UPDATE TO SEIU-WEST MEMBERS RE: SASKATCHEWAN HEALTH AUTHORITY (SHA) EMPLOYEE PROOF OF VACCINATION POLICY DIRECTIVE

October 22, 2021

Since we last updated members, we have pressed the SHA for further details about the declaration form you’ve been asked to fill out, the “monitored testing” program for those who don’t get vaccinated, and what the SHA’s next steps are.

We have received some information we want to share with you, as well as update you on what questions remain unanswered.

THE DECLARATION FORM

• So far, 38,000 staff have completed the declaration:
  • 98% are already vaccinated or committing to get vaccinated
  • less than 2% are seeking an accommodation;
  • 1% are participating in the monitored testing program.
• A further 15% of SHA staff have not responded to the declaration form.
  • The SHA will be following up with them via email to remind them of the need for compliance with the policy. There is a warning in the email that failure to comply with the vaccination policy may result in discipline up to and including termination. There is no acknowledgement of the structural deficiencies in the declaration form, nor instructions on how to provide their response. 
• Outstanding issues:
  • Who will SHA share employees’ vaccination information with?
  • How does an employee respond with their declaration as the form is no longer available and no alternate method of communication has been identified?
  • What scientific data is the SHA relying on as proof that the currently available vaccines are effective?

THE TESTING PROGRAM

• This will be a phased in process with a go-live date of November 15.
• Will be using the Rapid Antigen tests 3x week (Sunday/Tues/Thur). Staff in this program can test, upload a screen shot of the results with name/date to their MyConnection.
• The tests provided by the federal government for free aren’t able to be used for this program.
• The $225/month testing fee is a flat rate, regardless of whether you are full-time, part-time, or casual.
• Outstanding issues:
  • Will employees be sent an invoice, or will there be a payroll deduction?
  • If by payroll deduction, how will casuals who may not be working get a payroll deduction done?
  • What about employees who are on a leave?
  • Is the cost of the test tax-deductible?

We will continue to follow up on our outstanding questions and report back to the membership.

Respectfully,

Barbara Cape

President

SEIU-West

(For a link to the Q&A from the Town Hall event held October 13, 2021, please click here.)

On October 13 and 14, 2021 President Barbara Cape and Director of Contract Bargaining and Enforcement, Bob Laurie, answered members' questions about the SHA Proof of Vaccination Policy Directive. The Zoom meeting was recorded to ensure accuracy in responding to these questions. All participants were encouraged to put their question in the chat – and questions from members were gathered prior to the meeting…many with the same themes.

SEIU-West stated that the Union’s role was not to defend or explain the SHA policy. SEIU-West was not consulted and we continue to wait for answers on many of the same questions the members have been asking. We also are not here to debate the different science references or legal citations that members have gathered from other sources. We discussed the statement from the SEIU-West Executive Board on the SHA Proof of COVID Vaccination Policy. We shared on our website, and on screen, the memo that was issued from the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission (SHRC). We shared the SHRC statement that the Employer simply putting in place a policy doesn’t violate an individual’s human rights, provided there is a way to accommodate based on protected grounds, such as medical or religious exemptions.

The SEIU-West Executive Board continues to strongly encourage members to seek out advice from their family health care provider and get vaccinated.

COVID-19 Vaccination Self-Declaration form UPDATE: SEIU-West can now advise that members should use the following statement and send to the SHA if there is an issue with the pre-populated answer options not truthfully and correctly describing your intentions:

Date:

To Blake McMullen; [email protected] 

I have been advised by my Union to inform you I cannot truthfully and correctly complete the SHA Declaration of COVID-19 Vaccination Status because the Employer response options provided do not describe my intention.

Your Name

Save/keep a copy for your records. Do not send a copy to the Member Resource Center.

Jaycen: I fully understand the unions position in assisting with accommodations related to the Proof of vaccination. However, will the union also stand by its vaccinated members when they refuse work on the grounds of unsafe work conditions? Ie. working along side unvaccinated members.

A: I appreciate your question; the issue of this pandemic and its impact on frontline staff has been an occupational health and mental health nightmare! The short answer is yes, we will continue to stand by our members. We will stand by our vaccinated members as well as those who are unvaccinated but managing their participation with the SHA (or other employers) policies in different ways. The employer has a requirement to provide a safe workplace; this policy from the SHA has been framed in part as an occupational health and safety initiative. But the policy also has impacts that provoke questions of human rights and privacy rights. We will ensure that we represent the whole membership, fairly and without bias.

Theresita: Where is the legal proof of laws to JUSTIFY the employer’s demands of forced vaccinations and or PCR testing (as there is no LAW requiring vaccinations or testing be mandatory in legislation, acts or laws, as they are a medical procedure)? No other act, order or policy supersedes law.

A: The law that allows the employer to introduce policies is the Saskatchewan Employment Act. The policy they have introduced is a Proof of Vaccination policy. Neither the proof of vaccination nor the testing meet the definition of a medical procedure.

Has there been a thorough JOB ANALYSIS done to make mandatory testing a bona fide occupational requirement (BFOR)?

A: We are not aware of the SHA has done an assessment of bona fide job requirement for this policy, but we aren’t sure that it is required as it’s a policy that is applicable to all staff.

Filling out the declaration, whether you are vaccinated or unvaccinated by choosing the exemption, one is being asked for their private medical health information which is a VIOLATION of the Privacy Act.

A: In reviewing advice from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, the employer can indeed introduce this policy and not be in violation of privacy legislation provided that they communicate how the information will be stored in a confidential manner; limit access to only those who must see the information; and destroy the information after it is no longer needed

The threat of disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment for not complying with their policy directive because of its basis on unlawful stipulations is COERCION and punishable under the Criminal Code.

A: The SHA is requiring people to comply with this policy in much the same fashion as other policies – non-compliance is subject to progressive discipline. We aren’t commenting on the question of criminal code issues, but we agree that the way this is being implemented is not collegial

Mandatory testing of only a certain identifiable group of people is DISCRIMINATORY as it is a well-known fact that everybody can be infected with SARS CoV-2 and can transmit it if infected. This discriminatory bias is meant to punish a particular group, to put undue hardship on them and to continue singling out healthy people as a problem. It is psychological HARASSMENT and is a violation of established workplace policy. These are violations also of the CBA Articles 4.01 and 4.02.

A: Participating in the monitored testing program doesn’t meet the standard of discrimination because it’s offered as an alternative to providing proof of vaccination. Discrimination is a legal term and is based on the protected status that the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission has laid out in their memo on our website.

The mandatory testing if done on the employees’ cost and personal time is designed to make the performance of one’s ordinary work duties increasingly OPPRESSIVE AND UNSUSTAINABLE. It reaches a point where one could argue that it constitutes a BREACH OF CONTRACT. Enforcing this policy then is meant to coerce an employee to vaccination which is tantamount to making it mandatory. 

A: We have identified many of the same concerns as our members about the vagueness of the details (if any) provided by SHA with regard to the mandatory testing program: lack of details regarding access; pricing; frequency have all created a number of concerns for all of us. We are continuing to follow up with SHA on these questions. As well, SEIU-West, CUPE and SGEU have all requested that the SHA provide the testing to our members.

If ALL employees are subjected to PCR testing, all acceptable specimens should be an option for testing including the less invasive spit gargle or sputum samples.  The frequent use of the nasopharyngeal swab sterilized with Ethylene Oxide can potentially cause harm.  Will the employer accept the liability for any immediate and future harm to an employee for being subjected to such frequent medical procedure?  Based on the ethics of INFORMED CONSENT, all risks should be made available no matter how small or unlikely.  If the only choice for an acceptable sample for PCR testing is the nasopharyngeal swab, what happens to an employee who exercises their right not to give their INFORMED CONSENT to the medical procedure?  This is also supported by CBA article 23.03 (c) An employee has the right to refuse to perform any particular act or series of acts if he/she has reasonable grounds to believe that the acts or series of acts is unusually dangerous to his/her health or safety.

And as The Canadian Constitutional Act states: 52 (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. —Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 

Every Canadian has a legal right to life, liberty and security of the person (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom Section 7).  The security of a person can lie in one's ability to earn a living.  Violating this right by terminating an employee based on unlawful requests by the employer is a violation against the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom.

This is a pivotal time in the history of healthcare and of all the people of Canada. This is an opportunity for the SEIU West to stand up against these unlawful requests by the employer. May it be written in history that SEIU West did the right thing and fought for and upheld the legal rights of not only its members but of ALL Canadians. Note: these template questions were asked by a few members, but the response is only repeated here once.

Lori: Are both vaccinated and unvaccinated going to be required to test? If not, how is that not discrimination? We all know that fully vaccinated individuals can acquire and transmit the virus. 2. Do I have to fill out the self declaration form when I don't even know what I'm agreeing to? I have no information as to cost of the test, nor frequency of testing! I do not feel comfortable signing anything that doesn't have all of the information.

A: As part of the SHA proof of vaccination policy, those who decline to show proof of vaccination will be required to test in the monitored testing program. However, if a person is vaccinated and exhibiting symptoms, they should still call 811 and get tested.  Also, those who are accommodated will need to still be tested/monitored in some fashion. Our advice on the declaration remains the same: comply with the requirement. If you are unable to complete the form because your answer would be incorrect or dishonest, we ask that you send the email above (in red) to the SHA. Your concerns about frequency and access are concerns that we share as well.  the implementation process on this policy has been hugely problematic.

Jeannette: 1 How do we fill out the declaration without being properly informed and what if we wait to fill it out until such time as we are properly informed? If we don’t sign will we be putting our jobs in danger but if we do sign then we will be held accountable as we signed a legal and binding document. Where does testing take place, why were the home tests good enough until now, how much is it going to cost, how often will we have to test, how long do they project we will have to test, how often do we have to test. There are so many questions left unanswered. 2 What if this causes undue hardship for us as employees to have to pay for testing just because we choose not to be vaccinated at this time. 3 They are no longer testing asymptomatic people so why test if we are asymptomatic 4 If everyone, vaccinated or not, can spread it then why does everyone not have to be tested – this is very discriminatory.

We are sharing your concerns with lack of information and clarity on the declaration forms and we’re following up with SHA on these questions. The cost is a question that we are seeking clarity on as well, including what does that $225/month cover? On the question of testing, those who are vaccinated will continue to be tested if they exhibit symptoms. The SHA has identified that those who are vaccinated can get COVID, but as a general rule, their symptoms are less severe and there is less likelihood of transmission.

Chrissy: I do not want to sign the Declaration of Covid 19 Vaccination Status. I do not feel comfortable signing the form. It is not clear what it all entails and I am being coerced in doing so. This is not right. Can you help me navigate this challenging situation?

A: We are encouraging our members to contact the SHA with the statement above in red. SEIU-West is following up with specific questions regarding the policy and will update our membership accordingly.

Tammy: I have a question if we dont disclose or status or test they are putting us on unpaid leave. I am a contract worker can they do this? Do they not have to pay me? The attitude is extremely intimidating do this or else basically. My medical info is it not private and protected by doc patient privilege? I feel this is wrong forcing someone to do something for a job. Any insight would be greatly appreciated

A: One of the options identified by the SHA is putting those who don’t comply with the policy on unpaid leave, and no, you would not be paid. As a contract worker, you are also required to follow the policies of the SHA. The goal is to get people vaccinated, as stated by the SHA.

Your medical information is protected, however, the advice from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner is that the employer can introduce a proof of vaccination policy provided they identify how they will keep your information confidential; limit access to that information; and identify how they will securely destroy that information once it is no longer needed.

Sherlynn: How can SEIU-West stand behind said-vaccine for the COVID-19 and the Employer COVID-19 Vaccination Policies? There is NO longterm effects known on these said-vaccines. And sadly, one doesn’t even know the effects on the people who have succumbed to 1 and/or 2 said-vaccine and potentially many many more said-vaccines/boosters, either voluntarily or through coercion. #2. Where is option 5?? on the Declaration of COVID-19 Vaccination Status for those that do not consent and HOW is SEIU-West going to support us? Where is the direction from OUR UNION? Where is the option for those whom do not consent to the unknown said-vaccineS, do not consent to the testing with unknown safety and accuracy, do not consent to releasing to whomever OUR personal and private health information? [“The SHA will collect, and review evidence provided by you in relation to your vaccination status. Access to identifiable information is limited to those who need to know for the purposes of administering the policy directive. The SHA will be storing the information provided on a SHA independent, stand-alone, secured server. Reports generated with vaccination data that are shared with the Ministry of Health and other partners do not contain any personal data.”] #3. How can we declare ANYTHING without all the policy information? How many more said-vaccines will keep being recommended and recommended to be deemed fully vaccinated? How often is the testing? How can we even select to participate in the monitored testing process at our OWN expense when WE do NOT have the information?!? How come one cannot declare creed which is directly inline with morals and values for accommodation? This is discriminatory. #4 It is also discriminatory that only the without said-vaccine are the ones to be tested as ALL can carry and spread. #5 Also discriminatory is any close-contact at work in the workplace for those without said-vaccine will be put off work unpaid, however not those with the said-vaccine. Sadly the rules (goal posts) keep changing daily and make absolutely no sense. There are so many unknowns that it extremely concerns me that SEIU -West can support any of this. Give me some direction as I AM NOT CONSENTING with what is before US ”

A: SEIU-West isn’t standing behind the employer’s policy, we are clearly stating what our research and the legal precedents are that govern our work. We have set out that the legal opinion is that an employer can introduce such a policy as proof of vaccinations.

We are not commenting on the science or legal advice that people have gathered from other sources. If you feel that by completing the SHA declaration that you would not be able to do so truthfully, then we have advised our members to send the above noted statement in red. SEIU-West will represent our membership regardless of their vaccination status.

We agree that this policy’s roll-out has not provided enough clarity or information for members to understand the impact of the policy. As mentioned in previous responses, we are continuing to follow up on questions around access; frequency of testing; and clarity about the confidentiality and security of members’ vaccination status.

In the advice provided by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, having a personal preference or opinion about the policy doesn’t equate to a protected status for accommodation under the legislation.

Linda: I still have quite with the Declaration we are supposed to fill out by the 15th, it doesn’t say how much the test or what will happen or if they will pay for it or anything, is there not a way you can help us ? Since Dr’s can’t give out accommodations this isn’t even fair Please fight for us because I am not the only one and my co workers are scare of loosing their jobs or being permanent damages from the vaccination, this is crazy Thanks everyone is getting desperate.

Subsequent to the townhall meetings, on October 14, SHA identified that the cost for the monitored testing program was $225/month. SEIU-West, CUPE and SGEU have written to the SHA to recommend that the testing be provided by the employer.

Doctor’s can indeed provide objective medical to support a medical accommodation, but if you do not have grounds for an accomodation, they will not provide it to you.

We are not aware of permanent damage from the vaccines.

Laura: If placed on Administrative leave, how will this affect my pension? Will I have option to make payments to pension, so not to lose out at retirement.

A: We don’t have ‘administrative leave’ in our collective agreement. If placed on an unpaid leave of absence, you would not be paid and so it would indeed affect your pension contributions.

You can request to pay both your and the employer’s portion of pension contributions, but this would be subject to the terms of SHEPP

Alyssia: Article 19 in the SEIU-West union book, 19.09-reimbursement of expenses. The employer shall be reimbursed for all substantiated expenses incurred while performing required duties on behalf of the employer. This should pretain to the testing costs, should it not?

A: Unfortunately, this article would not apply because it references performing the required duties of your job – specifically the tasks in your job description. Compliance with the policy by way of the monitored testing program wouldn’t fit within that definition.

Jamie: My question is if I fill the declaration form out is it saying that I have no problem Paying to get tested? Because that is the problem I can’t afford to pay to get tested but I am not getting the vaccine. And why all our ppe, etc is paid for but not this?

A: I believe the form is asking you to declare whether you intend to participate in this policy by showing proof of vaccination or the monitored testing program. Or, if you are going to be seeking a medical or religious exemption and be accommodated.

COVID-19 Vaccination Self-Declaration form UPDATE: SEIU-West can now advise that members should use the following statement and send to the SHA if there is an issue with the pre-populated answer options not truthfully and correctly describing your intentions:

Date:

To Blake McMullen; [email protected] 

I have been advised by my Union to inform you I cannot truthfully and correctly complete the SHA Declaration of COVID-19 Vaccination Status because the Employer response options provided do not describe my intention.

Your Name

Save/keep a copy for your records. Do not send a copy to the Member Resource Center.

Chantelle: As they decides email the cost of testing as $225 a month, what does an employee do now? That is a huge chunk of money to go towards something that has been handed out freely for the past 19 months. For 19 months we were front line workers who were thanked for the hard work we do, and now because we question what is going on we are treated like disgusting, virus ridden humans? For 19 months I watched covid swabs come in troves, symptomatic and asymptomatic. Now we are not able to take advantage our our health care system and got free testing? Are you still trying for free testing? I am not signing the declaration as I feel like to test would be an enormous pay cut to myself and husband who works in the region. But we can not loose our jobs as we need to feed and house our kids. There is no winning with this. If we get the vaccine that would be going against what we want. It would be putting something in my body to keep my job that I love and do mot want to loose. But we can not afford to test.... What do we do? Simply but....what do we do?”

A: The question of affordability is one that we will raise with the SHA. In the past when we have asked about cost, the SHA has reminded us that the vaccine is free. This direction is from Premier Scott Moe to get more people vaccinated – that appears to be the driving motivation here that the government and the SHA have been quite direct on.

SEIU-West cannot answer these questions for you – that is up to you to decide. The Public Health Agency of Canada has endorsed and recommended the vaccines; the governments across Canada of all political stripes have endorsed the vaccines; and SEIU-West recommends that our members get vaccinated.  We would encourage you to talk with your family doctor and make the decision to get vaccinated.

Tanya: Hi, can the $225 testing fee be changed according to our wages? Is the testing to take place at our homebase or do we have to travel to a city? How long is this mandate in place for?

A: We’ll follow up on these questions with the SHA re: adjustment based on wage…however, I don’t think they’ll make that modification. We don’t have an end date in sight. Because it’s a ‘policy directive’ it is temporary  and is usually in effect for no more than 1 year and can be ended whenever it is determined to no longer be needed.

Elaine: part-time employees working one week on, one week off, confirmation required that testing is not required during the week off. If an employee is self-paying, will the rate charged ($225 per month) be pro-rated? - what proof needs to be provided for religious exemption? - if you had covid, is natural immunity recognized in anyway? - if you had covid, inquiry of the validity of testing meaning is it true that you will test positive for covid for 3 months following diagnosis? How will this be tracked in regard to testing? ”

A: We’ll follow up on the question around pro-rating.

You’ll need to get clarity from the SHA regarding specifically what they will require for a religious exemption, however it is usually a letter from your place of worship indicating a long-held belief of the faith.

Natural immunity is not being taken into account.

The validity of the testing is a question I recommend that you ask the SHA.

Sherry: I think 2014 SHA tried to make the flu vaccine mandatory, what was the unions thoughts when they were trying to do this? Were you for it or against it? If you were against it, how is this mandate any different?

A: There are several differences: the flu vaccine doesn’t have the scientifically stated efficacy of the current vaccines for COVID-19; the flu isn’t a global pandemic – COVID-19 is; the Government of Saskatchewan has given the legal authority for employers’ to introduce these policies.

Immunize or Mask Policy was voluntary, not mandatory. Repealed in 2015.

Sheila: What happens if I don't sign the declaration? SHA sent out in daily brief that $225. will be deducted from paycheck for testing.

A: We are recommending that members respond with the message to SHA set out in red at the top of this post. If you don’t comply, the employer has stated that they will put people off work on an unpaid leave of absence.

Eloise: How does the union protect us from discrimination? Forcing one group of people to undergo regular covid testing and not another group, is nothing short of discrimination especially when both groups are equally susceptible to contracting and transmitting covid.

A: The SHA policy is providing options to comply with the policy: show proof of vaccination or agree to participate in the monitored testing program. The policy is also allowing for an accommodation based on protected grounds.

This doesn’t meet the definition of discrimination under the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code because they are considering the need for a medical or religious exemption. A personal opinion about vaccines doesn’t meet the test for an argument under the legislation for discrimination.

The science that the SHA has shared outlines that while vaccinated people can get COVID-19, the likelihood is that is will be less severe than those who are unvaccinated and less likely to spread to others.

Sherlynn: A flat $225 per month, no frequency indicated of testing. This is undue hardship at top wage. What about part time and casual?

A: We are following up on the questions of frequency and whether it is pro-rated for those who are part-time and casual.

Matt: Since this is a direct gov mandate (and not a proxy bullying tactic like all previous) this actually falls within the Charter.

A: The mandate from government is to develop a proof of vaccination policy.

The question of constitutional rights is not as black and white as people think. Section 1 of the Cdn Charter of Rights and Freedoms sets out the following: “The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only such reasonable limits as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” The challenge here is that there is an argument to be made that in the middle of a global pandemic, all rights are not absolute.

Hea: We are not new hires, so wouldn't them creating new "rules" be a break to the contract?

A: The CBA allows employers to establish policies. Unless there is a violation of our collective agreement, there isn’t a ‘break’ to the contract.

Gina: 1. How often is the testing to be done? 2. How long is the testing going to be for? What happens if someone tests positive? How will testing be handled then?

A: We’ll follow up on these questions with SHA and report back to the membership. We have asked many of these questions previously but the response has been “We’ll get back to you.”

Mel: using this policy to encourage vaccination and threatening our employment and income is not coercion or a threat?

A: According to the advice from the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner and previous arbitration decisions, the short answer is no. Options for compliance need to be made available. Policies must be reasonable; communicated clearly; and applied evenly throughout the membership. We may not like how they are implementing this and have a lot of questions, but a personal choice or opinion doesn’t make this coercion.

Leah: Are you fighting for the cost because now they are saying 225 a month

A: We are still requesting that the employer provide the tests and are following up on a number of questions now that the cost has been announced.

Jenn: Since the SHA is requesting regular testing if the employee chooses to not vaccinate, why is SHA not paying for/supplying the tests?? Why should the cost be the employee's responsibility?

A: Ultimately, the goal for the SHA is to get all staff vaccinated if they are not accommodated. While some employers are currently offering to pay for the tests, not all policies have to be the same.

Gina: What can we do about workplace harassment, bullying, and discrimination?

A: This should be reported via the Occupational Health and Safety reporting mechanisms. Whether it’s the ‘1600 report line’ or a written form for the local OHS committee. We need to remember that this is the SHA’s policy and not attack each other. If you feel comfortable to encourage someone to get vaccinated, please do so. But the enforcement of the SHA policy is for management to manage – we must remember to be respectful of each other.

Sandra: Reports generated with vaccination data that are shared with the Ministry of Health and other partners. WHO I want to know are these other partners???

A: We’ll follow up with the SHA on this question and report back to the membership.

Lou Ellen: Some rural sites do not have rapid testing and employees will have to travel long distances for example employees in Eastend will have to travel to SC they will also need to take days off to accomdate will the union help gat costs covered

Access and frequency are high on the list of follow up questions we have for the SHA. SEIU-West, CUPE and SGEU want the employer to provide this testing, preferably in the facility.

Jill: Do you have to declare if you are maternity leave, sick leave, not currently working? etc? Also, why is natural immunity not considered? Isn’t the vaccination made to mimic nature?

A: We are following up on the requirement for those who are currently on a leave or when people take vacation and the requirements for the testing program. Natural immunity is not being considered by the SHA.

Janice: The employer is saying a lot of things like natural immunity is not as strong as vaccination and many other items we have brought forward. Can we get the actual proof from the employer to show us where they are getting this data which does not coincide with what the FDA, WHO and CDC

A: We’ll recommend that the employer share the scientific data they are relying on, including updating this as the science evolves. I believe that this was shared in the Daily Rounds in late September, but we’ll follow up with the employer.

Laura: If placed on Admin leave will it be an approved leave or non-approved leave by the employer?

A: SEIU-West doesn’t have ‘Administrative leave’ in our collective agreement. This would likely be an unpaid leave of absence.

Val: can/will the union continue to assist that we aren't required to get a 2nd Vax, as I received 1st Vax today to avoid unpaid leave in the future.

A: We encourage all members to get vaccinated – talk with your family doctor and get both vaccinations.

Thanks to everyone for participating in the townhalls. We will continue to provide advice to our members as this issue evolves and changes.  Our Member Resource Center is currently inundated with member calls and messages, so we ask for your patience as we continue to answer your questions.  We will respond in the order that we’ve received them. We thank you for remaining respectful as we work through these issues together.

Respectfully,

Barbara Cape

President SEIU-West

(For a link to the Q&A from the Town Hall event held October 14, 2021, please click here.)

President Barbara Cape and Director of Contract Bargaining and Enforcement, Bob Laurie, answered members questions about the SHA Proof of Vaccination Policy Directive.  The Zoom meeting was recorded to provide accuracy in responding to these questions.  All participants were encouraged to put their question in the chat – and questions from members were gathered prior to the meeting…many with the same theme.

SEIU-West stated that we were not going to defend or explain the SHA policy, as it wasn’t our policy. SEIU-West was not consulted and we continue to wait for answers on many of the same questions the members have been asking.  We also are not here to debate the different science references or legal citations that members have gathered from other sources.  We discussed the statement from the SEIU-West Executive Board and shared on our website, and on screen, the memo that was issued from the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission (SHRC).  We reiterated that the SHRC states that simply by putting in place a policy doesn’t violate an individual’s human rights, provided there is room to accommodate based on protected grounds, such as medical or religious exemptions.

The SEIU-West Executive Board continues to encourage members to seek out advice from their family doctor and get vaccinated.

UPDATE: and we can now advise that members should use the following statement and send to the SHA if there is an issue with:

Date:

To Blake McMullen; [email protected] 

I have been advised by my Union to inform you I cannot truthfully and correctly complete the SHA Declaration of COVID-19 Vaccination Status because the Employer response options provided do not describe my intention.

Your Name

Save/keep a copy for your records. Do not send a copy to the Member Resource Center.

Below are some of the questions we’ve received.

Terrilyn: What is seiu-west doing to help support and protect its members regarding visitors during COVID? I understand staff need to be vaxed or test negative why is their not a push for a policy for visitors? Or is there and it's just behind the scenes? Also what about the overworked exhausted staff still continuously being madated through out this pandemic and being told to phone their coworkers and harass them into coming into work?

A: The SHA policy on proof of vaccination is only directed at staff, including contractors and volunteers. It doesn’t apply to visitors.  We have asked SHA what they are doing to ensure the safety or the residents and staff as it relates to visitors, but they have not indicated they are going to bring in any stronger enforcement measures other than reduced presence and mandatory masking.  This is disappointing because SEIU-West believes that this is an avenue that we should be addressed to reduce COVID-19 transmissions, along with stronger public health orders to limit gathering sizes.

Kevin: My question is what do we do when patients refuse to wear a mask in an open treatment area for example emergency or renal kidney unit.

A: We recommend that you report that to your supervisor or manager immediately. But it is not up to members to enforce the policy – that is the management’s job.  If mandatory masking is a requirement, then this should be enforced by the SHA.

Ken: Have read your statement but I still don’t understand why I have to pay weekly or more to prove I don’t have COVID Are long term care homes going to test residents to prove to me they don’t have COVID at there expense I don’t think so . I have no problem going for testing but making unvaccinated workers pay for this is bullying and should not be tolerated.

A: The SHA policy doesn’t apply to residents of LTC facilities. SEIU-West has advocated to have the testing done in facility by the employer to make it less onerous on staff to participate in this program.  Cost and access of the tests are a concern that we have as well; the three healthcare provider unions, SEIU-West, CUPE and SGEU, have all requested the employer consider this in their implementation.

Sherri: My question/concern is if SHA is concerned for their employees and patients, why aren't all employees being tested as there is evidence that even vaccinated employees carry high viral loads when asymptomatic.

A: The scientific evidence that SHA has shared shows that there is a reduced infection and transmission rate for those who are vaccinated. Vaccinated staff will continue to be tested when symptomatic, as is the practice now.  The option for unvaccinated staff to be compliant with the policy is to be tested instead of being vaccinated.

Janet: Why do we have to declare anything my health information is my private information? Why do we have to pay for testing when Canada post employees are provided with the at home rapid test and the rapid tests are good enough for Canada post same province? (Also 2/3 of the Federal staff are exempt from testing or vaccinations) If we are forced to be tested All employees should be tested as the vaccinated still carry the same viral load as unvaccinated. How can we self declare to anything I.e. testing when we don't know type of test, frequency of testing or cost of testing? Please get this entire policy dropped.

A: Employers are allowed to introduce policies that are reasonable, clearly communicated; administered in a fair and consistent way and compliant with the collective agreement.

The Saskatchewan Office of the Privacy Commissioner has provided advice that employers requesting proof of vaccination doesn’t violate private information standards, provided the employer limits the collection of this information; limits who has access to this information; and ensures the confidentiality of this information.

SEIU-West has grave concerns with how this policy was introduced and the slip-shod implementation after the fact; members need to know what they are agreeing to on their declaration forms.

Federal staff are governed by the Canada Labour Code – whereas we are governed by our collective agreement and the Saskatchewan Employment Act. There is unfortunately, no requirement that what one employer does – others should do as well.

Again, the question of testing both vaccinated and unvaccinated are related to this proof of vaccination policy. The options are to show proof of vaccination or participate in regular testing. If a member seeks an accommodation based on medical or religious grounds, they will still need to be tested, but the accommodation will address how this is done. Alternatively, they can request an unpaid Leave of Absence.

Leah: I will test but can’t afford the testing. Is it once a week and can you fight to have them test us?

A: We do not have clarity on the frequency of testing – we raised this question with SHA as well and received no clear answer. And yes, we have requested that the employer provide the testing in house.

Sherry: Honestly my main question is how can they make us pay for tests when this whole time we've been getting them for free and other vaccinated people can continue to get them for free. Also the confidentiality is a huge issue for me.

A: We have challenged the employer on the issue of cost and accessibility. Again, this needs to be reasonable and not an onerous burden on healthcare workers.  We appreciate your concerns about confidentiality and want the SHA to provide clarity on how they will keep your proof of vaccination status safe; for how long will they keep it; and who will have access to it.

Sherry: If this is a medical test required by the employer why are they not paying for it? Pg 118 of the collective agreement.

A: Under Article 23.05 a) it references ‘pre-employment medical or subsequent medicals or immunization’; the COVID testing doesn’t qualify as a medical test under this language. And time for getting vaccinated is covered by the employer. We are told by the SHA that this is a policy directive which is temporary in nature.

Julie: I would like to know how much will it cost for the COVID tests once a week that S H A will be requiring and will this be done at our workplace .thank you.

A: As of last night’s town hall, we weren’t aware of the cost of testing. As of this morning, October 14, the SHA has announced a monthly cost of $225 for staff who opt for the testing regime. We have also asked about the frequency of testing and are awaiting a response.  SEIU-West, CUPE and SGEU have requested that the employer provide these tests.

Beata: Will employees be forced to pay, out-of-pocket, for their testing? I cannot afford 100 a week for testing.

A: As of last night’s town hall, we weren’t aware of the cost of testing. As of this morning, October 14, the SHA has announced a monthly cost of $225 for staff who opt for the testing regime. We have also asked about the frequency of testing and are awaiting a response.  SEIU-West, CUPE and SGEU have requested that the employer provide these tests.

Colin: What is the SHA COVID-19 monitored testing program? Frequency? cost? kind of sounds like a third party will be doing the actual testing. -If with this they are allowing unvaccinated but negative tested individuals to work. How are they now going to mitigate this and protect these individuals from the vaccinated who are being allowed to enter with simply a proof of vaccination but no proof that they have not become an asymptomatic breakthrough case or possibly with symptoms but downplaying or lying about them but remain as spreaders? It would seem that testing for everyone would be the best solution. -Why have the at home rapid tests which we have been certified to use now not considered as valid? It can be understandable to not be allowed to conduct your own test but there are several possible options whereby monitoring could be easily done. -At this time there is no testing availability in Moose Jaw let alone rural areas. There are individuals willing to be tested but the where is the question. -Has there been any consideration to the Sask Human rights code being a living document? This is to say that additions to prohibited grounds for discrimination have been added within the last decade. is medical status given the nature of advancing technology an addition which once through courts may also be seen as necessary? Thank you

A: The SHA’s monitored testing program is one of the alternatives available under their Proof of Vaccination policy directive. The frequency is not clear yet and the cost wasn’t identified last night before the town hall meeting, but was announced this morning as costing $225/month. It appears that this will be done by SHA – not a third party.

Vaccinated staff will continue to be tested if they are symptomatic. Respectfully, I think that healthcare workers know first-hand how serious COVID is and won’t be lying about potential symptoms.

We don’t know what kind of tests are being used/recommended in the monitored testing program, but will be following up on that question with the SHA to get clarity.

Medical status is something that is addressed in the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission information memo under ‘disability (physical or mental)’ – but vaccination status is not a part of that consideration.

Ryan: Unions position on signing declaration WITHOUT all available information provided regarding testing program ie cost, frequency, type of test, where to test etc.

A: Comply because it’s mandatory – if you can’t answer because the questions are designed where you would be forced to lie, report to the employer that you tried to answer but couldn’t do so. Need this to be on the record with the employer.

We have posted a recommended response to send to the SHA on this issue – it’s on our website. Make sure you keep a copy of this.

UPDATE: SEIU-West has identified this issue with SHA and we can now advise that members should use the following statement and send to the SHA:

Date:

To Blake McMullen; [email protected] 

I have been advised by my Union to inform you I cannot truthfully and correctly complete the SHA Declaration of COVID-19 Vaccination Status because the Employer response options provided do not describe my intention.

Your Name

Save/keep a copy for your records.

Laurie: I have a huge concern that is very stressing regarding the mandates handed down on Oct 1. Please fight and stand up for our constitutional rights as human beings that are been taken away from us. We have worked in the COVID environment for 2 years with virtually no cases, , now they want to force us into something we don't want to do.

A: SEIU-West is raising the same concerns and questions as our members are; we are committed to representing all of our membership – regardless of their vaccination status.

The question of constitutional rights is not as black and white as people think. Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms sets out the following: “The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only such reasonable limits as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” The challenge here is that there is an argument to be made that in the middle of a global pandemic, all rights are not absolute.

Amy: I have some questions regarding this COVID policy rollout 1. R all employees; vaccinated and non vaccinated, required to undergo the rapid testing? If not why? We r well aware that vaccinated acquire and spread this virus just like non-vaccinated. And would that not be discrimination if all r not required? 2. What happens if u need to leave work early/be late because of this rapid testing? 3. What happens when a rapid test comes back positive? How is that being coded for unvaccinated? 4. If a vaccinated person be aimed COVID positive how r they being coded? 5. What if I choose to not follow the rapid test or vaccination policy? 6. It’s been proven that after a positive result, u can have a COVID rapid test show up positive for up to 90days….how is this affecting employees? 7. If sha is making this man diaries should it not be easily accessible and paid for by employer because it’s their policy? Shouldn’t be any different then undergoing random drug tests at other companies 8. Will employers be willing to sign a full liability waiver for damages caused by this vaccine if they arise?

A: No, not all employees are required to undergo the COVID testing under this policy. Vaccinated employees will undergo testing if symptomatic.  The SHA has shared their scientific evidence that vaccinated people are less likely to acquire and spread COVID.

It’s not considered discriminatory because the testing option is being provided instead of providing proof of vaccination. It is one of the options that is available to staff covered by this policy.

SEIU-West, CUPE and SGEU are advocating for this testing to be done by the employer and hopefully limiting the time required away from work.

If either a vaccinated or unvaccinated healthcare worker is diagnosed positive, the advice is the same, call 811. How this is being coded is the same as well: if you are put off work by 811 for isolation purposes – members should be paid pandemic pay. If you deemed positive, it will be coded as sick time.

If a member chooses not to follow any policy – not only this policy – the employer can discipline a member.

I cannot speak to the employer signing off on any liability waivers – that would be a SHA question.

SEIU-West, CUPE and SGEU are requesting the employer make these tests available to staff. The SHA announced today, about the monthly cost for the testing which is $225/month.

Laura: What will happen if I don't fill out the Declaration by the end of Thursday, Oct 14/2021. I don't like my choices. Please answer on the zoom meeting and via my email. Thanks.

A: This is yet another one of those ‘mixed messages’ that we are getting from SHA. I think the deadline will be extended based on the circumstances.

Comply because it’s mandatory – if you can’t answer because the questions are designed where you would be forced to lie, report to the employer that you tried to answer but couldn’t do so. Need this to be on the record.

UPDATE: SEIU-West has identified this issue with SHA and we can now advise that members should use the following statement and send to the SHA:

Date:

To Blake McMullen; [email protected] 

I have been advised by my Union to inform you I cannot truthfully and correctly complete the SHA Declaration of COVID-19 Vaccination Status because the Employer response options provided do not describe my intention.

Your Name

Save/keep a copy for your records.

Laura: 1) Have there been suggestions as to where, how often and how much the cost will be/if any, for staff to COVID test? 2) If I decline to do the COVID testing, can I opt to take Admin leave? 3) If placed on Admin leave, is there a maximum amount of time I would be allowed to stay on leave? e.g 1 year or 2 years 4) If I change my mind and want to come back to work and I was willing to COVID test, would I be allowed to return and how much notice would I have to give? 5) What happens with Canada Life benefits and Pension should I be placed on Admin leave? 6) If I don't sign the "Declaration" by end of Thursday, Oct 15/21, are there consequences?e.g. Can I still use my sick time, vacation hours, family leave, medical time? 7) What happens to all the employees that have been vaccinated 6 months or more ago. Do they have to get a booster because their antibodies have waned? Who is going to protect me from those employees should I be at work unvaccinated and COVID testing. Will they have to test weekly and pay? Or will they be given special privileges to test and NOT pay?

A: The cost of the monitored testing program was announced on Thursday at $225/month – this wasn’t available info for last night’s town hall. We do not know how often.

We don’t have ‘Admin Leave’ in our collective agreement. But you can apply for an unpaid leave of absence at any time. Under Article 15.01, LOA’s are generally 1 year in length, but can be requested to be extended.

If you return from a LOA, you would be required to comply with the SHA’s Proof of Vaccination policy.

Our advice on the declaration form is to comply because it’s mandatory – if you can’t answer because the questions are designed where you would be forced to lie, report to the employer that you tried to answer but couldn’t do so. Need this to be on the record. SEIU-West has identified this issue with SHA. See the update in red at the beginning of this document.

For those employees vaccinated 6 months or more ago – the question of a requirement for a booster isn’t something that SEIU-West can answer…that is not our area of expertise.

Janet: I called Microbiology(virology) at RUH and asked if the spit test was accurate for COVID 19 testing and they stated that it is very accurate. I feel like this is a better option for us if we are forced to get tested. This test is not classified as a Medical procedure like the nasal swab. The spit test is less invasive. I feel we/I should not have to pay for this testing as this is technically a decrease in pay. I think the Union should challenge this policy and especially deadline as there's no clear information as to type of test.

A: This isn’t within our area of expertise regarding which test is being used. We encourage you to reach out to the SHA with this question.

We are communicating our concerns about the cost of testing and availability of testing with the SHA with the recommendation that they provide this to employees.

Darwin: Since SHA has now done a flip flop in such a short amount of time on paying for the rapid tests , this has forced my hand to get the vaccine, as even though I am not comfortable injecting myself with experimental gene therapy vaccine I can't lose my job and and I can't afford to pay for any PCR testing, so again how is that actually a choice?? Choice for the well off?? Also , the employer states I need to answer the declaration question for the situation i find myself in, but there is no choice to pick for scheduling a time next week to get the shot and then another in Six weeks, only " I have gotten my first shot and will endeavor to get the second shot within six weeks"... so what do I choose since I still need both shots??

A: Respectfully, we don’t have a comment on your assertion about the vaccination being experimental gene therapy…it’s a vaccination.

Based on your example, it sound like you should identify that you are going to provide proof of vaccination. See the update in red at the beginning of this document.

Michelle: what happens if we can't afford testing every week? I am currently awaiting vaccination not yet available in Canada

A: The SEIU-West Executive Board encourages members to talk with their family doctor and get vaccinated. I’m not sure what vaccine you are waiting for, but there are some that are already available.

The monitored testing program is reported by SHA to cost $225/month. If you have issues with that cost, please contact the Member Resource Center at 1-888-999-7348 Ext 2298 or [email protected]

Gloria: If Johnson and Johnson vaccine is listed as an acceptable shot under the mandate order why has it not been made available? People have waited for this type of adenovector based vaccine and are now being punished for being patient.

A: SEIU-West can’t answer why certain vaccines are available and not others.

The SEIU-West Executive Board encourages members to talk with their family doctor and get vaccinated. There are some vaccines already approved and available.

Ashley: I have chosen to not be vaccinated for COVID because I am currently pregnant. I was told by my doctor that I will not qualify for an accommodation. The information given to me to states that the vaccines are safe for pregnant women but that no clinical trials were done and this is based off of a hypothesis that it is safe not confirmed findings. So for myself and others in the same situation I find it quite concerning that medical professionals are trying to force this on pregnant women. The health authority says they are not forcing it but my only other option is to drive 2hrs one way to pay $100+ for a test just to prove I can attend work even if I have zero symptoms. In total with gas and testing I am being asked to pay approximately $200 every 3 days just to prove I'm not sick. Meanwhile, my fully vaccinated coworkers can attend work test free and possibly spread the virus anyway, because it is known that vaccinated people can spread the virus, which in turn can still infect those immune compromised, including pregnant individuals such as myself. I would also like to add that by the health authority making me drive for these tests they will be putting myself and my unborn child at risk to be in a car accident, especially as winter is approaching. This may seem far fetched but it is my understanding that death from car accidents is higher in my age range than COVID 19. By also making me travel for testing I am now having to go to a community I have no contacts too and one I don't ever go to, increasing my risk of not only contracting but spreading the virus. So my questions are why is the health authority not making testing mandatory on site when we have testing available right in our facilities and homes? And why are pregnant women or women who plan to be pregnant being forced to take a vaccine they fear may harm their child or face the financial burden and stress of extra traveling?

A: I can’t comment about the advice you are receiving from your doctor, but if you have a question about an accommodation, please contact the Member Resource Center at 1-888-999-7348 Ext 2298 or [email protected]

The Proof of Vaccination policy is providing options: show proof of your vaccination status; or participate in the monitored testing program. An accommodation will allow you to forgo vaccination but you will still need to test. The cost would be mitigated due to accommodations. There needs to be options for people to choose from.

The cost of the monitored testing program has been announced as being $225/month but how this is managed in rural or remote areas is not clear at this time. We will be following up with SHA.

SEIU-West, CUPE and SGEU has recommended that these tests be provided by the employer.

Michelle: Concerns regarding employee information/confidentiality -informed consent and Right to refuse -details of mandatory testing program -100% to Refuse all COVID testing based on the non-discrimination act Bill S-201, it is an indictable offence to force anyone to take DNA/RNA test or deny service, employment or education opportunity -public Health act 1994 section 64 (1) Conscientious objection to immunization -charter of rights implicated by mandating vaccines. Section 7 and section 15

A: The advice from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Saskatchewan sets out that when asking for proof of vaccination, an employer needs to limit access; ensure that the information is used only for the purpose required; that the employer will ensure that this information is saved in a confidential manner; and destroyed when it is no longer needed.

We need to remember that this is not a ‘mandatory vaccination policy’, but a proof of vaccination policy. In saying that, while the employer is asking for proof of vaccination, they are also providing alternatives should a member not want to provide that: including a duty to accommodate based on religious or medical grounds; or participating in a monitored testing program.

The conscientious objection option doesn’t apply in this case because this policy is being introduced under the Saskatchewan Employment Act – Occupational Health and Safety legislation and regulations. The conscientious objection option is only available if it is a mandatory vaccination policy introduced under the Public Health Act.

In reading the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, we need to read the whole document. S. 1 sets out the following: “The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only such reasonable limits as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” The challenge here is that there is an argument to be made that in the middle of a global pandemic, all rights are not absolute.

Mel: Is the cost for testing going to be tax-deductible?

A: We don’t know but will follow up with the SHA for clarity and report back to the membership.

Leah: Will boosters be required under this policy?

A: They are not specifically referenced in the SHA policy, but we will seek clarity on this and report back to the membership.

We will post Part Two of the questions shortly.

Thanks to everyone for participating in the town halls. We will continue to provide advice to our members as this issue evolves and changes.  Our Member Resource Center is currently inundated with member calls and messages, so we ask for your patience as we continue to answer your questions.  We will respond in the order that we’ve received them. We thank you for remaining respectful as we work through these issues together.

Respectfully,

Barbara Cape

President SEIU-West

A Report from the Political Action and Awareness Committee Co-Chair, Dennel Pickering

Devin Tepleski from Iron and Earth presented about an initiative led by oil sands workers to retrain workers to transition into renewable energy development.  This project started as a documentary film.  Since then, 600 workers have signed up.  These oil sands workers are grateful for the opportunities oil sands have offered but see renewable energy development as the next step to ensuring a sustainable future – it’s also where great opportunities await.

Iron and Earth is in its infancy right now, but the concept is solid and it is quickly building momentum.  It has created 4 pillars for success: collaboration, research, training and advocacy.  Training is scheduled to start next summer.

The federal government is holding town hall meetings asking public for climate change strategy as a result of the Paris agreement.  Saskatoon West is the only constituency in Saskatchewan that has held one, but members can request their MP hold a meeting or they can give feedback directly to the government.

Iron and Earth has a solar skills campaign coming out soon.  This is an initiative where the goal is to have 1000 electricians implement 100 solar projects (such as solar panels on high schools that they are partnering with or EV charging stations) by offering some training for transference of skills and hands on work to build ability to transition into renewable.  They will also provide curriculum materials to the high schools in order to get future workers interested in the renewable trade.

Iron and Earth has created a workers climate plan found at www.workersclimateplan.ca.  This includes a survey consultation, video testimonials, worker interviews, ability to participate in town halls, digital town halls, or the ability to submit directly to the government at www.letstalkclimate.ca.  So far, solar and wind technology is leading the growth in renewable energy.  $32.9 billion has been invested globally since 2004 into renewable energy.  It is estimated that $7.4 trillion will be invested globally by 2040 in renewable energy.  Electricians can transition their skills into solar jobs, geothermal jobs can be done by boilermakers.

They still need funding for this project and have recently applied to the Alberta government.  They are also looking for sponsors.  Companies like Enbridge and Suncor are investing in renewable energies.  There is expected funding this fall in the AB government fall budget and with the targets agreed to by the federal government, hopefully federal funding will become available to projects like this as well.

Saskatchewan and Alberta are the hot spots for solar energy, yet other provinces seem to be leading the way.  Other provinces are generating more renewable energy and investing more into renewable energy research – we must take part in the transition to renewable energies.

To get further involved, you can text WCP to 1-778-771-0852 and check out their website www.ironandearth.org.  They also have an AGM on October 29 in Edmonton.

Update: New Deadline! Send us your survey by August 21, 2016 to be entered into the draw for a $250 Visa gift card!

In advance of our next rounds of SAHO and Extendicare bargaining, we would like to invite SEIU-West members who are covered under the SAHO or Extendicare collective bargaining agreements to take the time (15 to 20 minutes) to provide us with your thoughts on how to improve your collective agreement.

You can use your computer, laptop, table or your mobile phone to fill out your bargaining questionnaire.

All SAHO/Extendicare SEIU-West members who complete the survey online will be entered into a draw for one of three fabulous prizes (first prize is a $250 Visa gift card)! Be sure to provide your name and valid personal email address or mobile number so we can contact you if you win!

The results of this questionnaire (except for identification) will be shared with SEIU-West delegates at our October 2016 SAHO/Extendicare bargaining conference to assist us in developing our 2017 proposal packages. Your input is important to your bargaining team.

As always, if you have any questions please contact us or call the Member Resource Centre (MRC) at 1-888-999 SEIU (7348).

Don’t forget to check the SAHO and Extendicare bargaining pages in order to keep up to date on the latest bargaining news and events.

UPDATE: You can now complete a paper copy of the survey!

Click to download the printable PDF of the 2017 SEIU-West SAHO/Extendicare Bargaining Survey.

By Barb Cape, President – SEIU-West

Hello and Happy Nursing Week!

We are well into our celebrations within SEIU-West…whether there has been a cake in your facility, or you’ve participated in our Nursing Week contest or you are simply enjoying a collaborative nursing team…all of these things matter.

Earlier this week, I talked about the role of the LPN in continuing education and the skills brought to their work as part of the nursing team. Today I want to talk about the role of our CCAs.

The Continuing Care Assistants bring experience, knowledge and training to their daily work. With a certificate program that covers different aspects and environments of care, there is a focus on the technical aspects of the work. But the people who work within this classification also bring a considerable amount of compassion to the care they provide.

I have always said that it’s a special person who works in health care or related fields, regardless of classification. But for the CCA, they are with people during the most vulnerable point in their lives, whether it’s at the end of life, or daily care, or during truly difficult medical situations – they provide the hands-on role of care provider that we seldom see elsewhere.

RNs bring a level of knowledge and skill specific to more involved health care needs; LPNs provide a practical and immediate knowledge for assessment and care plans; and CCAs are the eyes and ears of the team; providing invaluable observations and contributing to the overall ability of the health care team to use their respective level of knowledge and skill in the field via hands-on care.

I believe that there is a need for a reboot of how we look at nursing teams. There is an opportunity for a greater degree of collaboration in the team itself; a recognition of the knowledge and skill that each member brings to the overall provision of nursing care.

We all have a role in this system; we do not operate in silos. Each person who works in health care is a front-line expert and we should acknowledge and respect both their unique role and their responsibility.

For today during Nursing Week, join me in celebrating the Continuing Care Assistants who provide dignity, comfort and care to those they serve.

To enter the Nursing Week Contest, click here.

To download a PDF of the Nursing Week Poster, click here.

"We are lucky to have health care that does not discriminate on income - public health care matters" - Leona, Phlebotomist at Canadian Blood Services.

"I try to give the best care that I can for the residents - and I love to make them laugh!" - Maria.

By Barb Cape, President – SEIU-West

Happy National Nursing Week!! SEIU-West is so proud of its members who work in nursing teams – this week serves as an opportunity to show our gratitude, and to also share important information around the vital work they do. To start the week, I want to begin by highlighting Licensed Practical Nurses (stay tuned for Continuing Care Assistants’ Day, later this week!)

Recently, I had a very interesting conversation with a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) who is a member of SEIU-West in Saskatoon. She was upset about the ongoing struggle between the Registered Nurses and members of SUN, and their regulatory body, the Saskatchewan Registered Nurses Association (SRNA). She said, “Today is a sad day for regulation in Saskatchewan”. And while we in health care pay attention to these issues, what is this really about? 

Recently, the Ministry of Health approved the new set of bylaws that govern the Licensed Practical Nurse scope of practice under which LPNs can safely work. The bylaws were intended to provide role clarity as they describe quite specifically the work that is done by LPNs daily based on their competencies. As well, the LPN education program created and delivered by SASK Polytech has expanded to encompass some additional duties and practices. The new bylaws reflect these added education pieces. This process is no different from that of every other regulated profession, as they seek to remain up-to-date. For example, LPNs, Doctors, RNs, technologists, and pharmacists are all required to take continuing education credits to ensure that they remain current in their profession. It’s a great idea and even though I’m not in a regulated profession, I think lifelong learning and staying up to speed on my profession (Chef) is a brilliant idea.

But that’s part of the problem: SRNA and others are arguing that these skills are not a part of a LPNs ‘foundational’ education (aka their original course). But that’s a red herring because regulated professions add to their body of knowledge via their educational program. Additional courses and skill upgrades are regularly offered to all professions – regardless of who they are in health care. Lawyers do it. Accountants do it. And RNs do it…so why not LPNs? These courses or programs might be offered on-line, or via an employer, or through Sask Polytech… but they all must be a recognized and vetted course in order for it to count towards improving one’s skills.

There is a claim that LPNs are working outside of their scope and putting patients at risk. I have said this before and will say this again: PROVE IT! And if you know of someone working outside of their scope, contact SALPN immediately! It’s not ok once or twice; it’s not ok if no one is looking – it is not OK! But that being said, I have yet to find any evidence of LPNs putting their patients at risk by working outside of the LPN scope of practice. If the true issue is a lack of acceptance of the expanded education, skill and competencies of LPNs – that’s just goofy. There is a role for every health care profession in advancing the model of care Saskatchewan residents deserve. There is no role for professional jealousies.

As our LPN member who works in an Operating Room, she said: “…I love my job. I love going to work every day and I feel honored to help people during one of the scariest times in their lives. I took the same peri-op program as my RN counterparts and was partnered for group assignments with a RN. I was the sole LPN in a group with five RNs… we wrote the same exams, assignments and research papers. I feel strongly that my education prepared me to serve in my role. I feel strongly that the public should be able to have confidence in me when I come to walk them into the operating room. I am good at what I do.”

Click to enlarge.

The public needs to know that the work of EVERYONE on the health care team is valued. From maintenance, to administration, to front-line nursing, to support services, and everything in between. There are some jobs that I can’t and shouldn’t do, because I am a cook; just as there are some duties that a LPN can’t and shouldn’t do because it’s outside of the scope of practice for a LPN. There really is a role for all members of the nursing team including the RN, the LPN and the CCA.

As we celebrate Nursing week, I ask you to remember this: everyone has skills to bring to our health care system. We cannot operate in silos; we cannot eliminate any one player on our health care team and we all know how to improve our health care system… let’s remember that this week. Let’s work together to build strong nursing teams – to do this we must stop the ongoing attacks against all members of our nursing teams, recognize and value the professional skills offered by each and create pride and respect for our diverse roles.

Other Resources:

To enter the Nursing Week Contest, click here.

EXTENDED DEADLINE: MAY 16

Click on the image above for a downloadable PDF file.

The People’s Injunction Demonstration – We’re All People On the Line

Click on the images to be connected with your national and provincial labour organizations!