444

Biden administration finalizes controversial minimum staffing mandate at nursing homes (www.cnn.com)

submitted 6 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

90 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Biden administration finalized on Monday the first-ever minimum staffing rule at nursing homes, Vice President Kamala Harris announced.

The controversial mandate requires that all nursing homes that receive Medicare and Medicaid funding provide a total of at least 3.48 hours of nursing care per resident per day, including defined periods from registered nurses and from nurse aides. That means a facility with 100 residents would need at least two or three registered nurses and at least 10 or 11 nurse aides, as well as two additional nurse staff, who could be registered nurses, licensed professional nurses or nurse aides, per shift, according to a White House fact sheet.

Plus, nursing homes must have a registered nurse onsite at all times. The mandate will be phased in, with rural communities having longer timeframes, and temporary exemptions will be available for facilities in areas with workforce shortages that demonstrate a good faith effort to hire.

The rule, which was first proposed in September and initially called for at least three hours of daily nursing care per resident, is aimed at addressing nursing homes that are chronically understaffed, which can lead to sub-standard or unsafe care, the White House said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] BigilusDickilus@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

Chances are that Mark Patterson is not a medical service provider. I am sure he is very well compensated, but he would be association staff, not industry.

[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 2 points 6 months ago

So you are saying he's the person who is a candidate to be laid off so that they can find the money to pay their workers more?

[-] BigilusDickilus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

No, that's not how associations tend to work in the US. Very likely he came from an association in an adjacent field and is essentially the conduit to Leadership and in charge of executing their strategic plan and such. He is not paid by the companies is individuals directly he is paid by the association. If they don't do well collectively he is probably out and would be working somewhere else potentially entirely unrelated.

In associations longtime professionals tend to work with the same sorts of groups, but very often their jobs and those of the Members are entirely unrelated and the specialization is more due to connections and being able to say you understand how to work with those sorts of people.

For example I have been working mostly with research scientists most of my career at at this point. I have no background in science, but I have a lot of contacts with people who work for scientific associations and I can say that I an very used to their personalities and have a record of success I can point at. That doesn't mean I couldn't go do a fine job for realtors or something since the jobs would be basically the same, but that I landed here and it's the easiest fit at this point. K

this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2024

444 points (99.6% liked)

politics

19097 readers

3193 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News