43
Forum’s future unfolds Tuesday
Northside nurses reportedly have discussed giving their union authority to call a strike.
YOUNGSTOWN — Forum Health will not ask the federal bankruptcy court to postpone Tuesday’s hearing on the hospital system’s motion to set aside work agreements with two labor unions.
The hearing also is expected to deal with Forum’s request to transfer financial responsibility for its pension plan to the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., and a request to extend the time during which Forum is the only party that can submit a restructuring plan.
Walter Pishkur, Forum president and chief executive officer, said the hearing will occur as scheduled and that Forum will not seek to change the date.
Judge Kay Woods of the Northern District of Ohio’s U.S. Bankruptcy Court earlier this week granted Forum’s request for an expedited hearing on the matters. She rejected a motion objecting to the expedited hearing filed by the Youngstown General Duty Nurses Association/Ohio Nurses Association, which represents nurses at Northside Medical Center.
In its filing, however, ONA said Forum told the nurses’ local counsel that it wanted to move the hearing to July 27. ONA attorneys argued the July 27 date is not within the permitted statutory time frame, and also said it would work a hardship because ONA attorneys have a bankruptcy proceeding in California on July 27.
The legal maneuvering comes amid talk of a possible nurses strike precipitated by the Forum Health Board of Trustees’ rejection of a tentative agreement with the nurses.
Nurses union officials did not return calls, but other sources say a strike authorization vote was discussed at a union meeting Wednesday.
Pishkur said Thursday afternoon he had not received notice of a union vote and said he “does not anticipate such an action.” But as always, we are ready to have additional conversations with them and hope that happens soon,” he said.
Relations between Forum and the nurses have deteriorated since they issued a joint statement announcing a tentative agreement on a new contract.
Before the union’s ratification vote July 1, however, the Forum board rejected the tentative agreement. Nonetheless, the nurses went forward and ratified the agreement.
“Look at this from Forum’s perspective,” Pishkur said in an e-mail. “If the nurses hadn’t ratified the tentative agreement, which happens all the time in labor negotiations all over the Valley, no one would raise an eyebrow. Our rights to closely examine a tentative agreement hold the same weight and importance.
“Simply put, the final step that allows both parties to review serves a good purpose, so both sides can perform the due diligence their respective group deserves,” according to Pishkur’s e-mail.
“Our board felt that the time frame related to the concessions in the tentative agreement was not sufficient and could possibly put the organization back in the same financial situation it is currently facing. We felt we made the decision that was best for the system long term.”
Pishkur also sought to clarify Forum’s position on the timing of its filing of its motion asking the court to negate collective bargaining agreements with the nurses union and the Service Employees International Union, which also represents employees at Northside.
“We saw the media reports suggesting the timing of filing July 3 was done for specific purposes,” Pishkur said. “The fact is we filed on Friday because that’s when we were ready to go, and there was no purpose served by waiting.”
alcorn@vindy.com