Anybody wondering about causes of the nursing shortage?

The biggest problem is that most of the nurses today (like me) are reaching retirement age & there are not enough starting out to replace them. Many professions also are open now to people who would have gone into nursing before, but now there are more lucrative jobs for them. One of the other problems is that the attitude of administration in hospitals has always been "if you don't like it you can leave" which does not help the situation.When good nurses complain about the nurse to patient ratio, nothing is done. Nurses don't get job satisfaction if they don't have time to give good nursing care. I would never go back to hospital nursing because of this & have worked for the last 10 years in hospice. I can treat patients with more personal care than I could give in a hospital where I'd be lucky to even see my patients twice in a shift because of the volume of work that is assigned. I also remember one incident where a nurse (RN) was the only one who could do IV ABTs on the floor and was on the verge of tears when she called for help & was told she had to "deal with it" & if she went home she'd be fired. She stayed but resigned after that (I would have too). Incidentally that hospital just closed with a reputation for giving "poor nursing care". I wonder why? Whatever job you have, you want to feel satisfaction at the end of your shift. Good nurses won't stay if they don't.

Nursing Shortage Causes

The causes of the nursing shortage are simple. It is a case of supply and demand. There are simply more nurses in demand than are being supplied.

There are no figures anywhere to show that more nurses are being produced than are being demanded by the system in the US or Canada.

The Philippines is one of the few countries that produces more nurses that they can employ. They have a national strategy to educate and export nurses to meet the demand in countries other than their own. And it is not because nurses are not in demand in the Philippines, but rather that they simply will not employ them and pay then what they are worth.

"She's been assaulted, urinated on (not by accident), spat on, etc. And if the SHTF, you can bet the hospital isn't even thinking they might back her up. And we wonder how to get good people to do a good job!"

So is there a difference in being "urinated on" versus emptying urine from a bag ? or cleaning out a sewer backup?

Just like scaling a bridge, digging a ditch, or cleaning out a clogged sewer this is part of the job of a nurse.

However, there should be protection for workers from such assaults and if the there was an active labor union for nurses, supported by legislation that protects workers from assault, this would be handled as part of the labor management (LMC) committee in the workplace.

"And we wonder how to get good people to do a good job!"

If your workplace is organized with labor unions there should be a mechanism in place to address such working conditions.

All workplaces should have a protocol for protection against violence. For those work areas where violence may be expected because of environmental or disease related conditions then there definitely has to be a protocol to protect workers.

If there was a good labor union in place and the employee was doing the job within the required standards of the profession ( if any are in place), then it does not matter who backs up the employee.

When standards are in place to protect the public they also protect the employee because no employee can do any good for the public they serve if they are stressed out and leaving the profession because of poor working conditions. Just how does that serve the public interest?

In the public sector, labor unions serve the public interest.

You get people to do a good job first by making sure they are well educated and know what the requirements are for "doing a good job".

Does "doing a good job" mean serving the public in their best interest? or doing what you are told to do by your employer? Ther is a big difference between the two.

Then you make sure that professionals, like nurses, are supported in their practice environment with practice standards that serve the public interest ( not the employer's interest), good leadership, well established polices, and opportunities to engage in decisions about their own work environment.

The only people who are experts in the work are the people who do the work!

Labor unions serve to protect the public interest by protecting jobs so that workers can fully engage in their work to serve the public without fear of losing their job should their mandate to serve the public interest conflict with the interest of the employer.

There's no shortage around here - one local hospital is laying off nurses.

What I have seen, even when there was a shortage, was administration spending all sorts of money on recruitment, but not doing simple things to keep the good nurses happy. Simple things, like having workable schedules, parking issues, room assignments - stuff that is relatively easy to fix, compared to hiring people.

A lot of good nurses move to different jobs, while the dead wood floats to the top, so we all suffer.

Good question. I work in a hospital where senior management are nurses. The rub is that they haven't practiced in years. So, they've forgotten what it's like in the trenches.

Hospital management is often driven by CYA. (That's the hospital's A, not the employees).

Often times the good nurses (and other staff) are forced out, so that newer (and cheaper) nurses can be brought in.

Medicine /healthcare has become like most businesses. As one senior surgeon I know once said, "If you wonder about the hospital's motivation, follow the money trail."

It's depressing at times. If it wasn't for the patients & my co-workers.

Agree with ckm. Some nurse managers are far removed from patient care. (I already reported on this site about one who bragged she never emptied a bedpan.) Some can be suborned by bonuses to cut costs. More patients cared for by fewer nurses.