This text is part of the special issue on Trade Unionism
More than 500 days without being able to renew a collective agreement, this is what the members of the Fédération interprofessionnelle de la santé du Québec (FIQ) are experiencing. The union brings together some 80,000 nurses, nursing assistants, respiratory therapists and clinical perfusionists.
During the last talks, the FIQ negotiating committee reached an agreement in principle that was subsequently rejected by a large majority of union members. “This is proof that this agreement did not meet our members’ expectations at all,” emphasizes Julie Bouchard, president of the FIQ. “We took note of it, but the government did not. Subsequently, we made numerous proposals to break the impasse, but without success. I have difficulty understanding why this government persists in turning a deaf ear and refusing the hand that is being extended to it.”
For better care
It is mainly the working conditions of these health professionals that are at the heart of the renewal of the collective agreement. The FIQ had announced its game by choosing as its slogan for the negotiations “Our working conditions are your conditions of care”. For Julie Bouchard, this goes without saying. “Satisfactory working conditions for our health professionals ensure that they are able to provide better care to patients,” she maintains. For example, a more balanced professional/patient ratio is just as beneficial for the patient as it is for the professional.”
Not to mention that such improvements benefit the entire health care sector, she believes. “It’s essential to attracting and retaining staff,” continues Julie Bouchard. “If we want to bring back to the public network the nurses who left for the private sector, we have to offer them attractive working conditions. Otherwise, we won’t succeed.”
Progress has been made on some aspects, including mandatory overtime, an irritant that Health Minister Christian Dubé has committed to making an exception rather than the norm. But others remain contentious. This is particularly the case with flexibility and mobility, which the government would like to see more extensive for health professionals.
“It’s not that we’re against mobility, there’s already some in the network,” says Julie Bouchard. “What we refuse is mobility without clear supervision. There need to be rules, and these rules must take into account the specificities and skills of health professionals. A nurse who is mainly in the operating room can’t be assigned to the emergency room overnight. It’s not the same environment, the same protocols, the same care to be given.”
And while mobility offers more flexibility, it is not very conducive to developing a sense of belonging, argues the union representative. “When you work in a department that is familiar to you and with the same colleagues, you are then part of a real care team. And it is the patient who comes out the winner,” she argues.
A light at the end of the tunnel?
Why would the government stick to its guns when faced with the grievances of health professionals? Julie Bouchard dares to explain: “I think there is a perception, in government, but also in general, that the role of a nurse is to take vital signs, administer medication and give injections. But it is much more complex. We forget too easily that the nurse is often the communication link between the patient and the doctor, who is not at the patient’s bedside like the nurse is.”
Optimistic, Julie Bouchard believes that there is hope of reaching an agreement. “What gives me confidence in reaching an agreement is that health professionals, like the government, have a goal that is, ultimately, common. It is to improve the quality and safety of care. We must now agree on the means to achieve this goal.”
This content was produced by the Special Publications Team of Dutyrelevant to marketing. The writing of the Duty did not take part in it.