Lone Star

God bless freedom of speech and the first amendment! Unless your post was libelous, slanderous, defamatory or otherwise legally actionable; it doesn't matter what he thinks about your post on some 'social networking' site! You've made a reasonable attempt to discuss it, and were met with apathy. He is obviously not your employer, so there's really nothing that he can do about your opinion. I really don't see what the big hoo-hah is about a post on someone's social networking page. Owners of companies are going to believe that their company is the best thing since sliced bread and turning doorknobs, even if someone in the general public thinks it's the biggest waste of space and resources ever brought forth. That's part of the joy of living in America! We're ALLOWED to have different opinions. Since this guy obviously has no intention of discussing the matter with you, why lose sleep worrying about it? His message was delivered to you, yours to him...end of story. If your posts have violated no local/state/federal laws, it doesn't matter if he likes your opinion or not. If I had a penny for every time someone was 'offended' by their interpretation of a post in a chatroom, forum or social networking website; I'd be richer than Bill Gates himself! Of course, there are those posts where it's VERY clear what the poster is saying; but unless someone can actually hear the inflection in your voice and see the expression on your face as you're composing your message, it's very easy to misread or misinterpret exactly what the content of said message REALLY is.

I didn't have to work for them to see how they did things, and the results of their actions. When MY service is dispatched for a call, through MY dispatch; and I roll up to find an AMR rig on scene...or find that my patient was transported by AMR, its not too awful difficult to figure out my call was 'jumped'. This wasn't a 'one time only occurrence'. Out of the following 11 counties that I know had AMR providing EMS services to, only ONE county still has AMR...and thats because they have a training facility there. Genesee Jackson Kent (AMR Training Facility) Lapeer Livingston Macomb Oakland Saginaw Shiawassee Tuscola Wayne Michigan AMR Locations *Edited to correct formatting and glaring spelling errors.

I went to Walmart and put a 'single serving' bag of M&Ms in layaway...

I adamantly disagree with lowering minimum standards for the purpose of hiring select groups! If you cannot pass the minimum skills required for a certain profession/ job, then you’ve got no business in that position. Furthermore, I take umbrage when a qualified candidate who has absolutely stellar test scores get passed over in order to hire a considerably less qualified candidate, just for the purpose of keeping racial/gender balances. If you want to be a Police Officer, Firefighter or EMT; then you need to be able to pass the minimum testing requirements just like any other white male has to; if you can’t, you don’t get a position in the academy/school. Arbitrarily adjusting test scores (whether academically or physically), does NOT improve the hiring ‘gene pool’. Public safety aside, if you apply for an office position and can’t type at least at the minimum speed/accuracy levels, then you don’t get the job! It’s that plain and simple. The same should apply for Public Safety jobs. In no way am I saying that women or minorities can’t do these jobs, nor am I saying that they don’t belong in these professions. What I AM saying is that they need to meet the same requirements as men do. If they can’t then they need to look elsewhere until they can. The same applies to those that need ‘special treatment’ for the academic portion of the respective academies. I can fully understand and support the Americans With Disabilities Act simply because of the negative stereotype associated with disabilities. BUT, and this is a big ‘but’, if you’re not even remotely qualified or able to do the job you’re applying for, then you shouldn’t get it. Life isn't fair, and contrary to what they taught you in school, not everyone who tries out gets to play.

Oh man, he's been Googling 'big medical words' again......

Go back and re-assimilate to the Collective, we of lesser intelligence cannot handle your superior intellect or your elevated levels of arrogance!

You claim that 'education is important', yet you advocate shortcuts. You can't have it both ways! The college I'm currently attending is still in the 'quarter system' as opposed to the 'semester system'. I pull an entire semester in 10 weeks, and I know first hand how 'rushed' everything is! It's absolutely insanity to think that an entire course that takes over a year to complete can be crammed into 12 weeks. I don't care if your ass is in a seat for twelve hours a day, five days a week or not. It's just not enough time. The increased time that you have exposure to the material, the better your chances of retaining it with some understanding of the biomechanics behind it. Those 'Patch Mill' schools will not offer (or require) you to have ANY additional classes in anatomy and physiology. This course alone is an absolute MUST to understand how and why the medications we give are successful, and the effects they have on the body. These types of courses (the 'Patch Mill') are not only doing a disservice to you, but enabling you to do disservice to the patients you treat. Not only are you advocating a shortcut to Medic, you're also advocating a shortcut to higher licensure as well. As long as you support such tactics, you will not be taken seriously as a professional in the healthcare field. This isn't a field where 'speed is what you need' to get through it! People’s lives are in your hands, and they DESERVE to have the person who holds their lives in the balance to be as knowledgeable as possible! As far as the ‘being poor’ is concerned, that’s what something called ‘financial aid’ is for! You may not get a ‘free ride’, but any assistance is better than none at all. As far as being ‘rushed’, there is no ‘maximum age limit’ on becoming a Paramedic. I’m currently 46 and working on my Medic for the first time. As long as you can do the job, the age shouldn’t be an issue. Additionally, with a college degree, it shows the future employer that you have the desire and the drive to stick to a project to its completion. Shortcuts only serve to show that you’ve got no time or interest to dedicate to getting the job done correctly. No one ever said that the path to becoming a good medic was easy or quick. If it were easy and quick, then everybody would be a good medic. Yes, EMS may be a ‘youngster’ compared to the field of medicine, and when compared to public safety (Police and Fire), but it’s been around long enough to be able to stand on its own two feet! In order for the profession to advance, it has to make some serious adaptations to the changing world around it. Part of those changes include the elimination of the ‘shortcuts’ and quit catering to the ‘lowest common denominator’! The only thing that you’re proving is that you don’t have the desire to make this a profession. Andrew Carnegie said: "Anything in life worth having is worth working for.", This also applies to the field of prehospital medical care .

You've been around here long enough to have watched this very topic unfold in the chatroom several times over (not to mention how many hundreds of times in the forums) that this shouldn't even be a question you should bother asking. Of course the 2 year degree program is going to be much better than any 12 week "Here's how to pass the NREMT test" course will EVER be! Sure, the courses offered through the 'Patch Mills' will get you through all of the requirements to qualify to sit for the NREMT, and they will probably get you through it before you're shredded and bleed to death, but the question is this: Why are you willing to settle for the absolute MINIMUM requirements, especially knowing that peoples lives will depend on your education? I'm not saying that the 'Patch Mills' don't turn out adequate providers (I doubt they'd remain in business if they didn't), but do you REALLY want to settle for being 'adequate' or do you want to strive to become the BEST medic you can be? The 'Patch Mill' curriculum seems to focus more on regurgitation of 'fact' at the appropriate times as opposed to EDUCATING the medic student. You'll want to know WHY the patient's body is in the shape it's in, WHY the treatments you render are appropriate, HOW your intended treatments will affect your patient and WHAT to do in the case they don't respond in the way you expect them to. Yes, the colleges will have you taking courses that will seem to be a complete waste of time (especially from an EMS standpoint), but the 'Patch Mill' will not have you taking college level Anatomy and Physiology (from the cell structure upward), and there will also be other classes in the collegiate environment that will help you with 'critical thinking skills' (such as algebra). Will I be a better provider just because I went to college? Maybe, maybe not; but at least I WILL have more than a 'fighting chance' because I DID go to college!

AMR has a habit of moving into an area, either buying up all the ambulance companies (or driving them out of business), and then doing something to get their priveliges suspended or revoked. This eventually leads to the area being completely without EMS coverage. AMR has no compunctions against 'jumping calls' either. Imagine getting dispatched to a call, only to find out that AMR is already on scene as you roll up... I know for a fact that this is what they did in Flint, MI. About the time that AMR started getting priveliges suspended in cities and counties. By the time the smoke cleared, the State of MI revoked their priveliges to practice statewide. I've spoken to HR managers with several companies and they have resoundingly told me that AMR on your resume isn't going to win you any 'preference points', but could have a 'negative effect'... AMR's focus is becoming the biggest EMS provider in the United States. They care nothing about being the BEST provider, and as has been said before; all you really are to them is a 'warm body in a uniform'.

Dwyane, I went out to my mailbox today and lo and behold! I had a nice little surprize in there! I have to admit that it’s much larger than I expected. The picture on Tribal Hollywood’s site has nothing as a ‘reference point’. All in all, I’m very impressed with it! Thank you Dwayne and Tribal Hollywood! LS

It's not that they cant afford to pay the nurses, or that the nurses are trying to bankrupt the hospital corporation; it's not even a matter of the nurses trying to get something they're not entitled to. The hospital corporation wants ever increasing profits to go into their pockets (read stockholders, administrators, etc) that they want to get by with as little in the payroll/benefits department as they can legally get by with. Because of the economic conditions out there, the corporations know that there are 10 people looking to have the one position you have. If you don't like it....there's the door. This doesn't excuse the corporations from abusing their employees, and THAT is why the union is there. Furthermore, it's not like the nurses are striking because there's no cheetos in the vending machines. Obviously, the international convention of their union agrees with the nurse's position, therefore they authorized the strike. Yes, strikes have to be authorized. To strike without authorization is considered a 'wildcat strike' and the union cannot (and probably will not) back your play. If the dispute cannot be handled by the individual local chapter, then it goes to the District Committee. If they cannot get things resolved, then it goes to the Regional Committee. From there it goes to the National Committee, and then International if necessary. As you can see, there's plenty of opportunity to resolve the issues before one person starts walking a picket line. A strike is usually a last resort. It's not like I'm going on strike because someone named Joe Schmoe got called a 'stupid idiot' by his supervisor, and I'm supporting my union brother!

The way I've always heard it was "red and black, friend of Jack; red and yellow, kill a fellow." The coral snake is often confused with the king snake.

Can we say "DUH!"?

I know these may be a little more than you said you wanted to spend, but I had a pair similar to these when I was working in New Orleans after the hurricanes, and was on my feet for 12+ hours a day. These boots were really light and very comfortable! http://www.3rdwatchshoes.com/servlet/ProductList?command=createProcurement&supplierID=352&manuID=352&categoryID=2139&categoryName=Men%27s+Footwear

*wipes coffee off the monitor* Note to self: Do NOT drink ANYTHING when reading posted jokes!

With every rock she threw!

I take it you've never worked for a company who paid you the bare minimum wage that the law provides for. I worked for a company (pre EMT) who decided that they would finally increase our 'benefits package' by offering health insurance. The only problem that I encountered was that after the initial 'probationary period', when I became eligible for the insurance, it would have taken ALL of my 'net income' plus I would have had to throw in an additional $20.00 a week just to be able to have health insurance. Should I not be allowed to earn a decent wage AND insurance simply because I was working in the shipping department? After the workers started moving toward bringining a union into the company, people started 'magically disappearing'. It was tough to prove that they were disappearing because they were in support of organizing, but when I had to go to mediation to get unemployment benefits, one of the questions my legal advocate asked my supervisor was "If this man was such a lousy employee as you charge, why isn't there any documentation to support your claims?" Had there been more tangible proof that I (and others) had been fired for supporting bringing in the union, the supervisor (and subsequently the company) would have been in violation of federal law. What I find funny is that I found out through a friend that still worked there, the supervisor I had was terminated shortly after I had been. I wasn't the one behind the organizing, but I was definately in support of the move. The employer promised us all sorts of benefits and increases if we voted against unionizing, and he fooled enough people into voting against the union coming in, only to find that he lied to them all..... I've also worked for a union, and life was far better than the warehouse job. I worked on the assembly line building the Mustang convertibles. No, I didn't get paid a monsterous wage (I was making a whopping $11.00/ hour), but I DID have health insurance, retirement and was protected from supervisors who wanted to treat us like dirt. I had a QI/QA guy who was a friend of mine get his job threatened because of what I did on the line. The QI/QA supervisor saw the SPC charts for my job and threatened to fire the QI/QA man because he didn't think the results that were documented were true and accurate. Because my friend was about to lose his job for falsification of company documents, I got the union, the general foreman, production foreman and a couple other 'hot shot's from the company assembled at my station on the line and proved to them through 25 cars (that they picked at random) that I COULD do just what was documented on those charts. To make a long story short, not only did my actions save my friend's job, but it proved that the QI/QA supervisor wasn't able to accept that the fact that there are some people that are willing to do their job to the best of their ability, and that just because you don't think something can happen doesn't mean that it can't happen. The reuslts of the whole 'hoo-hah' on the assembly line protected my friend's job. The unfortunate effect of it was that the QI/QA supervisor lost his. I didn't intend to do anything but help my friend keep his job. I wasn't out to see anyone get fired. The only reason I'm not still working there is because Ford took the job that we had perfected for over 15 years back 'in house', which ended up closing the shop.... *edited to correct grammatical error*

Obviously you've never had to have someone step in on your behalf to ensure you got a 'fair deal' from an employer that would rather work you like a dog and give you nothing more than the pittance that the law provides. Unions aren't what’s wrong with this country, and to place all of the woes at their feet is simply ludicrous! Could it be that there are other reasons that those with a union job are on strike? Like unfair labor conditions/practices on the part of the employer? Don’t the union members deserve more than minimum wage? Are you happy only making minimum wage? Employers for the most part will only give their employees only what the law demands they must. In an ‘at will employment’ situation, the employer can fire you for any reason (for example, if they don’t like the color of your shoes, you’re fired). If employers were looking out for more than their ‘bottom line’ and taking care of their employees (who just happen to be directly related to the employer’s ‘bottom line’ in the first place), there wouldn’t be such a need for unions. Until employers start treating their employees better than an expendable resource, the unions will continue to fight for the worker’s rights. Maybe you like having your livelihood dependant on the employer’s whim and mood, then by all means stay out of a union shop. But if you want your voice heard through collective bargaining, maybe you should actually see what a union does before you blame them for all the things that are wrong.

I'm probably jumping into waters that are WAAYYY over my head, but DNR means 'Do Not Resuscitate', not 'Do Not Stabilize'. The patient is pretty well through a closing door, but you still owe it to your patient to get them to the best definitive care available. Obviously, he's not going to get what he needs at the current hospital (hence you wouldn't have been called if he could). When (I'm thinking this patient is far beyond the 'IF' stage) he codes, you have to honor the DNR and not attempt resuscitation measures. It's my understanding that even if the patient has a signed DNR on file and in his possession (now your possession), all he has to say is "Don't let me die!" or "I don't want to die!", and that is enough to rescind the DNR on the spot. Since nothing in the original post even comes close to those statements, the DNR is still in full force and effect. Currently, I don't know if pushing blood products is within the scope of practice for a medic in GA (only because I haven't learned the medic's scope of practice and protocols yet), I would imagine that if they are, I would keep the blood products flowing for as long as possible during the transport. As long as he's still at the original hospital, they can continue to monitor and attempt to stabilize while you, the receiving physician and Med Command are on the phone, (isn't that what they're there for?). This is a REALLY tough spot to be in, and I'm not prepared at this point to just 'write the patient off', and refuse transport.

United States labor law is a heterogeneous collection of state and federal laws. Federal law not only sets the standards that govern workers' rights to organize in the private sector, but overrides most state and local laws that attempt to regulate this area. Federal law also provides more limited rights for employees of the federal government. These federal laws do not, on the other hand, apply to employees of state and local governments, agricultural workers or domestic employees; any statutory protections those workers have derived from state law. The pattern is even more mixed in the area of wages and working conditions. Federal law establishes minimum wages and overtime rights for most workers in the private and public sectors; state and local laws may provide more expansive rights, Similarly, federal law provides minimum workplace safety standards, but allows the states to take over those responsibilities and to provide more stringent standards. Finally, both federal and state laws protect workers from employment discrimination. In most areas these two bodies of law overlap; as an example, federal law permits state to enact their own statutes barring discrimination on the basis of race, gender, religion, national origin and age, so long as the state law does not provide less protections than federal law would. Federal law, on the other hand, preempts most state statutes that would bar employers from discriminating against employees to prevent them from obtaining pensions or other benefits or retaliating against them for asserting those rights. United States labor law is a heterogeneous collection of state and federal laws. Federal law not only sets the standards that govern workers' rights to organize in the private sector, but overrides most state and local laws that attempt to regulate this area. Federal law also provides more limited rights for employees of the federal government. These federal laws do not, on the other hand, apply to employees of state and local governments, agricultural workers or domestic employees; any statutory protections those workers have derived from state law. The pattern is even more mixed in the area of wages and working conditions. Federal law establishes minimum wages and overtime rights for most workers in the private and public sectors; state and local laws may provide more expansive rights, Similarly, federal law provides minimum workplace safety standards, but allows the states to take over those responsibilities and to provide more stringent standards. Finally, both federal and state laws protect workers from employment discrimination. In most areas these two bodies of law overlap; as an example, federal law permits state to enact their own statutes barring discrimination on the basis of race, gender, religion, national origin and age, so long as the state law does not provide less protections than federal law would. Federal law, on the other hand, preempts most state statutes that would bar employers from discriminating against employees to prevent them from obtaining pensions or other benefits or retaliating against them for asserting those rights. The United States Congress has not ratified the International Labour Organization Convention on the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 The United States Congress subsequently tightened those restrictions on unions in the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, which also regulates the internal affairs of all private sector unions, providing for minimum standards for unions' internal disciplinary proceedings, federal oversight for unions' elections of their own officers, and fiduciary standards for union officers' use of union funds. Congress has since expanded the NLRB's jurisdiction to health care institutions, with unique rules governing organizing and strikes against those employers. The NLRA does not, on the other hand, cover governmental employees, with the exception of employees of the United States Postal Service, a quasi-public entity. The Federal Labor Relations Act provides for much more limited rights for employees of the federal government; Congress has, moreover, excluded a number of these workers in the United States Department of Homeland Security and elsewhere from even these limited protections. Federal law does not provide employees of state and local governments with the right to organize or engage in union activities, except to the extent that the United States Constitution protects their rights to freedom of speech and freedom of association. The Constitution provides even less protection for governmental employees' right to engage in collective bargaining: while it bars public employers from retaliating against employees for forming a union, it does not require those employers to recognize that union, much less bargain with it. Most states provide public employees with limited statutory protections; a few permit public employees to strike in support of their demands in some circumstances. Some states, however, particularly in the South, make it illegal for a governmental entity to enter into a collective bargaining agreement with a union. The Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932 outlawed the issuance of injunctions in labor disputes by federal courts. While the Act does not prevent state courts from issuing injunctions, it ended what some observers called "government by injunction", in which the federal courts used injunctions to prevent unions from striking, organizing and, in some cases, even talking to workers or entering certain parts of a state. Roughly half the states have enacted their own version of the Norris-LaGuardia Act. For the most part the NLRA and RLA displace state laws that attempt to regulate the right to organize, to strike and to engage in collective bargaining. The NLRB has exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether an employer has engaged in an unfair labor practice and to decide what remedies should be provided. States and local governments can, on the other hand, impose requirements when acting as market participants, such as requiring that all contractors sign a project labor agreement to avoid strikes when building a public works project, that they could not if they were attempting to regulate those employers' labor relations directly.1 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_labor_law

It sounds like the employer was very close to violating Section 8(a) of the National Labor Relations Act by doing that. I realize that patient care might have been an issue, but that doesn't give the employer free reign to violate the National Labor Relations Act just to 'prove a point that the striking workers can be replaced' (See the link at the bottom of this post for the specific language of the law as it applies in this situation). You Have the Right to ... Participate in meetings to discuss joining a union; Distribute, read and discuss union literature (in non-work areas during breaks and lunch time); Wear union buttons, stickers, t-shirts, and hats to show support for the union; Sign a UE membership card and demand union recognition; Circulate and sign petitions, or ... Join together in other activities to protest unfair treatment or demand improvements in wages, hours and working conditions; Organize other employees to support the union, sign union cards, or to file grievances. These rights are protected by Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (and similar state laws), which gives you the right to join or support a union. It is Illegal for Your Boss to ... Fire or threaten to fire, layoff, discipline, harass, transfer, or reassign an employee because they support the union; Favor employees who don’t support the union over those that do in promotions, hours, enforcement of rules or any other conditions; Close or threaten to close your place of employment or take away benefits or privileges in order to discourage union activity; Promise employees a pay increase, promotion, benefit or special favor if they oppose the union; Ask your opinion of the union. Under Section 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (and similar state laws) it is illegal for your boss to commit any of the acts listed above.1 1. http://www.ueunion.org/org_rights.html

Samuel L. Jackson does have a way with words, doesn't he?

As the OP stated, she is still under the 'age of consent' which means no matter how many times she says 'yes', she's not old enough to give it any validity. Just because she said 'yes' (with her being under the age of consent), does NOT free you from criminal liability.

That was something else I was going to mention in my post, baby snakes are just as venomous as the adults from the time they hatch (after their fangs have hardened). Snakes also have several sets of fangs in 'reserve' in the event they break one or lose one. they just drop in place and require a few hours to harden, then it's back to 'business as usual' for them. Edited to correct grammatical error