, a free and fair election means that employees are free to decide whether they want to unionize in a fair secret ballot vote. Management, rather than interfering, respects this decision.

Free and fair election agreements often include the following guidelines:

  • Management agrees to abstain from spending any patient care resources on efforts to dissuade employees from unionizing.
  • Both the union and the employer agree not to disparage each other and to present only factual information.
  • Employees are allowed to exchange and discuss information about unionization.
  • Management does not take a position on unionization, but allows employees to make up their own minds.
  • Employees are given access to union representatives and information at the workplace.
  • Management agrees to schedule an election without delays and respect the decision employees make.
  • Management and the union agree to a fair, timely and binding enforcement process for these guidelines.

Aren’t there already laws to protect employee rights?
The rules laid out in the National Labor Relations Act greatly favor employers and anti-worker consultants by actually allowing them to broadly interfere in union elections. If employers break the few restrictions in place, the fines are so minimal that they are of no consequence. Furthermore, employers can cause so much legal wrangling and delay that votes can be postponed and overturned. That is why free and fair union election guidelines are needed in addition to already existing labor laws.

Do hospital workers want a vote run by the National Labor Relations Board?
Yes. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is the federal agency charged with running union elections. However, management is still given vast leeway to unfairly interfere in an NLRB election. That is why caregivers are calling on hospital CEOs to agree to a free and fair code of conduct before, during and after an NLRB union election.

Here are local hospitals which have entered into election agreements of various types:

In Massachusetts:

  • Boston Medical Center: From 1996-1997, BMC workers held two union elections under an election accord. In 2005, another group of workers voted in an election under a new accord, negotiated earlier that year.
  • The Trustees of Boston City Hospital in 1993 negotiated a process in which they agreed to recognize the union upon evidence that a majority of workers petitioned for representation.
  • Whidden Memorial Hospital: Two elections took place between 2000 and 2002 under a free and fair accord.
  • UMass Medical Center in Worcester conducted an election in or about 1999 under an accord.

Elsewhere in the U.S., many health systems have negotiated free and fair election codes of conduct. These systems include:

  • Kaiser Permanente: All hospitals and clinics nationally (Kaiser is country’'s largest private nonprofit health care provider).
  • HCA: Several hospitals in three states (HCA is the largest for profit healthcare corporation in the world).
  • Tenet: All California hospitals (Tenet is the second largest for profit system in the U.S.)
  • Catholic Healthcare West: All hospitals in its system.
  • Allina Health: All hospitals in its system.
  • Daughters of Charity: All hospitals in its system.
  • The NY League of Voluntary Hospitals (representing the overwhelming majority of Hospitals in NYC).
  • Many nursing home chains throughout the country.
  • Many independent hospitals throughout the country.