Relationship between the manager of the nursing care company and the helpers
Naturally, the helper’s dissatisfaction increases in the working environment described above. So how do the manager of the nursing care company get helpers to follow their instructions? Here, as an example, I will describe the actual condition of the nursing care company that I mainly use. All of these are based on whistleblowing from the helpers who belong to the company.
The biggest fear for the manager is unity of helpers. If there is a hole in the service shift even for an instant, it will be a credit problem, so if they form a union and get strikes, collective bargaining, collective resignation, etc. Therefore, dividing and isolating each helper is the highest priority. Therefore, this company completely prohibits communication, information exchange, gathering, and drinking parties between the helpers who belong to it. It is also forbidden to talk to helpers belonging other companies more than necessary. This is because, if extra information is entered, they may have doubts about their working environment.
In this way, the information is blocked, and the company spews bad language to the employees. This is to make helpers conflict with each other so that they cannot trust each other. As a user, I have the opportunity to talk to almost all helpers, so I can understand the situation from a bird’s-eye view, but this plan on the management side has been quite successful for many years. So, for example, if four helpers come to me one after another, all four of them abusive say, “Coward other three helpers earn points by falsely telling the president about me.” For a while, I was wondering, “Why this helper doesn’t have such a good relationship with other helpers?” The answer is above.
In this way, even if the company drives the helpers apart., it is impossible to cover the fundamental poor working environment. After all, the more they continue to work, the more they know the reality and there is no salary increase, so they accumulate complaints. In other words, a helper with long service years has a higher risk of becoming a dissident. If left alone, dissatisfaction may spread to other helpers. Therefore, when the management side has the prospect of a new helper coming in due to the apparent high salary, he intensively harassed the helper with the longest years of service and personality attack, and take it in the direction the helper has to quit. The specific method is too awful to be described here.
If you think carefully, it is mysterious why the company do something to reduce the number of employees even though the poor working environment is due to the lack of manpower. The most probable reason is that if the company increase the number of helpers or raise their salary, it will be in the red, so it has to do your best to maintain the current number and working conditions. .. As a result, it is a sad story that cannot be saved if the overuse and disposable cycles are established. However, since the job turnover rate of this company is abnormally high compared to others, there seems to be a problem with the management method. Although it deviates a bit from the working environment, this company does not have employees undergo medical checkups, and it is said that it performed care services that it did not actually do and falsely billed for nursing care compensation and received strict attention. There is a continuous black story. This is just the tip of the iceberg, and there are many worse stories out there, but I can’t really write about them here.
Relationship between a manager of nursing company and persons with disabilities
You may ask, “Why do you dare to use the above-mentioned awful company mainly?” The reason is simple and convenient for service users. The neglect of workers’ rights and compliance also means that they can flexibly meet the needs of users by turning things aside. In other words, the disabled person’s interest is closer to that of a manager than that of helpers, and a disabled person and a manager have a kind of complicity regarding abuse of the helper .
I would like to explain using concrete examples so that it is easy to understand. For example, people with disabilities would like to be able to freely change the service time even immediately before, according to changes in their schedule and physical condition. In response to this need, if there is a company that give priority to profit and abuse helpers in order to respond to my time changes, and a company that protect helpers and never respond to my needs, I choose the former without hesitation. When I complained about a helper, there is a company that keeps the helper under control, even in a dirty way and would immediately and strongly instruct the helper on my behalf, and another company that says “I want to also listen to the helper’s insistence.” and only has third-party arbitration, I choose the former without hesitation. If there is a helper who is on the verge of dying from overwork but always keeps a fixed service time, and a helper who is active by consuming all the two days off and paid holidays but make a hole in the shift all the time, I choose the former without hesitation.
I don’t think it’s bad. This is what every consumer in the world is doing. People with disabilities are no exception. we also have our own interests, and have to live. Of course, I want helpers to be as happy as possible, and as you will see later in the final section, from a macro perspective, people with disabilities should work together to improve working environments of helpers. However, in daily life, it is necessary to accept the current welfare system as a given one for the time being and to maximize our happiness microscopically. It’s painful that it eventually hunts down the helpers, but it can’t be helped because I’m more cute than others.
However, it is dangerous to rely entirely on such an awful company just because it is easy to use. I don’t know when it will be caught by the administration. Even if it doesn’t happen, two helpers would quit at the same time and the company would go out of business immediately. Also, relying on only one company weakens the bargaining power of persons with disabilities. Therefore, at present, I hedge risk by combining four companies, that are large or small, and tight or flexible. It is a wise way to set a time schedulebe with being familiar with the pros and cons of each company.