Guest guest Posted May 21, 2006 Report Share Posted May 21, 2006 Folks, you need to think before you send your resumes to blind email addresses. Lately there have been a bunch of " job offers " asking interested applicants to send resumes to this email address or that. As you may or may not know, identity theft is rampant. The information sent in a resume can give a crook a great start in developing an identity theft using you as the victim. Any company that wants to advertise positions available should, at the minimum, send the following information. Name of company, business form (sole proprietor, partnership, LLC, corporation) and ownership Address of company Telephone number of company Name of hiring contact Salary and benefits offered Whether or not the company is a Texas licensed EMS provider Whether or not the company is U. S. owned. There are many, many EMS firms now, particularly in Dallas and Houston, that are owned by foreign nationals. Before sending resume, check with the DSHS to see if it is a licensed EMS provider and whether or not there are any pending complaints against it. Check with the Secretary of State to see if it's in good standing, and also check there for liens against it for unpaid wages. Compare a company's " advertisement " with those that are put out by reputable companies such as AMR, R/M, ETMC, Champion, Acadian, and by governmental entities. Those are models to go by. Don't ever send a resume to a blind email address. Gene Gandy, JD, LP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2006 Report Share Posted May 21, 2006 You have your ideas, I have mine. I want to know about nationality of ownership because there are fly-by-night people running lots of EMS transfer services who won't pay their employees and who fade into the woodwork when complaints are made. It's hard to trace a guy whose permanent address is in Nigeria. I have heard a number of such stories. I only mentioned identity theft as one problem. There are others. Do you really want to work for a company that has IRS liens on it? I won't go into forms of business structures and why they're important to know about. Go take a freshman business law course if you want to know about them. Take my advice or leave it. I'm not your lawyer, thank God. But I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. Seriously, everybody does what they want to anyway. All I can do is offer general advice based upon 40 years of experience with scumbag employers. And there are more of them in EMS than in plumbing, I guarantee you. I won't send my resume blindly, and I don't recommend that anybody else do it. But if you do and bad things happen, then go whine to somebody besides me. Have a nice day. Gene (not your lawyer) Gandy > Sorry, Gene, but you are off base with your advice below. There are many > reasons - legitimate ones - for a company to place a confidential ad. In just > the EMS field, for instance, there are eight ads in today's Houston > Chronicle - five of which are placed as " Confidential " ads. That's normal business > practice in many fields, and by many companies - small and large. > > The list of information that you think should be in an ad looks more > appropriate in a merger discussion. Business form? Nationality of ownership? > What does that have to do with " identity theft " problems? And what does it > have to do with an employment situation (unless you are planning to run a > hostile takeover from inside)? > > Similarly, a discussion of salary and benefits is more appropriate in an > interview than in an ad. A person's salary in non-governmental position would > appear to fall under privacy constraints - in other words, it's none of the > public's business. It is between employer and employee. > > If someone is interested enough in the position to make an original > contact, then asking for some of that information may be appropriate. Due > diligence is called for in any employment situation, but there is a limit to what > that phrase covers. > > Being cautious is one thing; being paranoid is another. > > > wegandy1938@... wrote: > Folks, you need to think before you send your resumes to blind email > addresses. Lately there have been a bunch of " job offers " asking interested > applicants to send resumes to this email address or that. > > As you may or may not know, identity theft is rampant. The information sent > in a resume can give a crook a great start in developing an identity theft > using you as the victim. > > Any company that wants to advertise positions available should, at the > minimum, send the following information. > > Name of company, business form (sole proprietor, partnership, LLC, > corporation) and ownership > Address of company > Telephone number of company > Name of hiring contact > Salary and benefits offered > Whether or not the company is a Texas licensed EMS provider > Whether or not the company is U. S. owned. > > There are many, many EMS firms now, particularly in Dallas and Houston, that > are owned by foreign nationals. > > Before sending resume, check with the DSHS to see if it is a licensed EMS > provider and whether or not there are any pending complaints against it. > > Check with the Secretary of State to see if it's in good standing, and also > check there for liens against it for unpaid wages. > > Compare a company's " advertisement " with those that are put out by reputable > companies such as AMR, R/M, ETMC, Champion, Acadian, and by governmental > entities. Those are models to go by. > > Don't ever send a resume to a blind email address. > > Gene Gandy, JD, LP > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2006 Report Share Posted May 21, 2006 , you're a wise lady! Gene > > > > Sorry, Gene, but you are off base with your advice > > below. > > I disagree. > > > There are many reasons - legitimate ones - > > for a company to place a confidential ad. > > Name one that applies to a firm soliciting employees. > > > The list of information that you think should be in > > an ad > > I didn't read Gene's message that way. I read it to > mean anyone applying for the job should request at > least that level of information. > > > Nationality of ownership? What does that have to > > do with " identity theft " problems? > > FBI statistics confirm that Nigeria alone accounts for > somewhere near 40% of all internet fraud. I would > think the nationality of the person who has access to > my personal financial information would be very > important information. > > > Similarly, a discussion of salary and benefits is > > more appropriate in an interview than in an ad. > > Perhaps the specifics, but I would think a salary > range and general description of benefits would be > appropriate. > > > Due diligence is called for in any employment > > situation, but there is a limit to what that phrase > > covers. Being cautious is one thing; being paranoid > > is another. > > because of the current width and breadth of electronic > fraud, identity theft, and general corruption in > today's electronic society, I personally think there > is no limit to the amount of " due diligence " one must > pursue. If you wish to publish your SSN for all to > see, be my guest. But I think Mr. Gandy is right on > the mark. > > -- > > __________________________________________________ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2006 Report Share Posted May 21, 2006 Sorry, Gene, but you are off base with your advice below. There are many reasons - legitimate ones - for a company to place a confidential ad. In just the EMS field, for instance, there are eight ads in today's Houston Chronicle - five of which are placed as " Confidential " ads. That's normal business practice in many fields, and by many companies - small and large. The list of information that you think should be in an ad looks more appropriate in a merger discussion. Business form? Nationality of ownership? What does that have to do with " identity theft " problems? And what does it have to do with an employment situation (unless you are planning to run a hostile takeover from inside)? Similarly, a discussion of salary and benefits is more appropriate in an interview than in an ad. A person's salary in non-governmental position would appear to fall under privacy constraints - in other words, it's none of the public's business. It is between employer and employee. If someone is interested enough in the position to make an original contact, then asking for some of that information may be appropriate. Due diligence is called for in any employment situation, but there is a limit to what that phrase covers. Being cautious is one thing; being paranoid is another. wegandy1938@... wrote: Folks, you need to think before you send your resumes to blind email addresses. Lately there have been a bunch of " job offers " asking interested applicants to send resumes to this email address or that. As you may or may not know, identity theft is rampant. The information sent in a resume can give a crook a great start in developing an identity theft using you as the victim. Any company that wants to advertise positions available should, at the minimum, send the following information. Name of company, business form (sole proprietor, partnership, LLC, corporation) and ownership Address of company Telephone number of company Name of hiring contact Salary and benefits offered Whether or not the company is a Texas licensed EMS provider Whether or not the company is U. S. owned. There are many, many EMS firms now, particularly in Dallas and Houston, that are owned by foreign nationals. Before sending resume, check with the DSHS to see if it is a licensed EMS provider and whether or not there are any pending complaints against it. Check with the Secretary of State to see if it's in good standing, and also check there for liens against it for unpaid wages. Compare a company's " advertisement " with those that are put out by reputable companies such as AMR, R/M, ETMC, Champion, Acadian, and by governmental entities. Those are models to go by. Don't ever send a resume to a blind email address. Gene Gandy, JD, LP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2006 Report Share Posted May 21, 2006 > Sorry, Gene, but you are off base with your advice > below. I disagree. > There are many reasons - legitimate ones - > for a company to place a confidential ad. Name one that applies to a firm soliciting employees. > The list of information that you think should be in > an ad I didn't read Gene's message that way. I read it to mean anyone applying for the job should request at least that level of information. > Nationality of ownership? What does that have to > do with " identity theft " problems? FBI statistics confirm that Nigeria alone accounts for somewhere near 40% of all internet fraud. I would think the nationality of the person who has access to my personal financial information would be very important information. > Similarly, a discussion of salary and benefits is > more appropriate in an interview than in an ad. Perhaps the specifics, but I would think a salary range and general description of benefits would be appropriate. > Due diligence is called for in any employment > situation, but there is a limit to what that phrase > covers. Being cautious is one thing; being paranoid > is another. because of the current width and breadth of electronic fraud, identity theft, and general corruption in today's electronic society, I personally think there is no limit to the amount of " due diligence " one must pursue. If you wish to publish your SSN for all to see, be my guest. But I think Mr. Gandy is right on the mark. -- __________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2006 Report Share Posted May 21, 2006 Actually my advice to anyone is look for an employer with a good reputation of paying its employees. Thanks to the Texas AG, not paying employees is a form of fraud and is now being investigated by TDSHS whenever a complaint is filed. Unfrotunately in our field too many medics want a piece of the pie and are opening their own companies with very little money. I know of one friend who already is on his third company and he is barely getting by. And unfortunately TDSHS is not making it any harder for these people to open. The state ought to look at other states that charge $5,000-$10,000 as start up fees and then drop to $500-$1000 to relicense. Maybe they shouldnow require that these owners be bonded. After 9 years in the field I will start working for AMR. Here in the Valley, like in Dallas, Houston, San , there are just way too many services opening and not enough oversight by the state, at least that is the problem for the Valley. One rep for about 40-50 serivces, do the math. I have seen too many providers running with no protocol books, expired meds, etc. Unfortunately it is hard to bite the hand that feeds you. Identity theft is rampant and is only getting worst. I think what Gene is stating is something that should be requested if you continue to choose to work for these " mom & pop " services. My experience now is that alot of services want to squeeze the juice out of you like a lime at a bar, and pay below par. However unfortunately the gov't is not paying out alot and they have no choice but to do more with what little they have. A catch-22. Salvador Capuchino Jr EMT-P > > Sorry, Gene, but you are off base with your > advice > > > below. > > > > I disagree. > > > > > There are many reasons - legitimate ones - > > > for a company to place a confidential ad. > > > > Name one that applies to a firm soliciting > employees. > > > > > The list of information that you think should be > in > > > an ad > > > > I didn't read Gene's message that way. I read it > to > > mean anyone applying for the job should request at > > least that level of information. > > > > > Nationality of ownership? What does that have > to > > > do with " identity theft " problems? > > > > FBI statistics confirm that Nigeria alone accounts > for > > somewhere near 40% of all internet fraud. I would > > think the nationality of the person who has access > to > > my personal financial information would be very > > important information. > > > > > Similarly, a discussion of salary and benefits > is > > > more appropriate in an interview than in an ad. > > > > Perhaps the specifics, but I would think a salary > > range and general description of benefits would be > > appropriate. > > > > > Due diligence is called for in any employment > > > situation, but there is a limit to what that > phrase > > > covers. Being cautious is one thing; being > paranoid > > > is another. > > > > because of the current width and breadth of > electronic > > fraud, identity theft, and general corruption in > > today's electronic society, I personally think > there > > is no limit to the amount of " due diligence " one > must > > pursue. If you wish to publish your SSN for all to > > see, be my guest. But I think Mr. Gandy is right > on > > the mark. > > > > -- > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 I have to agree here. What is wrong with giving a little info about the company, certification and job requirements, salary range, and benifits that the employee can expect? That way a prospective employee will know if he/she qualifies and would be willing to take on the job and go through the application process. It would benefit the employer since they would only get replies from folks that are really interested and qualified instead of having to send out a ton of replies asking the same questions. Might take a little more time in the initial job posting, but it would save a lot of time later on. Just my opinion for what it's worth. Joe > > > > > Sorry, Gene, but you are off base with your advice > > > below. > > > > I disagree. > > > > > There are many reasons - legitimate ones - > > > for a company to place a confidential ad. > > > > Name one that applies to a firm soliciting employees. > > > > > The list of information that you think should be in > > > an ad > > > > I didn't read Gene's message that way. I read it to > > mean anyone applying for the job should request at > > least that level of information. > > > > > Nationality of ownership? What does that have to > > > do with " identity theft " problems? > > > > FBI statistics confirm that Nigeria alone accounts for > > somewhere near 40% of all internet fraud. I would > > think the nationality of the person who has access to > > my personal financial information would be very > > important information. > > > > > Similarly, a discussion of salary and benefits is > > > more appropriate in an interview than in an ad. > > > > Perhaps the specifics, but I would think a salary > > range and general description of benefits would be > > appropriate. > > > > > Due diligence is called for in any employment > > > situation, but there is a limit to what that phrase > > > covers. Being cautious is one thing; being paranoid > > > is another. > > > > because of the current width and breadth of electronic > > fraud, identity theft, and general corruption in > > today's electronic society, I personally think there > > is no limit to the amount of " due diligence " one must > > pursue. If you wish to publish your SSN for all to > > see, be my guest. But I think Mr. Gandy is right on > > the mark. > > > > -- > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 I gotta go with Gene on this one. What's wrong with knowing a little bit about who you're applying to BEFORE you actually apply? In this age of " fly-by-night " EMS and ID theft, it is just plain good sense to be absolutely certain of who and what you are dealing with. I've been in this field for nearly 26 years, and I've seen some pretty low-down, cur-dog ugly, sneak-thief service owners in my day. I've ALWAYS been careful about where I hang my hat, but in this age of electronic identity theft, I've really gotten careful. Case in point: A good friend from High School is a line officer for the Philadelphia Fire Department. His youngest by is in college (pre-med), and has been a vollie EMT for the rescue squad where they live (in the Philly suburbs). He was wanting a part-time job (but not flipping burgers), and saw an ad for part-time EMT's and sent his resume to the email address in the ad. He never heard back from them, but three months later he had bill collectors pounding down his dorm room door. As was said in a prior post, the whole shooting match went back to Nigeria or Swaziland or some other such country untouchable by our legal system. It took him the rest of his first two semesters to fix the problem. Case number 2: I myself worked for a service where my paycheck bounced (actually everybody's check bounced). My boss told us it was a " clerical error " , and that our next paychecks would be fine. Two week later, the IRS shut the company down. The bosses weren't paying ANY of our taxes, and had pocketed our last two paychecks to " get outta Dodge " before the " Sheriff " came a callin'. We also found out they hadn't paid our Worker's Comp insurance since day one, or even our final health insurance premiums. We were burned. Extra Krispy. Being careful is NOT being paranoid, not in this day and age. Would you get on an airplane with no idea of the track record of the airline? Would you go to a surgeon without checking him out to the nth degree first? Would you buy a used car without getting a mechanic to give it the once over? Would you date a woman without a health card (just kidding). With some municipal areas having private ambulance services in the triple-digit range, wouldn't it be a good idea to known what you're dealing with BEFORE you put all YOUR eggs in THEIR basket? I think so. Barry E. McClung, EMT-P Field Training Officer MetroCare Services - Austin L.P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 Two words.....Chuck Curtis >>> fyremedic78133@... 5/22/2006 10:53 am >>> I gotta go with Gene on this one. What's wrong with knowing a little bit about who you're applying to BEFORE you actually apply? In this age of " fly-by-night " EMS and ID theft, it is just plain good sense to be absolutely certain of who and what you are dealing with. I've been in this field for nearly 26 years, and I've seen some pretty low-down, cur-dog ugly, sneak-thief service owners in my day. I've ALWAYS been careful about where I hang my hat, but in this age of electronic identity theft, I've really gotten careful. Case in point: A good friend from High School is a line officer for the Philadelphia Fire Department. His youngest by is in college (pre-med), and has been a vollie EMT for the rescue squad where they live (in the Philly suburbs). He was wanting a part-time job (but not flipping burgers), and saw an ad for part-time EMT's and sent his resume to the email address in the ad. He never heard back from them, but three months later he had bill collectors pounding down his dorm room door. As was said in a prior post, the whole shooting match went back to Nigeria or Swaziland or some other such country untouchable by our legal system. It took him the rest of his first two semesters to fix the problem. Case number 2: I myself worked for a service where my paycheck bounced (actually everybody's check bounced). My boss told us it was a " clerical error " , and that our next paychecks would be fine. Two week later, the IRS shut the company down. The bosses weren't paying ANY of our taxes, and had pocketed our last two paychecks to " get outta Dodge " before the " Sheriff " came a callin'. We also found out they hadn't paid our Worker's Comp insurance since day one, or even our final health insurance premiums. We were burned. Extra Krispy. Being careful is NOT being paranoid, not in this day and age. Would you get on an airplane with no idea of the track record of the airline? Would you go to a surgeon without checking him out to the nth degree first? Would you buy a used car without getting a mechanic to give it the once over? Would you date a woman without a health card (just kidding). With some municipal areas having private ambulance services in the triple-digit range, wouldn't it be a good idea to known what you're dealing with BEFORE you put all YOUR eggs in THEIR basket? I think so. Barry E. McClung, EMT-P Field Training Officer MetroCare Services - Austin L.P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 Who would want to work for an employer that posts anonymously to this forum? Think about it -- on County, CareFlight, MetroCare, AMR, Calhoun County, Washington County, San Marcos/Hays County all post their full information when they announce vacancies here. Why can't (or wouldn't) anyone else? Could it be they have something to hide? Sure, there's some anonymous recruiting done at the executive management level, but how many transfer services looking for any EMT desparate for a job need to do anonymous recruiting? I have to agree with Gene, Barry, and . -Wes Ogilvie, lots of initials Austin, Texas Re: " Job openings " I gotta go with Gene on this one. What's wrong with knowing a little bit about who you're applying to BEFORE you actually apply? In this age of " fly-by-night " EMS and ID theft, it is just plain good sense to be absolutely certain of who and what you are dealing with. I've been in this field for nearly 26 years, and I've seen some pretty low-down, cur-dog ugly, sneak-thief service owners in my day. I've ALWAYS been careful about where I hang my hat, but in this age of electronic identity theft, I've really gotten careful. Case in point: A good friend from High School is a line officer for the Philadelphia Fire Department. His youngest by is in college (pre-med), and has been a vollie EMT for the rescue squad where they live (in the Philly suburbs). He was wanting a part-time job (but not flipping burgers), and saw an ad for part-time EMT's and sent his resume to the email address in the ad. He never heard back from them, but three months later he had bill collectors pounding down his dorm room door. As was said in a prior post, the whole shooting match went back to Nigeria or Swaziland or some other such country untouchable by our legal system. It took him the rest of his first two semesters to fix the problem. Case number 2: I myself worked for a service where my paycheck bounced (actually everybody's check bounced). My boss told us it was a " clerical error " , and that our next paychecks would be fine. Two week later, the IRS shut the company down. The bosses weren't paying ANY of our taxes, and had pocketed our last two paychecks to " get outta Dodge " before the " Sheriff " came a callin'. We also found out they hadn't paid our Worker's Comp insurance since day one, or even our final health insurance premiums. We were burned. Extra Krispy. Being careful is NOT being paranoid, not in this day and age. Would you get on an airplane with no idea of the track record of the airline? Would you go to a surgeon without checking him out to the nth degree first? Would you buy a used car without getting a mechanic to give it the once over? Would you date a woman without a health card (just kidding). With some municipal areas having private ambulance services in the triple-digit range, wouldn't it be a good idea to known what you're dealing with BEFORE you put all YOUR eggs in THEIR basket? I think so. Barry E. McClung, EMT-P Field Training Officer MetroCare Services - Austin L.P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 Sal is correct in his observations. Something has to be done about the unchecked proliferation of EMS services. I understand that there are over 200 firms in the City of Houston alone. I know one DSHS field specialist who has over 100 firms to monitor by himself. Regulation is impossible under such circumstances. Arizona requires a certificate of need before a license will be granted. I always opposed this in the past, but now I favor it. Sal is correct that a substantial fee should be charged for getting a license and renewing. It ought to be at least as much as a liquor license. Owners should be bonded as Sal says. That would cull out the field quickly, because there have been cases where even companies like R/M were unable to produce a surety bond due to financial difficulties. EMSAT, isn't this something you need to be addressing? Gene G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 I agree...I would encourage everyone to apply for jobs for companies they want to work for...part of that process is interviewing the company...not just them interviewing you. Any place that will not identify themselves to you or allow you to ask questions of them or their staff is not a place I would consider working. You can also make public records requests from DSHS and other regulatory entities for information regarding complaints, disciplinary actions, and other such stuff...if it is a BIG life change (relocation, dropping a job you like for a potential better one, etc) this is another option. Wes is absolutely correct, many upper level jobs do anonymous job postings or they use firms to recruit and do preliminary selection processes for these jobs...BUT the key is that these companies identify themselves, have legitimate return address (like " send resume to San Express Jobs, PO Box 1122212, San , etc etc " ) or to an actual company that you can find on the internet... I will agree again...blindly sending your personal information out on the internet in today's age will get you what you deserve... Dudley Re: " Job openings " I gotta go with Gene on this one. What's wrong with knowing a little bit about who you're applying to BEFORE you actually apply? In this age of " fly-by-night " EMS and ID theft, it is just plain good sense to be absolutely certain of who and what you are dealing with. I've been in this field for nearly 26 years, and I've seen some pretty low-down, cur-dog ugly, sneak-thief service owners in my day. I've ALWAYS been careful about where I hang my hat, but in this age of electronic identity theft, I've really gotten careful. Case in point: A good friend from High School is a line officer for the Philadelphia Fire Department. His youngest by is in college (pre-med), and has been a vollie EMT for the rescue squad where they live (in the Philly suburbs). He was wanting a part-time job (but not flipping burgers), and saw an ad for part-time EMT's and sent his resume to the email address in the ad. He never heard back from them, but three months later he had bill collectors pounding down his dorm room door. As was said in a prior post, the whole shooting match went back to Nigeria or Swaziland or some other such country untouchable by our legal system. It took him the rest of his first two semesters to fix the problem. Case number 2: I myself worked for a service where my paycheck bounced (actually everybody's check bounced). My boss told us it was a " clerical error " , and that our next paychecks would be fine. Two week later, the IRS shut the company down. The bosses weren't paying ANY of our taxes, and had pocketed our last two paychecks to " get outta Dodge " before the " Sheriff " came a callin'. We also found out they hadn't paid our Worker's Comp insurance since day one, or even our final health insurance premiums. We were burned. Extra Krispy. Being careful is NOT being paranoid, not in this day and age. Would you get on an airplane with no idea of the track record of the airline? Would you go to a surgeon without checking him out to the nth degree first? Would you buy a used car without getting a mechanic to give it the once over? Would you date a woman without a health card (just kidding). With some municipal areas having private ambulance services in the triple-digit range, wouldn't it be a good idea to known what you're dealing with BEFORE you put all YOUR eggs in THEIR basket? I think so. Barry E. McClung, EMT-P Field Training Officer MetroCare Services - Austin L.P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 Once again I will post: Lee Lane, BAAS, LP Operations Director Air Medical, Ltd. 1806 Entrance Dr. New Braunfels, Texas lee@... Man you guys are tough, we are a legitimate MICU licensed service for five years. Please do not apply if you do not meet the previously mentioned requirements. Thank you. > > I agree...I would encourage everyone to apply for jobs for companies they want to work for...part of that process is interviewing the company...not just them interviewing you. Any place that will not identify themselves to you or allow you to ask questions of them or their staff is not a place I would consider working. > > You can also make public records requests from DSHS and other regulatory entities for information regarding complaints, disciplinary actions, and other such stuff...if it is a BIG life change (relocation, dropping a job you like for a potential better one, etc) this is another option. > > Wes is absolutely correct, many upper level jobs do anonymous job postings or they use firms to recruit and do preliminary selection processes for these jobs...BUT the key is that these companies identify themselves, have legitimate return address (like " send resume to San Express Jobs, PO Box 1122212, San , etc etc " ) or to an actual company that you can find on the internet... > > I will agree again...blindly sending your personal information out on the internet in today's age will get you what you deserve... > > Dudley > > Re: " Job openings " > > > I gotta go with Gene on this one. > > What's wrong with knowing a little bit about who you're applying to > BEFORE you actually apply? In this age of " fly-by-night " EMS and ID > theft, it is just plain good sense to be absolutely certain of who > and what you are dealing with. > > I've been in this field for nearly 26 years, and I've seen some > pretty low-down, cur-dog ugly, sneak-thief service owners in my > day. I've ALWAYS been careful about where I hang my hat, but in > this age of electronic identity theft, I've really gotten careful. > > Case in point: A good friend from High School is a line officer for > the Philadelphia Fire Department. His youngest by is in college > (pre-med), and has been a vollie EMT for the rescue squad where they > live (in the Philly suburbs). He was wanting a part-time job (but > not flipping burgers), and saw an ad for part-time EMT's and sent > his resume to the email address in the ad. He never heard back from > them, but three months later he had bill collectors pounding down > his dorm room door. As was said in a prior post, the whole shooting > match went back to Nigeria or Swaziland or some other such country > untouchable by our legal system. It took him the rest of his first > two semesters to fix the problem. > > Case number 2: I myself worked for a service where my paycheck > bounced (actually everybody's check bounced). My boss told us it > was a " clerical error " , and that our next paychecks would be fine. > Two week later, the IRS shut the company down. The bosses weren't > paying ANY of our taxes, and had pocketed our last two paychecks > to " get outta Dodge " before the " Sheriff " came a callin'. We also > found out they hadn't paid our Worker's Comp insurance since day > one, or even our final health insurance premiums. We were burned. > Extra Krispy. > > Being careful is NOT being paranoid, not in this day and age. Would > you get on an airplane with no idea of the track record of the > airline? Would you go to a surgeon without checking him out to the > nth degree first? Would you buy a used car without getting a > mechanic to give it the once over? Would you date a woman without a > health card (just kidding). > > With some municipal areas having private ambulance services in the > triple-digit range, wouldn't it be a good idea to known what you're > dealing with BEFORE you put all YOUR eggs in THEIR basket? > > I think so. > > Barry E. McClung, EMT-P > Field Training Officer > MetroCare Services - Austin L.P. > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 Now you would not try to tell us that the great Chuck Curtis would have ever done any wrong now would you Please note I did work for him for about 12 hours and that was enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 You may have to explain that to the youngsters in the group. GG > Two words.....Chuck Curtis > > >>> fyremedic78133@... 5/22/2006 10:53 am >>> > I gotta go with Gene on this one. > > What's wrong with knowing a little bit about who you're applying to > BEFORE you actually apply? In this age of " fly-by-night " EMS and ID > theft, it is just plain good sense to be absolutely certain of who > and what you are dealing with. > > I've been in this field for nearly 26 years, and I've seen some > pretty low-down, cur-dog ugly, sneak-thief service owners in my > day. I've ALWAYS been careful about where I hang my hat, but in > this age of electronic identity theft, I've really gotten careful. > > Case in point: A good friend from High School is a line officer for > the Philadelphia Fire Department. His youngest by is in college > (pre-med), and has been a vollie EMT for the rescue squad where they > live (in the Philly suburbs). He was wanting a part-time job (but > not flipping burgers), and saw an ad for part-time EMT's and sent > his resume to the email address in the ad. He never heard back from > them, but three months later he had bill collectors pounding down > his dorm room door. As was said in a prior post, the whole shooting > match went back to Nigeria or Swaziland or some other such country > untouchable by our legal system. It took him the rest of his first > two semesters to fix the problem. > > Case number 2: I myself worked for a service where my paycheck > bounced (actually everybody's check bounced). My boss told us it > was a " clerical error " , and that our next paychecks would be fine. > Two week later, the IRS shut the company down. The bosses weren't > paying ANY of our taxes, and had pocketed our last two paychecks > to " get outta Dodge " before the " Sheriff " came a callin'. We also > found out they hadn't paid our Worker's Comp insurance since day > one, or even our final health insurance premiums. We were burned. > Extra Krispy. > > Being careful is NOT being paranoid, not in this day and age. Would > you get on an airplane with no idea of the track record of the > airline? Would you go to a surgeon without checking him out to the > nth degree first? Would you buy a used car without getting a > mechanic to give it the once over? Would you date a woman without a > health card (just kidding). > > With some municipal areas having private ambulance services in the > triple-digit range, wouldn't it be a good idea to known what you're > dealing with BEFORE you put all YOUR eggs in THEIR basket? > > I think so. > > Barry E. McClung, EMT-P > Field Training Officer > MetroCare Services - Austin L.P. > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 Bob, Ditto on certificates of need. As I said, I have always opposed them. And, I should have mentioned, in Arizona they have been scandalously politicized. There has been litigation all the way to the Giant Supreme Court in Beltwaysville regarding them. I mentioned them in a moment of frustration. Yours is a better idea. Thanks for saying it. There are, however, many other ways that can be used to tighten up the process of issuing provider licenses, if only our Lege would do it. Gene > Gene, > > Instead of Certificates of Need, which can be unwieldy and excessively > political, I would recommend that state provider licensure require that any > company that wishes to be able to conduct non-emergency transports anywhere > in the state, must first be providing contract 911 services somewhere in the > state - and I'm not referring to contractual emergency interfacility > transfers. > > We're talking about cream-skimming companies that want all of the easy > money, without the public responsibilities, risks and costs associated with > 911 work. Believe me, with this requirement, these people will flood the > rural and super-rural areas begging for 911 contracts - or go out of > business. It would be kind of a role reversal. > > The medics would ultimately determine the success or failure of these > companies because the number of experienced and well-seasoned 911 " street " > medics is comparatively limited. Market forces would drive out the > substandard performers, especially from the urban centers. > > Bob Kellow > > Re: " Job openings " > > > Sal is correct in his observations. Something has to be done about the > unchecked proliferation of EMS services. > > I understand that there are over 200 firms in the City of Houston alone. I > know one DSHS field specialist who has over 100 firms to monitor by himself. > Regulation is impossible under such circumstances. > > Arizona requires a certificate of need before a license will be granted. I > always opposed this in the past, but now I favor it. > > Sal is correct that a substantial fee should be charged for getting a > license > and renewing. It ought to be at least as much as a liquor license. > > Owners should be bonded as Sal says. That would cull out the field > quickly, > because there have been cases where even companies like R/M were unable to > produce a surety bond due to financial difficulties. > > EMSAT, isn't this something you need to be addressing? > > Gene G. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 Gene, Instead of Certificates of Need, which can be unwieldy and excessively political, I would recommend that state provider licensure require that any company that wishes to be able to conduct non-emergency transports anywhere in the state, must first be providing contract 911 services somewhere in the state - and I'm not referring to contractual emergency interfacility transfers. We're talking about cream-skimming companies that want all of the easy money, without the public responsibilities, risks and costs associated with 911 work. Believe me, with this requirement, these people will flood the rural and super-rural areas begging for 911 contracts - or go out of business. It would be kind of a role reversal. The medics would ultimately determine the success or failure of these companies because the number of experienced and well-seasoned 911 " street " medics is comparatively limited. Market forces would drive out the substandard performers, especially from the urban centers. Bob Kellow Re: " Job openings " Sal is correct in his observations. Something has to be done about the unchecked proliferation of EMS services. I understand that there are over 200 firms in the City of Houston alone. I know one DSHS field specialist who has over 100 firms to monitor by himself. Regulation is impossible under such circumstances. Arizona requires a certificate of need before a license will be granted. I always opposed this in the past, but now I favor it. Sal is correct that a substantial fee should be charged for getting a license and renewing. It ought to be at least as much as a liquor license. Owners should be bonded as Sal says. That would cull out the field quickly, because there have been cases where even companies like R/M were unable to produce a surety bond due to financial difficulties. EMSAT, isn't this something you need to be addressing? Gene G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 I would add that this is not a restraint of trade, but rather an obligation of a Texas licensed EMS provider to accept its portion of the public burden. Of course you'd " grandfather " the deal for a year or so, but eventually things would revert to a steady state. As far as the effects on the medics are concerned, the calculus is a simple matter for these " providers " : No pay and benefits = no medics = no 911 contracts = no license (or revocation) = adios amigos. Bob Kellow Re: " Job openings " Sal is correct in his observations. Something has to be done about the unchecked proliferation of EMS services. I understand that there are over 200 firms in the City of Houston alone. I know one DSHS field specialist who has over 100 firms to monitor by himself. Regulation is impossible under such circumstances. Arizona requires a certificate of need before a license will be granted. I always opposed this in the past, but now I favor it. Sal is correct that a substantial fee should be charged for getting a license and renewing. It ought to be at least as much as a liquor license. Owners should be bonded as Sal says. That would cull out the field quickly, because there have been cases where even companies like R/M were unable to produce a surety bond due to financial difficulties. EMSAT, isn't this something you need to be addressing? Gene G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 The subject of requiring a provider to do 911 was broached by Bob Kellow after I mentioned that I was now thinking that certificates of need might be a good thing for Texas. Bob said that certificates of need have been politicized and have been difficult to administer. So I said that perhaps the requirement that any EMS service be engaged in 911 wouldn't be a bad idea. Now, there are many possible views of this and many positions to take. You have now stated some interesting questions. What we need is a good, free-wheeling debate about how to limit the ridiculous proliferation of EMS providers while still maintaining fundamental freedoms in marketing. However, there are certain areas of business that need to be regulated more stringently than the Mom and Pop Donut Shop. I submit that EMS service is one of them. Yes, people do die from donuts, but not for a long time. People can die from incompetent EMS, and it happens all the time. Worse, the job market for Paramedics is good now, and that makes it even more important that every individual looking for a job realizes that there are some employers, maybe many employers, who are out and out crooks. And they need to watch out for them. I hate government regulation. It's against my nature. But there are times when it's the only way to control functions that can do great harm if not controlled. Yesterday I asked for anyone from TAA to comment on this situation. I find it instructive that up to now there has not been a word written by anybody from that organization on this subject. I know some of them monitor this list. Why doesn't TAA step up to the plate on this issue? Could it be...........Could it Beeeeee.......Could it be that TAA is made up of a bunch of fly-by-nights who don't want any sort of regulation? Nah. Or, well, maybe? Hmmmm. We'll see. Gene G. > Why would it be necessary for any provider to do 911? What advantage would > this give? Where a need exists there should be an opportunity for a > service. > > I see a disadvantage whereby a limit on services may cause an area to be > underserved. Competition is what makes our economy grow. Growth of the > economy means higher wages for EMS. > > Why would we want a limit on the growth of our industry? > > Yes, regulation is the answer. How can one regulate when the rules are > not there (the teeth)? > > How can you regulate when you do not have the staff needed for this to > happen? > > > > wegandy1938@... wrote: > Bob, > > Ditto on certificates of need. As I said, I have always opposed them. > And, I should have mentioned, in Arizona they have been scandalously > politicized. > There has been litigation all the way to the Giant Supreme Court in > Beltwaysville regarding them. I mentioned them in a moment of frustration. > > Yours is a better idea. Thanks for saying it. > > There are, however, many other ways that can be used to tighten up the > process of issuing provider licenses, if only our Lege would do it. > Gene > > > > > Gene, > > > > Instead of Certificates of Need, which can be unwieldy and excessively > > political, I would recommend that state provider licensure require that > any > > company that wishes to be able to conduct non-emergency transports > anywhere > > in the state, must first be providing contract 911 services somewhere in > the > > state - and I'm not referring to contractual emergency interfacility > > transfers. > > > > We're talking about cream-skimming companies that want all of the easy > > money, without the public responsibilities, risks and costs associated > with > > 911 work. Believe me, with this requirement, these people will flood the > > rural and super-rural areas begging for 911 contracts - or go out of > > business. It would be kind of a role reversal. > > > > The medics would ultimately determine the success or failure of these > > companies because the number of experienced and well-seasoned 911 " street " > > medics is comparatively limited. Market forces would drive out the > > substandard performers, especially from the urban centers. > > > > Bob Kellow > > > > Re: " Job openings " > > > > > > Sal is correct in his observations. Something has to be done about the > > unchecked proliferation of EMS services. > > > > I understand that there are over 200 firms in the City of Houston alone. > I > > know one DSHS field specialist who has over 100 firms to monitor by > himself. > > Regulation is impossible under such circumstances. > > > > Arizona requires a certificate of need before a license will be granted. > I > > always opposed this in the past, but now I favor it. > > > > Sal is correct that a substantial fee should be charged for getting a > > license > > and renewing. It ought to be at least as much as a liquor license. > > > > Owners should be bonded as Sal says. That would cull out the field > > quickly, > > because there have been cases where even companies like R/M were unable to > > produce a surety bond due to financial difficulties. > > > > EMSAT, isn't this something you need to be addressing? > > > > Gene G. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 Hey, Roper, Cowboy UP! You raise some good points. Now come up with a suggested solution. This whole controversy is extremely complicated, and you point out some very salient issues. Can we, as " The EMS Community " come up with a rational solution to the problems that have led to the proliferation of EMS transfer services? Can we figure out how to separate those who do great care, and there are many, from those who are fly-by-night? Can we come together as a group and become a lobby for improvement, or will we continue to be fragmented? We have an opportunity to take this discussion to a meaningful solution, and we need the input of all persons who have constructive suggestions. Let's take this issue to GETAC and to DSHS and to the Legislature. Talk is cheap. Let's Cowboy Up and do something about this. Kinky for Governor Gene G. > Ok, lets see if we're understanding your logic. If we're > transporting a critically ill patient a substantial distance to a > higher level of care, and allowing a 911 truck to be available, we > are not providing a worth while benefit to the citizens of the > county and should not be considered a part of the EMS community. I > have to differ. There are many municipalities that do not allow > private providers to share the expense or inter into agreements of > 911 contracts, but when they are out of trucks they will call for > backup from the local transfer provider. In addition to allowing the > transfer provider take the long distance runs to keep the muni > trucks in town. So get off you soap box about skimming the cream. > We're out here taking up the slack!! > Feeling Wind and Dust. > > > -- In texasems-l , " Bob Kellow " wrote: > > > > I would add that this is not a restraint of trade, but rather an > obligation > > of a Texas licensed EMS provider to accept its portion of the > public burden. > > > > Of course you'd " grandfather " the deal for a year or so, but > eventually > > things would revert to a steady state. As far as the effects on > the medics > > are concerned, the calculus is a simple matter for > these " providers " : > > > > No pay and benefits = no medics = no 911 contracts = no license (or > > revocation) = adios amigos. > > > > Bob Kellow > > > > Re: " Job openings " > > > > > > Sal is correct in his observations. Something has to be done > about the > > unchecked proliferation of EMS services. > > > > I understand that there are over 200 firms in the City of Houston > alone. I > > know one DSHS field specialist who has over 100 firms to monitor > by himself. > > Regulation is impossible under such circumstances. > > > > Arizona requires a certificate of need before a license will be > granted. I > > always opposed this in the past, but now I favor it. > > > > Sal is correct that a substantial fee should be charged for > getting a > > license > > and renewing. It ought to be at least as much as a liquor > license. > > > > Owners should be bonded as Sal says. That would cull out the > field > > quickly, > > because there have been cases where even companies like R/M were > unable to > > produce a surety bond due to financial difficulties. > > > > EMSAT, isn't this something you need to be addressing? > > > > Gene G. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 Why would it be necessary for any provider to do 911? What advantage would this give? Where a need exists there should be an opportunity for a service. I see a disadvantage whereby a limit on services may cause an area to be underserved. Competition is what makes our economy grow. Growth of the economy means higher wages for EMS. Why would we want a limit on the growth of our industry? Yes, regulation is the answer. How can one regulate when the rules are not there (the teeth)? How can you regulate when you do not have the staff needed for this to happen? wegandy1938@... wrote: Bob, Ditto on certificates of need. As I said, I have always opposed them. And, I should have mentioned, in Arizona they have been scandalously politicized. There has been litigation all the way to the Giant Supreme Court in Beltwaysville regarding them. I mentioned them in a moment of frustration. Yours is a better idea. Thanks for saying it. There are, however, many other ways that can be used to tighten up the process of issuing provider licenses, if only our Lege would do it. Gene > Gene, > > Instead of Certificates of Need, which can be unwieldy and excessively > political, I would recommend that state provider licensure require that any > company that wishes to be able to conduct non-emergency transports anywhere > in the state, must first be providing contract 911 services somewhere in the > state - and I'm not referring to contractual emergency interfacility > transfers. > > We're talking about cream-skimming companies that want all of the easy > money, without the public responsibilities, risks and costs associated with > 911 work. Believe me, with this requirement, these people will flood the > rural and super-rural areas begging for 911 contracts - or go out of > business. It would be kind of a role reversal. > > The medics would ultimately determine the success or failure of these > companies because the number of experienced and well-seasoned 911 " street " > medics is comparatively limited. Market forces would drive out the > substandard performers, especially from the urban centers. > > Bob Kellow > > Re: " Job openings " > > > Sal is correct in his observations. Something has to be done about the > unchecked proliferation of EMS services. > > I understand that there are over 200 firms in the City of Houston alone. I > know one DSHS field specialist who has over 100 firms to monitor by himself. > Regulation is impossible under such circumstances. > > Arizona requires a certificate of need before a license will be granted. I > always opposed this in the past, but now I favor it. > > Sal is correct that a substantial fee should be charged for getting a > license > and renewing. It ought to be at least as much as a liquor license. > > Owners should be bonded as Sal says. That would cull out the field > quickly, > because there have been cases where even companies like R/M were unable to > produce a surety bond due to financial difficulties. > > EMSAT, isn't this something you need to be addressing? > > Gene G. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 Ok, lets see if we're understanding your logic. If we're transporting a critically ill patient a substantial distance to a higher level of care, and allowing a 911 truck to be available, we are not providing a worth while benefit to the citizens of the county and should not be considered a part of the EMS community. I have to differ. There are many municipalities that do not allow private providers to share the expense or inter into agreements of 911 contracts, but when they are out of trucks they will call for backup from the local transfer provider. In addition to allowing the transfer provider take the long distance runs to keep the muni trucks in town. So get off you soap box about skimming the cream. We're out here taking up the slack!! Feeling Wind and Dust. -- In texasems-l , " Bob Kellow " wrote: > > I would add that this is not a restraint of trade, but rather an obligation > of a Texas licensed EMS provider to accept its portion of the public burden. > > Of course you'd " grandfather " the deal for a year or so, but eventually > things would revert to a steady state. As far as the effects on the medics > are concerned, the calculus is a simple matter for these " providers " : > > No pay and benefits = no medics = no 911 contracts = no license (or > revocation) = adios amigos. > > Bob Kellow > > Re: " Job openings " > > > Sal is correct in his observations. Something has to be done about the > unchecked proliferation of EMS services. > > I understand that there are over 200 firms in the City of Houston alone. I > know one DSHS field specialist who has over 100 firms to monitor by himself. > Regulation is impossible under such circumstances. > > Arizona requires a certificate of need before a license will be granted. I > always opposed this in the past, but now I favor it. > > Sal is correct that a substantial fee should be charged for getting a > license > and renewing. It ought to be at least as much as a liquor license. > > Owners should be bonded as Sal says. That would cull out the field > quickly, > because there have been cases where even companies like R/M were unable to > produce a surety bond due to financial difficulties. > > EMSAT, isn't this something you need to be addressing? > > Gene G. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 Ok, lets see, we can see about raising the insurance rates or the licensing fees. But even the wealthiest manager will find somewhere else to cut and most likely it will be on the first line equipment or unit. That means jepordizing safety, so are most Fly by Nights already at that point. Then there is the public relations. They usually let them selves fall apart and cannot staff the units appropriately becoming non-dependable, poorly attired, ect.. Next is possibly the skill level that is being acquired by the FbN's. The general public may not be aware, but we know. How do we challenge these issues? We keep being the professionals that we are. We keep our equipment operating, trucks clean, employees sharp, curtious, attention to the patient in the back of the unit is the utmost importance, meaning never talk over them as if they cannot answer. They are the king/queen, it is just good PR. Now, attitudes, in a professional setting there is no place for an attitude, some healthcare places will try and pull our chain, we must smile and do our job. This is all about taking our profession to the next level. It is in every arena, this list server, I have watched it for years and some of the supposedly respected minds in the business can be so childish and disrespectful to their peers on this list server. It is embarrasing. So will we take our profession to the next level. I believe we can with a united front. There are those of us out here that try every day, hey we are no saints but we try. Can we drive out the bad, I think in the long run it would be easier if we would all work together to bring in the good. Leave your egos and hero badge at the door and put on your public servant badge. Because that is what you really are. > > > > > > I would add that this is not a restraint of trade, but rather an > > obligation > > > of a Texas licensed EMS provider to accept its portion of the > > public burden. > > > > > > Of course you'd " grandfather " the deal for a year or so, but > > eventually > > > things would revert to a steady state. As far as the effects on > > the medics > > > are concerned, the calculus is a simple matter for > > these " providers " : > > > > > > No pay and benefits = no medics = no 911 contracts = no license (or > > > revocation) = adios amigos. > > > > > > Bob Kellow > > > > > > Re: " Job openings " > > > > > > > > > Sal is correct in his observations. Something has to be done > > about the > > > unchecked proliferation of EMS services. > > > > > > I understand that there are over 200 firms in the City of Houston > > alone. I > > > know one DSHS field specialist who has over 100 firms to monitor > > by himself. > > > Regulation is impossible under such circumstances. > > > > > > Arizona requires a certificate of need before a license will be > > granted. I > > > always opposed this in the past, but now I favor it. > > > > > > Sal is correct that a substantial fee should be charged for > > getting a > > > license > > > and renewing. It ought to be at least as much as a liquor > > license. > > > > > > Owners should be bonded as Sal says. That would cull out the > > field > > > quickly, > > > because there have been cases where even companies like R/M were > > unable to > > > produce a surety bond due to financial difficulties. > > > > > > EMSAT, isn't this something you need to be addressing? > > > > > > Gene G. > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 There are also other restraints imposed by various agencies that can affect the " supply " of personnel. For example, some agencies (Montgomery County HD comes to mind) which prohibit their personnel from picking up an occasional P/T shift on private transfer services operating in their county. MCHD does do some transfers, as I understand it, but they can't come close to doing them all. Their policy makes it harder for the private services who pick up the slack to maintain staffing. And, without the private transfer services, a LOT of people wouldn't get transported. wtexasmedic wrote: Ok, lets see if we're understanding your logic. If we're transporting a critically ill patient a substantial distance to a higher level of care, and allowing a 911 truck to be available, we are not providing a worth while benefit to the citizens of the county and should not be considered a part of the EMS community. I have to differ. There are many municipalities that do not allow private providers to share the expense or inter into agreements of 911 contracts, but when they are out of trucks they will call for backup from the local transfer provider. In addition to allowing the transfer provider take the long distance runs to keep the muni trucks in town. So get off you soap box about skimming the cream. We're out here taking up the slack!! Feeling Wind and Dust. -- In texasems-l , " Bob Kellow " wrote: > > I would add that this is not a restraint of trade, but rather an obligation > of a Texas licensed EMS provider to accept its portion of the public burden. > > Of course you'd " grandfather " the deal for a year or so, but eventually > things would revert to a steady state. As far as the effects on the medics > are concerned, the calculus is a simple matter for these " providers " : > > No pay and benefits = no medics = no 911 contracts = no license (or > revocation) = adios amigos. > > Bob Kellow > > Re: " Job openings " > > > Sal is correct in his observations. Something has to be done about the > unchecked proliferation of EMS services. > > I understand that there are over 200 firms in the City of Houston alone. I > know one DSHS field specialist who has over 100 firms to monitor by himself. > Regulation is impossible under such circumstances. > > Arizona requires a certificate of need before a license will be granted. I > always opposed this in the past, but now I favor it. > > Sal is correct that a substantial fee should be charged for getting a > license > and renewing. It ought to be at least as much as a liquor license. > > Owners should be bonded as Sal says. That would cull out the field > quickly, > because there have been cases where even companies like R/M were unable to > produce a surety bond due to financial difficulties. > > EMSAT, isn't this something you need to be addressing? > > Gene G. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 Gene, Why don't you call their dogs ugly...I bet that gets them. Or you could double dawg dare them.....that would really show them who's boss. Or maybe the reason there has been a lack of response is because you just posted the question YESTERDAY evening.......Jeepers.........I know that you might find it hard to believe but not everyone checks in here multiple times a day. GET A LIFE YOU IRASCIBLE OL' CURMUDGEON. <grin> Seriously Gene, of course the TAA is not for the unfettered warm body approach that you describe. Our desire is for an even, quality focused, playing field for all those that are in the business. We also agree that the current situation is out of control and thus far there has been no plan offered to stop this revolving door. Rules are in place but there is not enough staff to enforce them Law enforcement can't get them all but it sure is nice to see them trying. We are working within the framework that is established while we continue to provide input to anyone that would listen about what we think needs to be changed and offering our money, time and support to help with the changes. Of course you know all of that because you are at all the TAA meetings.......aren't you? Gene, surely you are not just one of those people that won't go to the meetings or offer any input but would rather sit here on this list and throw bombs about what everyone else is not doing. Dave wegandy1938@... wrote: Yesterday I asked for anyone from TAA to comment on this situation. I find it instructive that up to now there has not been a word written by anybody from that organization on this subject. I know some of them monitor this list. Why doesn't TAA step up to the plate on this issue? Could it be...........Could it Beeeeee.......Could it be that TAA is made up of a bunch of fly-by-nights who don't want any sort of regulation? Nah. Or, well, maybe? Hmmmm. We'll see. Gene G. The comments contained in this correspondence are the sole responsibility of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the thoughts, feelings, or opinions of my employer, or any other group or organization that I may be, am perceived to be, have been or will be involved with in the future. They are my own comments, submitted freely and they are worth exactly what you paid for them. --------------------------------- Ring'em or ping'em. Make PC-to-phone calls as low as 1¢/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.