Despite the last week's delay of the Hospital nurses unionization vote, eligible voters seem to be sticking to their pro- or anti-union stances.
Some union opponents argue that the postponement, which came due to allegations of unfair labor practices by Duke, is a strategy to garner more union support. But several nurses said the lines have already been drawn-and are unlikely to shift.
"Nurses are educated professionals," said Clinical Nurse Tom Cantaffa, who has openly opposed joining the International Union of Operating Engineers. "Most people found information for themselves, sifted through the propaganda and made an educated decision."
Still, April Perry, another anti-union leader, maintains that the delay is meant as a tactical maneuver on the part of the union. She alleges that at an early May union meeting she attended, union representative David Miller told the group of nurses: "I sense there is strong opposition. We could delay the vote."
Miller, however, denies these charges, saying that if he did say something to that effect, Perry's interpretation was taken out of context. He added that on an anti-union web site, to which Perry often posts, he feels that this frequently happens.
"They select quotes," he said. "They do what they want to.... It's just inaccurate."
Perry also suggested that the vagueness of the union's unfair labor practice charges-which include allegations that Duke has illegally solicited grievances and prevented employees from disseminating union information- indicates that they are meant as a delay tactic.
But Miller continues to uphold that the charges against Duke are serious. And a representative from the National Labor Relations Board said that general charges are standard in these types of proceedings.
Regardless of whether the delay was tactical, several nurses said they have made up their minds-and are either staunchly in favor of or opposed to unionization. Since the discussions began, two web sites have provided information on behalf of either side. While one supports NUPA-"Nurses United for Patient Advocacy," the catchphrase associated with the union-the other contains "no NUPA" in its web address. At each site, nurses hold ongoing dialogues explaining their sides of the debate.
Despite the split in opinion, there is one common theme among both pro- and anti-union advocates: disappointment.
"We've worked so hard, on both sides, on presenting the cases and then trying to get the information... and then the vote was canceled," said Cantaffa, who works in the cardiac care unit. He added that many nurses had changed their vacation plans to accommodate the original June 2 and 3 election dates.
Mary Ann Crouch, chief nursing officer, has received many e-mails and telephone calls from nurses concerned about the delay.
"I've seen a bit of disappointment," Crouch said, adding that as far as she can tell, most nurses just want to hold the vote and move on.
Although many union supporters were upset by the late-May announcement that the vote had been put off, they hoped the postponement would work to their advantage. Although nurses' opinions seem entrenched, Clinical Nurse Dorcas Butler suggested that the extra time and the NLRB investigation might bolster union support by illuminating the suspicious way in which Duke deals with tough issues.
Overall, Perry said the unionization debates have strained workplace relations.
"Signs of tension are showing, morale is suffering, people are distracted...," said Perry, a clinical research coordinator in the pediatric cardiovascular program. "A rift has been created."
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.