In essentially no country is there really a free market of hospitals. They are pretty much always built at the discretion of what we might term “benevolent” government sponsored cartels, to ensure that there isn’t overlap, because nowhere can support the expense of multiple competing hospitals, much like utilities even when they are private. So the part of “free market” where workers can shop around their labor doesn’t exist in most of healthcare, if they bargain it will always be against a de facto sole provider of the service in any area. So what you have is a one way street in labor disputes. Management can do essentially anything hostile to labor so long as it doesn’t go so far as bringing the public in and then the government. This means they can pay ridiculously bad wages, they can even force workers to provide terrible service, and the laborers have no recourse beyond striking in many places.

Which brings us full circle to where we started, because the public in sane countries like Sweden has long ago realized that striking is really not a good thing in critical industries. It is the sort of thing you want to avoid at all costs, so it is essential that companies in such critical industries do not try to play chicken with labor over things, instead they have a very reasonable system companies and labor work together practically by default.

Am I in sympathy with striking nurses, or other healthcare providers, even if them striking means patients suffer? Yes, entirely, because I know that these people care deeply about patients, it is invariably always difficult way too low paid work, and I have never seen an instance where they took any action like this except when the situation was forced by the actions of the company.