Union Misrepresents its Opposition
to Hospital
April 29, 2004
by
Mike Bates
St. Francis Hospital and Advocate Health Care have each
proposed new hospitals in the Tinley Park –Orland Park area.
It’s expected that the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board
will decide within the next few months whether to approve either proposal.
The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has mounted an aggressive
campaign to influence public opinion against the Advocate facility.
It sent out a mailing to area residents last week asserting, "If
Advocate comes to town, our health care may be at risk."
The union’s brochure claims that if Advocate is permitted to
construct a new hospital in the area, patients may pay more for health
care, might be subjected to harsh collection policies, and perhaps
would no longer be able to use their family doctor.
Reading the union’s mailing raised my suspicions.
Labor unions are primarily in the business of increasing membership
and expanding their power. Oh, yeah, and collecting fat dues from
their members.
They’re not generally known for their attention to the public
interest, unless that public interest intersects with increasing membership,
expanding power and collecting fat dues.
Could the SEIU’s opposition to Advocate possibly be based on
something more selfish than its concerns about higher patient costs
and the other things detailed in its mailing? There’s evidence
that may be exactly the case.
In January of 2003, the SEIU suggested a partnership proposal to
Advocate. Included in it was a demand that Advocate assume a position
of neutrality on union efforts to organize its almost 25,000 employees.
Ed Domansky, the system’s media relations director, told me
that the SEIU called for "wall-to-wall unions at Advocate."
The union also wanted names, home telephone numbers and other personal
contact information of employees.
Advocate balked. Coincidentally no doubt, the SEIU at about that
time launched the Hospital Accountability Project.
The Project, according to SEIU’s website is "aimed at
improving health care by making quality, affordable health care available
to everyone." This can be a commendable goal, depending on the
methods used.
The principal process used by the SEIU and its Hospital Accountability
Project is to vilify Advocate Health Care with a vengeance. In this
drive, it’s enlisted a bunch of Chicago ministers and other
religious leaders, Jesse Jackson – no doubt frustrated at not
having been on TV for several weeks – and Illinois Attorney
General Lisa Madigan who, like most Democrats, finds bashing successful
and large enterprises just too tempting to pass up.
I don’t really care if the Service Employees International
Union wants to attack Advocate. That’s its right. What I do
object to is the SEIU not being upfront about why it’s doing
that.
The union wants more members and their dues. At a time when union
participation is at an all-time low, the SEIU has grown and is now
the largest union in the AFL-CIO. It claims to represent about 750,000
healthcare workers and obviously views that component of the economy
as ripe for expansion.
The SEIU’s tactics with Advocate represents a departure from
traditional ways of organizing employees. The standard method has
been to gather signatures of 30 percent or more of the workers. Then
the National Labor Relations Board is petitioned and an election is
conducted to determine representation.
But these days it can be difficult to persuade a significant percentage
of the workforce to seek collective bargaining. There have been too
many instances of unions representing themselves rather than the interests
of their membership.
It may be easier to wage a war of vilification against an employer.
Massive negative publicity and the attendant expenses could push an
employer to grease the way for the union to move in.
The SEIU maintains its interest is in affordable health care. There
isn’t, however, normally a correlation between unions and lower
costs. According to the AFL-CIO, weekly median earnings of a union
worker are 27 percent greater than those of non-union employees. So
will collective bargaining really make health care more affordable?
The Service Employees International Union should set aside the pretense
and be candid about its motives. It’s clear that if the SEIU
succeeded in unionizing Advocate Health Care, the corporate character
assassination would end immediately.
Mike Bates