Letters to the Editor
NIH Statement
Dear Editor,
Northern Inyo Hospital remains committed to bargaining in good faith with the NIH nurses represented by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). NIH is making every effort to be fair to all parties involved while keeping its commitment to the community to provide quality health care at reasonable rates.
NIH reduced the rate of many services in an effort to bring a balance to health care in Inyo County, and will not apologize for placing the needs of its patients and the community it serves at the forefront. NIH’s RN pay scale range is $33.72 to $48.41/hour, or roughly $70,000 to $100,000 annually. RNs who work from 3-11 p.m. earn an additional 8 percent shift differential, while those who work 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. earn an additional 25 percent.
In the long run, NIH is looking to preserve hospital service for this community. NIH must adapt how we provide services in order to meet modern patient needs.
To date, NIH has paid $56,000 for legal consultation in regards to the unionization. It is typical for both sides of any union negotiation to have legal counsel. However, NIH would rather see this money used to improve patient services.
Specific points about NIH Medical Leave:
NIH voluntarily goes above and beyond the 12 week Federal Medical Leave Act minimum with an additional four weeks of protected leave. A 2012 U.S. Department of Labor statistics report more than 70 percent of employees taking FMLA leave were back at work within 40 days. Only women who took leave to care for a new child took longer leaves.
Additionally, NIH employees may use any Paid Time Off (PTO) they have coming, plus other available resources, including the opportunity to have co-workers donate PTO hours to the employee.
After FMLA is exhausted, the medical condition is protected under Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Under the ADA, the hospital has the right to not accommodate an extended medical leave because of an undue hardship to the hospital and a specific department.
In the last two years, there have been three instances where an employee was separated from NIH due to medical issues. One was separated after 23 weeks, one after 20 weeks and one after 16.
It is shameful that the RNs would accuse the District and its Board of Directors of being uncaring and inhumane. When faced with making needed changes, the Board stepped up, researched solutions and sought input from stakeholders. Their priority is the greater good of this community.
Specific points about NIH Grievance Policy:
NIH was the only District Hospital in the State of California where employees could appeal grievances to the Board of Directors. It would not be fair to non-union employees to have one grievance policy for union members, and another for everyone else. NIH is committed to a fair and just grievance procedure for all.
Should anyone have concerns about the quality of care received at NIH, please contact Maria Sirois, Chief Performance Excellence Officer, at 760. 873.5811/maria.sirois@nih.org.
9212
Dear Editor,
Following the verification of the signatures for the initiative requiring voter approval of any changes to current ordinances limiting transient rentals to specific residential neighborhoods in the resort corridor, Town Council voted in favor of ordering a report addressing the impacts of the initiative (referred to as the 9212 report).
The impact of the initiative is only whether or not Council chooses to spend approximately $50,000 to hold a special election as opposed to simply adopting the measure based on the strength of the support for it as shown by the number of verified signatures obtained.
If the initiative is adopted by Council or passes in a special election and Council wishes to propose changes to the current ordinances, a measure would be included on a future ballot.
Since the initiative itself makes no changes to the current zoning laws, there are no impacts to quality of life or any of the other issues Council wishes to consider as suggested by some Council members during their debate. The analysis of such issues is important and should move forward if Council wishes to consider changes to current zoning laws, but they are certainly not impacts of this initiative. The 9212 report should be short and to the point if it is simply an analysis of the impacts of the initiative.
Karen Fisher
Mammoth Lakes
“Democracy in Action”
Dear Editor:
The “bad” portion of Paul Rudder’s letter which appeared in the Mammoth Times’ June 11 edition is misleading and inaccurate.
First, Rudder seems to imply that the people gathering signatures [for the SFR voter initiative] were “hired,” which is entirely false. The signature gatherers were well respected residents of Mammoth from all neighborhoods. Rudder’s comment about “retired ladies” is offensive and demeaning to the many people who spent their time in gathering the signatures.
Second, Rudder implies that if you spend enough time you can get the “same number of signatures” that Let Mammoth Decide obtained, for any issue. Again, a demeaning and offensive comment to the 1,073 residents who signed the petition, since it implies the people of Mammoth will sign anything, as opposed to signing only something in which they have an aligned interest.
Third, Rudder implies that it is the residents of the Knolls (“desires of the people in the Knolls”) that are pushing this Initiative implying that the supporters of the Initiative are from a limited and vocal portion of Mammoth. Once again, he is not correct (nor is Tim Flynn who also seems to think it is only the Knolls residents that want to have this Initiative pass). The members of Let Mammoth Decide are from all of the neighborhoods of Mammoth (including The Slopes, Majestic Pines, condominium owners, and lodging representatives) and not just the Knolls and even include many second homeowners.
Fourth, and perhaps the most misleading, is that by moving forward with the Initiative the group wants to “end representative government as we know it.” This is such an outrageous statement it almost is laughable. The Initiative takes away power from the Council in a very limited and isolated area, i.e. zoning as to transient rentals in single family neighborhoods. To say that this action somehow means if the Initiative passes representative government will now no longer be the norm in Mammoth is just not true. Moreover, having the people have a direct say in an issue is hardly destroying democracy. Such is the very basis of democracy.
A recall or voting for Council members and removing them from office if one is not happy with their decisions is not the only way the system is designed to give the people a voice (perhaps Mr. Rudder is forgetting about the initiative process which has been and is continually used in California in instances where the representatives are either not listening to the people or, as here, the issue is too important to be left to the representatives to decide). The power to decide issues is given by the PEOPLE to our representatives and when the people decide that an issue is too important to be left to the representatives to decide (such as election of a President) the people have the right to take the power as to any particular decision away from such representatives and decide it themselves.
Trying to claim, as Paul Rudder does, that engaging in such a process is undemocratic and is “not what the Founding Fathers’ intended” is very inflammatory and does a great disservice to the initiative process and the efforts of the well meaning residents of Mammoth who believe this issue is important enough to have it decided by the residents of Mammoth.
Additionally, Rudder’s claim that taking away the power to decide this limited issue from the Council is “destroying the Town Council” is ridiculous. As Rudder himself suggested, the Initiative is, in fact, the most direct and substantial way for the electorate to “get involved in the process.”
Paul Rudder’s claim that Let Mammoth Decide wants to “decide with people in parking lots and Letters to the Editor” is completely false. The Initiative, if passed by the voters (so not by letters to the Editor or in parking lots), will NOT alter anything other than WHO will have the power to decide the issue as to expanding transient rentals. If passed, the Town Council still has the ability and power to put on the ballot a measure to expand or alter transient rentals in single family neighborhoods and, one would assume, before that was done the Council would have all of the discussions necessary and obtain input from all parties interested in the issue. The only difference from the current process is that if the Initiative is passed once all discussions and input has been obtained the decision as to how to proceed will be made by a majority of the voters not just three Council members who may or may not have a vested interest in seeing the change. To imply otherwise is misleading.
The voting on the passage of the Initiative is the epitome of democracy, notwithstanding Rudder’s attempt to paint such actions as contrary to what has transpired in the United States for the past 200 years.
Finally, to claim that the Initiative sponsors are trying to “get everything we want … at the expense of someone’s else rights and desires” is again offensive and totally false. The Initiative gives the power to the People to decide the transient rental issue. How that supports a claim that the Let Mammoth Decide group is getting everything it wants at the expense of others is impossible to understand. Perhaps Mr. Rudder has not read the Initiative carefully, since throughout his letter he seems to imply that passage of the Initiative will change some law without discussion. Such is not the case. The only thing that will change is WHO gets to decide a very limited and isolated issue regarding the governing of our Town.
As Let Mammoth Decide has said, the issue as to transient rentals is too important to be left to the Town Council and is an issue that the entire Town should be involved in deciding. The electorate being able to be heard on an important issue is what democracy is all about and precisely and only what the Initiative accomplishes.
Gregg P. Martino
Mammoth Lakes
