🔒Editorial: The Saint Vincent Hospital strike has no winners, only losers

Labor unions have been an integral part of the American economy for a long time, and most of our modern worker protections are the result of union influence. Today, as worker wages have stagnated and the gap between the average worker’s pay and the CEO’s has continued to grow out of proportion, unions should have a vital role. Yet, a closer look at the Massachusetts Nurses Association union strike at Saint Vincent Hospital in Worcester over the past six months (and counting) serves as an example of why unions continue to struggle.

By most measures we outside of the fracas can see, the strike is a failure. And, we mean a failure on both sides. Maybe the negotiations were civil at the bargaining table, but both sides came out of that room trading barbs and issuing inflammatory press releases. From the MNA side, the headline in the fight was about patient-to-nurse ratios in key areas of the hospital – a years-long battle the union is having with all Massachusetts hospitals. But did the strike benefit the union and its negotiating stance more than its members out on the picket lines? Close to 700 nurses just spent the better part of six months walking outside a hospital during a pandemic, when their services were sorely needed inside. Yes, workers have the right to strike, but this one should never have been allowed to drag on for so long. Mediation and a settlement should have been required, or imposed if necessary, leaving any work stoppage at closer to one month, not a record-breaking six-plus months.

Ultimately, no one was better off as a result of the strike.

The hospital? No. An $18-billion corporation with stockholders to please – Saint Vincent’s parent Tenet Healthcare of Dallas – is never going to be cast as the good guy. The hospital absorbed the increased cost of replacement nurses, as well as a reduction in capacity and income – and it was forced to pay for more than $3 million in police details to safeguard the strikers, incoming patients, and employees. The inevitable sparring, which is expected in high stakes negotiations, turned uglier by the month, and served more to weaken the hospital’s position than strengthen it. The same is true for the union: A lot of cheap shots were thrown around in the news, which seemed to harden positions, not make a compromise easier to achieve.

The patients? No. While the hospital has filled in nursing positions with replacements, it’s hard to imagine they could match the expertise and efficiency of the existing staff. The hospital was forced to close 80 inpatient beds at the end of July, further reducing services essential to the community.

Striking nurses? No. Certainly they received pay raises and other benefits during the negotiations, but the ultimate staffing ratio language doesn’t appear to have produced the win they were looking for. Many nurses have lost their shifts, while others may lose their jobs altogether if this strike is not brought to a swift close.

As MNA and Tenet limp toward the finish line, a key takeaway is when two sides trade in an increasingly vitriolic battle of words, it becomes awfully hard to back off and take a fresh look. Resentments set in, jaws clench, and the goodwill needed to make a fair deal dissipates.

In a community like Worcester where the norm is to work hard at putting egos aside and achieve the common good with a minimum of political-point scoring, this long strike was a great disappointment. We hope the two sides can finally wrap up this ugly chapter, join hands, and work again for the common good.