As respectfully as I can say this, I haven't heard an idea that made me cringe as much as that in a long, long time. That's equivalent to saying that we shouldn't change ANY part of our practice if it could affect people's jobs. Science says transporting dead people is bad? Too bad, keep doing it, 'cause the hospitals might have to lay people off if they're not making enough money from continuing field codes. EMS isn't about saving people's jobs, least of all firefighters', and I for one am not going to advocate the maintaining of a system, no matter how long it's been around, if it's no longer the kind of system that's going to move EMS forward or benefit our patients. I'm not out to help maintain anyone's livelihood but my own, and this attitude of neutrality with respect to fire-based EMS has to stop--because I guarantee you that, from what the IAFF promotes, they're not out to protect the livelihood of anyone but firefighters.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the biggest reason why EMS is run by everyone else BUT EMS is because we are too damn neutral. We're all a bunch of cowards too scared to stand up to the IAFF and our national organizations are too scared to take a stance AGAINST fire based EMS. But you know what? We are the only ones who don't think there's a war going on for control of EMS. The IAFF has made itself clear: they are out to take EMS, and they'll use whatever tactics they have to to get a hold of it. If you want to see EMS grow and prosper and progress as a profession, then YOU have to be willing to say NO to any person or any organization that would seek to lower EMS educational standards.