DAILY MEMO: HEALTH CARE:

Pro-union nurses point to fired peer

Her experience shows MountainView workers need advocate, they say

Wednesday, July 22, 2009 | 2 a.m.

MountainView using threats to deter nurses, union alleges (7-18-2009)

Archive of Sun health stories

Nurses at MountainView Hospital are poised to vote on union representation and some cite Judy Loftman’s story as a reason they want protection from management.

Administrators terminated Loftman in September after more than a decade of service and a record of mostly excellent performance evaluations.

She claims her legal rights were violated in the process. Loftman wanted to have her daughter Liliana, an attorney, with her as moral support in an important meeting with management. But when Liliana arrived with her mother, administrators denied them entrance and called security, Loftman said.

She cites a Nevada law that says workers have a right to representation during meetings with employers. Labor attorney Andrew L. Rempfer, who is not involved in the case but represents employers, said that law only applies to employees who are represented by unions.

Orsburne Stone, a nurse at the hospital, said Loftman’s experience is a primary reason he is pushing for representation by the California Nurses Association. The nurses are also protesting allegedly unsafe staffing levels, but say some of the problems boil down to a lack of respect for them and for the law.

“They need to know they can’t just run roughshod over people’s legal rights and not pay for it in some way,” Stone said.

MountainView, owned by the Tennessee-based chain Hospital Corporation of America, is one of the few nonunion hospitals in the Las Vegas area. Its 425 nurses were to vote on CNA representation this week, but the election has been delayed because nurses filed charges against the hospital with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging they have been threatened and denied the right to inform nurses about the union.

Loftman, who has another job now, says she’s speaking out because nurses need to be “treated with professionalism, respect and within the bounds of the law.”

Hospital administrators, asked to comment about Loftman’s version of events, released the following statement: “With or without a union, we have a responsibility to our patients to address individual performance issues. We have been and continue to be committed to our progressive grievance processes, which are available to every employee. Our employees don’t need to pay union dues for protection they already have.”

Loftman worked the night shift in the Intensive Care Unit and was a supervisor for about eight years. The hospital dismissed her for “unsatisfactory performance,” according to a letter. She says the story is more complicated.

Loftman’s performance reviews from 2001 to 2007 rate her an exceptional employee. In 2007 she was praised for supporting initiatives that led to a 66 percent reduction in ventilator-associated pneumonia, a hospital-based infection.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services almost decertified MountainView in October because of infection control problems. The hospital saved its certification by issuing a corrective action plan.

Starting in April 2008, with the advent of new management, Loftman says things began getting hostile at work. Loftman said she was getting berated by her supervisor, Todd Isbell, director of critical care, often in front of other nurses.

Some of that treatment can be traced to a medical error caused in part by Loftman. The patient was not injured, and in other cases such errors resulted in correction, not punishment, she said, lest nurses be discouraged from reporting errors.

But in her case, she said, Isbell told her: “I’m going to make an example out of you.”

Loftman’s June 2008 review flags her medication error and says there must be more participation by supervising nurses in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia because it continues to “blight the ICU.”

Three months later Isbell told Loftman he needed to meet with her and a human resources representative. She said she had been reduced to tears by Isbell in previous confrontations, so she wanted her daughter along for support. Management refused and made the call to security.

Loftman said she’s never been pro-union, but the coming vote is a result of the administration’s poor treatment of nurses.

“If nursing staff was respected, valued and listened to — and if MountainView administration was held to the same high ethical standard expected of all the nursing staff — there would not be a vote taken,” she said.

Discussion: 12 comments so far…

By neiman1

7/22/09 at 8:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Nurses want the same protection school teachers seem to have. Wrong medication to a patient should not cost an R.N. her job? How do you protect the patient when medication errors are suppose to mean the nurse is told not to do it again and stay on the job. I am glad they fired her. Incompetent patient care should have drastic consequences. The hospitals exit for the patients, not a job guarantee to a bad nurse just because they have union protection.
By unionstrong

7/22/09 at 9:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

Neiman1- I totally agree with you! I don't see how the union is going to protect a nurse if he or she is making errors on the job. Hospitals have to look out for themselves with all of the patient lawsuits these days. The patient needs to be protected and one way to do that is fire the nurse if they can't do their job.
By sanddunes

7/22/09 at 12:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Did Ms. Loftman have her daughter and an attorney present when she applied for the job? Dismissal for unsatisfactory performance warrants protection from management is a new one. There is this thing called "at will" employment means your job is not guaranteed, which also means you can be let go if you're no longer needed.
By pjm6375

7/22/09 at 2:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

It is unfortunate that Mr. Allen would write such a clearly biased and inaccurate piece. I'm glad some of the readers who have commented appear to have their heads on straight. The same cannot be said for the writer or the nurse in question.

As a physician, we rely on nurses to carry through our orders in a timely and accurate fashion for the benefit of the patients. One thing every nurse learns is the importance of triple checking every medication before it is administered. If an "expierenced" nurse cannot do that basic element of her job correctly, then she was either not paying attention or not practicing her job based on any standard of care, as the vast majority of nurses do. It makes no difference how wonderful she was in the past, we treat patients in the present and we need to make coherent and accurate decisions every single day, otherwise we risk lives.

If I were to make such a horrible mistake, I would have been similarly reprimanded and likely would lose my privileges at the hospital. She was clearly not a target, unless you consider the target incompetence. In this situation, a union would have fought for her, argued her seniority regardless of poor performance, and would have made it difficult for her supervisors to reprimand her when clearly necessary. Sure, the union may protect the nurse in this situation, but nobody is protecting the patient. In fact, it would clearly harm the patient!

Ms. Loftman's attorney daughter may want to spend more time reading up on malpractice law and standard of care and a little less time providing emotional support for her incompitent mother!
By sn1254jk

7/22/09 at 3:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

I applaud Loftman for her action , we need more nurses like her here in Las Vegas and throughout the country . Nursing condition here at Las Vegas is one of the WORST in the nation , nurse patient ratio is 7 to 1 or more . As a registered nurse , I originally moved here from California where nurses get more respect both as a profession and as a caregiver . We get 5 to 1 in med /surg and 4 to 1 for telemetry . And we also respect our nurses aide , where we only assigned them 10 patient per nurses aide , not 1 to 22 like here . These people are human beings and professional and not just numbers .
If we want to attract or retain more nurses from other states or country we NEED to respect them as people . I hope UHS hospital like Valley hospital , Summerlin hospital and Centennial hills or Desert spring hospital administrator read this comment of mine because your hospitals are in the bottom when it comes to the way you respect and treat your nurses.
By sn1254jk

7/22/09 at 3:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

And the very reason why errors gets in because of understaffing . ICU nurses are suppose to have ONLY 2 patients not 3 like Mountain View does . Everywhere in the nation its rule of thumb 1 is to 2. Unless you dont care for your nurses or your patient then make it 3 or more like med / surg . Any comment from Mountain view ? , my friend works there and he gets 3 ICU PATIENTS EVERYTIME HE WORKS THERE . SO UNSAFE FOR THE NURSE `LICENSE AND FOR HIS PATIENTS .
By silver13

7/23/09 at 2:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

As a supervisor, Ms. Loftman would have been considered management during her time at MountainView. This would make her ineligible for CNA union membership.

Why wasn't the ICU director interviewed for his side of this story?
By ohsusannah

7/24/09 at 2:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

Nevada Law states that any employee called into a meeting by his employer is entitled to a support person, and/or legal representation. The law does not state that this 'right' is only available to members of a union. The medication error described in the above article, did not include the administration of an incorrect medication or dose, and the article states that the patient was not harmed. To the physician who commented on the "incompetence" of the nurse in the article above, it was actually the illegible handwriting of a physcian that was the basis of this incident. As his handwriting could not be deciphered, the medication he had in mind, was never ordered. Had he checked his own order against the record in a timely manner, the problem may have be averted all together, or solved within a 12 hour period.
Nurses not only carry out physcian orders, they watch out for, and advocate for their patients, occasionally even challenging an order they may know to be wrong or harmful. How interesting to see who advocates for the nurse. Thank you doctor!
By lvrn1

7/25/09 at 7:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

I am sure there was more to Mrs loftman being let go than was mentioned.As a former coworker I can attest to the fact that Mrs loftman would take 6 smoke breaks a shift each lasting 45 minutes in duration. That is about 6 hours of nonproductive time that was being paid .Some might consider this stealing from an employer.Also, coworkers were instructed not to tell her husband she was out smoking as this fact was kept from him by her.Besides smoking Mrs. Loftman spent the rest of her shift reading romance novels.What is the matter Judy,your new coworkers won't lend you money to pay for gambling debt's?Be thankful you had that job as long as you did.
By ohsusannah

7/25/09 at 12:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

Whether or not Judy Loftman deserved to be terminated, was never the issue of the article.
It was about Hospital management respecting an individual's right, under Nevada law, to have a
support person, and/or legal representaion with
them in a meeting with their employer. This is a 'right-to-work-state' and people in any profession can be terminated or fired, deserved or not, and that is why protecting one's rights,according to the law, is so important.
In any work place there are people who think they can, and should do, another's job in a better way. Doing a better job, or doing it differently, doesn't change the fact that as an
employee, there are laws in place to protect everyone; good employees, bad employees, and those who are just beginning in the work force.
By Retired_RN

7/26/09 at 7:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Responding to osusannah - Regarding the doctor's handwriting. Whatever happened to the nursing practice of contacting the doctor if there is a question about his order? The fact that this patient suffered no ill effects is irrelevant. The fact is that the mistake should not have been made in the first place. This patient was fortunate. Many other victims of this kind of nursing incompetence have not been so lucky. I am sure this was not the only example of this nurses incompetence. How about the whole story.
By unemployed_legal_american_citi

7/28/09 at 8:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

UNIONS MANY YEARS AGO PROTECTED THE HARDWORKING AMERICAN WORKER. NOW ALL the unions do is protect the bums and losers !!! THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY IS A GOOD EXAMPLE !!! MOST UNION CONSTRUCTION WORKERS {ALL TRADES} CANNOT STOCK SHELVES AT WAL MART !!! THE WORST OF THESE ARE THE RELATIVES AND FRIENDS OF BUSSINESS AGENTS WORKING FOR VARIOUS UNIONS !THEY GO FROM JOB TO JOB DOING NOTHING !!! IT IS SOMETHING LIKE THOSE BISHOPS YEARS AGO PROTECTING SICK PRIESTS, THE BUSSINESS AGENTS PROTECT THEIR LAZY RELATIVES AND FRIENDS IT IS A SHAME BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO BE IF NOT PRESENTLY THE DOWNFALL OF UNIONS !! THE NON UNION WORKER IS NO THREAT TO UNIONS , THE FRIENDS AND RELATIVES OF BUSSINESS AGENTS ARE !!!!!