Alberta takes a step forward.

[tniuqs]

Just to present another side of this complex story ... the money.

In AB the cost of an Ambo is directly billed to the patient unless a transfer to a higher level of care directed and required by the MD OR the patient is an in-patient. With the soon to be introduced new and improved Alberta Health Act one must wonder what is in store. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that the elimination of an AHC monthly bill, resulted in huge numbers of "procedure's" becoming deregulated. Almost the same as a USA based HMO, if a resident in AB does not have additional coverage ... well time to open the bill fold.

A huge point in this AB transition (and cost) why did the municipalities notjust receive improved funding, the system of Ambulance Services did actually work at one time and strangely enough more ALS services on a Provincial Basis than every other province, instead the Stelmach Government introduced even more white shirts, more bean counters and duplicating infrastructure. ... again FAIL by this government.

In BC, a standard basic user fee, now with a possible introduction of private services will we now see better improved services, will new regionalized services implement more ALS providers ? quite the taxpayers risk assessment there in my opinion, or will the BC taxpayers see a rather large jump in user fees ? So in the long run instead of improving BCAS and addressing the real issues so why burn the whole house to the ground instead of doing some remodeling.

I am now under the impression that Campbell is going to use paint and just "Flip that House"

No matter what the spin is put on Pre-Hospital Care their remains a huge gap and diverse in the way Ambulance is funded, and levels of care which bring's me to the real point or query.. so how can we standardize care with vastly different economic based delivery methods ?

New political math maybe ...

[rock_shoes]

In AB the cost of an Ambo is directly billed to the patient unless a transfer to a higher level of care directed and required by the MD OR the patient is an in-patient. With the soon to be introduced new and improved Alberta Health Act one must wonder what is in store. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that the elimination of an AHC monthly bill, resulted in huge numbers of "procedure's" becoming deregulated. Almost the same as a USA based HMO, if a resident in AB does not have additional coverage ... well time to open the bill fold.

Salient point. British Columbians are going to be in for a serious case of "sticker shock" if ambulance services are privatised. Currently inter-facility transports are free with an $85(last I checked) fee for all other responses including air ambulance (on the rare occasion it's available in BC). The average British Columbian doesn't have a clue as to what the real costs are and by the time they realize the truth it's going to be too late.

In BC, a standard basic user fee, now with a possible introduction of private services will we now see better improved services, will new regionalized services implement more ALS providers ? quite the taxpayers risk assessment there in my opinion, or will the BC taxpayers see a rather large jump in user fees ? So in the long run instead of improving BCAS and addressing the real issues so why burn the whole house to the ground instead of doing some remodeling.

An improvement in service resulting from a move to increase the portion of services delivered privately is extremely unlikely. A prime example would be the farming out of many HEU jobs (mostly cleaning and other facilities type staff). Since that has occurred in hospital infection rates have risen dramatically. The only way an improvement in service would occur under such a model is with a more than corresponding increase in user expense. People like Campbell don't care about paying a $600 ambulance bill on the off chance they need one. Campbell doesn't care about the rural British Columbian who would be stuck with a $10000 air ambulance bill for a trip to the nearest cath lab while on a nitro-drip.

No matter what the spin is put on Pre-Hospital Care their remains a huge gap and diverse in the way Ambulance is funded, and levels of care which bring's me to the real point or query.. so how can we standardize care with vastly different economic based delivery methods ?

New political math maybe ...

Though it obviously has its problems like any other delivery model, the NHS in the UK has enabled some groundbreaking developments in pre-hospital care. Things like practitioner fly cars, on scene patient service referrals, and even pre-hospital thrombolytic trials.

One of the biggest problems we have in Canada is that the Canada Health Act is federal while its implementation is provincial.

[tniuqs]

So a release of intel, or did did some one just switch on a light ? te he ... maybe letter writing does work I guess ?

I had some personal mental controversy in posting this news brief in this thread ... (it could be the rhum I drank with a buddy last night ) but this Alberta step forward is looking like we are now walking up a scree slope, 2 steps forward one step back. I wonder what is the next move going to be, perhaps stop the Health Care "centralization" initiative as well I still have airmiles to donate to the send Stephen Duckett’s one way ticket back to the land of OZ ... sorry aussiephil if your reading this

EDMONTON — Health Minister Gene Zwozdesky has frozen the centralization of Alberta’s ambulance dispatch systems.

“There are a lot of concerns in rural Alberta,” Zwozdesky said Tuesday, after making the announcement at the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties spring conference. It has not even been one year since the province moved to replace local medical emergency dispatch centres with three central call centres in Edmonton, Calgary and Grimshaw area in northwest Alberta. Rural communities were the greatest opponents of centralization, which started April 1, 2009. The new system was supposed to cut costs and streamline the running of ground ambulances within Alberta Health Services. Seventeen of 35 dispatch systems have been centralized. All systems were supposed to be on a single system by 2012, but Zwozdesky’s announcement puts a hold on the reorganization. “I’m not looking at reversing any at this stage at all,” Zwozdesky said, adding he will be looking at how the system has worked so far.“What they’re supposed to have accomplished is greater and faster access for ground ambulance, and better efficiencies in the system.” Yellowhead County joined the provincial system two weeks ago, County Mayor Gerald Soroka said there are gaps in service delivery. “Before, we used to dispatch ambulance and fire at the same time. Now, we are dispatching only fire. That’s the disconnect, we don’t know where the ambulance is coming from or when it’s going to be dispatched,” he said.“I know in our municipality there’s a lot of dead-end roads ... . When you’re doing a centralized dispatch, it’s hard to have a mapping system that covers the entire province.”

Zwozdesky’s announcement appeared to be yet another reversal of decisions made by Alberta’s health superboard.

Soon after being appointed health minister in January, he reversed a decision to close 300 acute-care hospital beds and backed away from plans to shut down 150 mental health beds at Alberta Hospital Edmonton. Last week, he distanced himself from health board chief executive Stephen Duckett’s plans to put “pay for performance” in place as an incentive for hospitals and physicians who provide “superior quality” health care. Asked about his overturning of board decisions, Zwozdesky said the dispatch centralization is a “policy matter.”“My concern is that people in Alberta, regardless of where they live, feel that they are enfranchised and have access to public health care,” he said. But Dave Eggen, the executive director of the Friends of Medicare, said Tuesday the “flip-flops” look like the government is putting together health policy “on the fly. AHS people must be dizzy from all these flip-flops in the last few weeks,” he said. On Monday, Liberal health critic Kevin Taft grilled Zwozdesky about the confusion created by overturned decisions.“Who is developing provincial policy on long-term care?” Taft asked. “Who is developing policy on pharmaceuticals and emergency medical services, ambulances. Where is that policy being developed?” Debating the health department’s budget in a committee meeting, Taft said he’s concerned Zwozdesky and Alberta Health and Wellness don’t have the capacity to develop policy, or keep Alberta Health Services accountable in spending its $9-billion operational budget. While he is responsible for ensuring the entire $15-billion health budget is spent properly, Zwozdesky said he walks a fine line between setting policy direction and leaving the health services to implement it. “We have to respect that yes, I am accountable as is the premier as is the whole of government accountable for it,” Zwozdesky said. But “people not want politicians interfering in the medical decisions that have to be made,” he said. “And those medical decisions are left best to the docs and the nurses and the other professional health-care providers so we have to maintain a degree of respect in a relationship that allows them to make unencumbered decisions.” He said policy decisions to close hospital beds had to be revisited when the health region no longer facing a $1.3-billion deficit.“There is that accountability and what I’ve said from Day 1 is we’re going to tighten the relationship” between Alberta Health and Wellness and Alberta Health Services. “We’re not going to strangle it, but we’re going to tighten it because we’ve got to get on the same page with this.”

Salient.

Ok a for using a word that I had to goggle to just START reading this post.

te he

[rock_shoes]

Scree is way more fun to go down than it is to go up. Go around dummies, go around!

[tniuqs]

Quote Gene Z.

“And those medical decisions are left best to the docs and the nurses and the other professional health-care providers so we have to maintain a degree of respect in a relationship that allows them to make unencumbered decisions.” He said policy decisions to close hospital beds had to be revisited when the health region no longer facing a $1.3-billion deficit.“There is that accountability and what I’ve said from Day 1 is we’re going to tighten the relationship” between Alberta Health and Wellness and Alberta Health Services. “We’re not going to strangle it, but we’re going to tighten it because we’ve got to get on the same page with this.”

Oddly enough input from the grunt providers has not been "requested" just the new white middle manager shirts in fact for EMS AHS.

So let the MDs and RNs ++ make the decisions but tighten the purse strings ?

Gene even this dumb grunt can see your talking out your hat, Gene your talking latitude/unencumbered to provide care but not funding it ...

sheesh more circle talking/scree running DOWN the mountain is more like it and don't slip Gene Z because it hurts your ass !

[Jamie Hersey]

"The AIT agreement was a legislated and signed document by the provinces to decrease trade barriers, best read the entire document first and foremost please. This is not clearly a one way street the destination being the very lucrative Oil-Patch industry in Northern BC and Alberta. So tell me it is't so and I have 30 'medics' and names doing just that, this very minute. Those that have actually gone through the process of reciprocity and we are richer for this in some ways, but damn near none are working on the Streets of Alberta PERIOD! but yet again your duped into believing there is not already avenues open ... say like taking a program in that province ?"

Is it fine well then perhaps I should do the same, live in AB and work in BC or SK the present AB conservative is quite concerned in residency now, and I do have responses in hand from AB Labour Minister in that regard.

If you are asking me if you should live in Alberta and work elsewhere, my answer is yes. It is a free country so do what you want. I suspect that people might be doing that very thing right now. If you need any contact information to help with job prospects let me know. As for the labour minister's response, could you share it with the group? I would be surprised to find a willingness to discuss barriers, such as 'provincial' residency status especially when you consider the AIT is aimed at knocking down barriers. Also, as you know finding quality staff can be a difficult prospect and manpower (staff) is needed to drive economic growth.

The Back Door approach:

Just a recent observation, BC will now accept the US REMT-P registry and grant licensure. Now with AIT agreement then allow's that individual to challenge the AB exams ... taking 3 writes to eventually pass and then go on to work in Oil Patch. To then reside in lands far away with (and admitted by that individual to never to work in the public system) It appears this back door approach is very effective means of just working the system, with absolutely no intent of contributing to Canadian society ... Is this the professionalism you are referring too ?

What a US NREMT-P going to BC, getting registered, then coming to Alberta to work… after failing the exam 3 times? Hmm, I think I picked up on your subtle undertones there. What you are saying is that somehow this individual is not qualified hence the backdoor comment. Let's break this down shall we? First, if the person is legally able to work in Canada then where they came from is not an issue. Secondly, you are confusing professional practice with a career again. Simply put, if EMALB says this individual can work as a medic, and ACoP says they can work as a medic, well then they can work as a medic. A professional association dictates professional practice not an individual's career choices. If they don't want to work in a public system, or they just want to work in the oilpatch so be it. It is their choice to do so. Even if you don't agree with it.

How they get taxed and where that money goes is a question of tax law, not professional practice.

As for the question at the end, is this the professionalism I am referring to, my answer would be yes. Look at it this way, how 'professional' would a paramedic association look if they excluded people based on non-clinical/training related issues?

Are there any assurances that the highest common denominator will win out ? ACoP approve no AHC approved increase in scope and other members of this board will agree with the least amount of Education .. could this be the way that we will follow in the future more toys in the kit ? To that end I will prove there are no artificial barriers, coming from a CMA approved program.

You can't start a paragraph talking about the highest common denominator, then end with saying that there are no artificial barriers. What is it? Personally, I am happy that a paramedic-based association is working on this. The discussion of why ACoP was chosen aside, would you rather it be a non-paramedic based association addressing this issue? After all if we (paramedics) can't get this right, then who can? How about a nursing association, or how about (insert profession here)? See my point? A paramedic association needs to be directed by paramedics.

Perhaps this Economic Development grant would better be served by funding Education for present and future Paramedics to improve levels of care to the community, instead of supporting other programs that favor those that have yet to become citizens of Canada, you know like helping Canadians better themselves before importing workers for big industry and then exploit them ?

Harsh economic times should have some influence or would some believe to foster the economic myth that Canada is a bottomless pit of support to the rest of the World ?

ie Charity begins at Home or so the saying goes ... the USA does not hand out "Green Cards" willy nilly so why should Canada ?

What level of care or training shall we train those paramedics at? How exactly would this economic grant favor non-citizens exactly? I don't follow your logic.

Canada supports the rest of the world? Really?

When did this become a discussion regarding us green cards, or Canadian residency? Here is a question for you: why do you think governments hand out green cards, and have immigration? Growth is the answer. When a population grows, so does the economy. People work, make money, spend that money, and demand services. I know I promised to not dive into economics but next time you are in a town with declining growth (decreased population) take a look around. What do you see? Next take a look at a boomtown (increased population). What do you see? This also applies to countries. Where do you want to live?

"Here is why it matters, the most its the present taxation laws, so buddy from wherever commutes and when he files his taxes (in his/her province of residence) the income tax earned then goes into THAT provinces coffer's even though the income is not earned there. But herein lies the problem, that individual is using the infrastructure of hospital, the roads and the like, not contributing to the very province that is providing employment. Its not a matter who or where they are from ... but the tax money goes someplace else --> hence the reason why with the massive amount of transient workers (in this example) Alberta has lost out and now has become a have not province."

Your understanding of taxation laws is delinquent, and you have complicated with provincial agreements in reguards to health. So perhaps go to the local post office and take another look at the General Form, and look to the very major recent controversy about transfer payments to AB. In the past economic history ALBERTA has paid far more than there fair share and has supported CANADA ... when the shoe changed feet ... well best do your homework is all I will say at this juncture .

Delinquent? I pay my taxes every year! J Sorry, I always thought my federal income tax, well, went to the federal government… If it doesn't go there where does it go then?

Oh no, here comes the Alberta advantage/rest of Canada is ripping us off discussion. If you want to talk economics, Ontario pays the most into the federal system and until last year they didn't receive a single transfer payment. I could go on here; however, I don't want to turn this thread into a flame war on taxes, and transfer payments. Perhaps I might already have.

Regardless of who pays into the system, stability is the key. A country with solid banking laws, strong government, and all that is a place I want to live, and a place that people want to invest in. Someone has to pay the bill, but then you can't turn around and beat up the system that provides that very stability. If you disagree I have some stock in a nice Liberian mining company for sale!

[tniuqs]

'Jamie Hersey' date='19 March 2010 - 09:40 AM' timestamp='1269013226' post='238236']

If you are asking me if you should live in Alberta and work elsewhere, my answer is yes. It is a free country so do what you want. I suspect that people might be doing that very thing right now. If you need any contact information to help with job prospects let me know. As for the labour minister's response, could you share it with the group? I would be surprised to find a willingness to discuss barriers, such as 'provincial' residency status especially when you consider the AIT is aimed at knocking down barriers. Also, as you know finding quality staff can be a difficult prospect and manpower (staff) is needed to drive economic growth.

Thanks for the offer of job contracts yes can you post the huge numbers of available jobs on the website ... presently available in Alberta ... and forget the oilpatch resume hunting EMS stuff because it is breakup and projects are completed for winter ... go fish.

Ok just who signed AIT again ? and when ? and what barriers are we semantically referring to again ? and how and why is immigration (out of country) tied to this ?

Economic growth, interesting so can you inform the group as to just what is the current unemployment rate in EMS (not the EI numbers) I personally know of 9 EMTs that are out of work with no prospects on the horizon, as for quality workers look to my paragraph on out of country Paramedics.

So live in a community and don't support that community then use its infrastructure at no cost, sorry to inform you this is not a free country. I pay a LOT of Taxes don't YOU and I have zero input in where those tax dollars go. So now instead of supporting my children, the schools (accept for special grant schools that just may be capitalizing on this free Federal grant money) so forget funding for post secondary schooling and forget that the Universities are steadily squeezing the lifeblood out of current young Canadians "ahem" that were born here, this CORP agreement in part supports those that did not support or build this country in the first place.

My suggestion is to separate the moneys based on the 3 goals, and not tie it all together in a ball of sting (note that strings ARE attached) I do support an National Exam Bank but for who accomplishes this .. hey lets be far under fair competition laws and "TENDER" an "RFP" ... hey that sounds fair because in the long run this "EXAM BANK" and "PROCESS" could become a marketable commodity.

As for the letter I will be holding it my hand for now, passed on to others of more influence than myself. Question: Does one not have to prove a need before one releases 1.2 million ? Well the interesting thing is government to a certain degree can be held accountable, with an provincial election coming and healthcare in the media every day ...just saying.

What a US NREMT-P going to BC, getting registered, then coming to Alberta to work… after failing the exam 3 times? Hmm, I think I picked up on your subtle undertones there. What you are saying is that somehow this individual is not qualified hence the backdoor comment. Let's break this down shall we? First, if the person is legally able to work in Canada then where they came from is not an issue. Secondly, you are confusing professional practice with a career again. Simply put, if EMALB says this individual can work as a medic, and ACoP says they can work as a medic, well then they can work as a medic. A professional association dictates professional practice not an individual's career choices. If they don't want to work in a public system, or they just want to work in the oilpatch so be it. It is their choice to do so. Even if you don't agree with it.

Subtle ? Try going the other way Canada to US ... LOL this a loop hole that should be closed immediately to protect high standards that in the PAST Alberta was noted for. There is a huge difference in quality of education and scope of practice south of the border and just look to the Colossal amount of information on that wee topic on EMT city ... your kidding me right?

I stand against government intervention in my chosen profession and unlike yourself I believe empowering and unifying in one collective voice is the correct path to follow. A regulatory body is established to evaluate a very basic standard of care not excellence or an advocacy for the profession let alone improve in scope of practice or forward thinking, look to track record again. Now the sad truth is that the paper card in hand from a regulatory body is an entry point ONLY, in the patch when it is booming its all you need ... now try applying to EDM or Calgary and see where that gets you.

Ok the patch ... now we are discussing an OH+S legislated entity (dictated to industry by government)and then to be provided service by a private for profit company, hey some operators are in it for the long haul but vast majority just have $$ in their eyes and best look to the OH+S "requirements" for medical equipment and some industrial oil patch operations actually retain staff for a whole year point is this is not a secure year round job in any way BUT the day rate makes everyone rub there hands with glee to find out it is not a reliable or anywhere near secure career for many reasons... Besides the regulatory body has a complete blind eye to industrial EMS when we should have wilderness or remote practice endorsement similar to ENFORM IRP 16 .. do you think that will ever happen ... meh.

Sheesh do you want to debate public vs private health care in Canada ... meh.

How they get taxed and where that money goes is a question of tax law, not professional practice.

Well at least a regulatory body gets a few bucks .... or is that area a bone of contention this very minute ?

As for the question at the end, is this the professionalism I am referring to, my answer would be yes. Look at it this way, how 'professional' would a paramedic association look if they excluded people based on non-clinical/training related issues?

Your point I am missing .. Please explain, try Google for definition of Professionalism.

You can't start a paragraph talking about the highest common denominator, then end with saying that there are no artificial barriers. What is it? Personally, I am happy that a paramedic-based association is working on this. The discussion of why ACoP was chosen aside, would you rather it be a non-paramedic based association addressing this issue? After all if we (paramedics) can't get this right, then who can? How about a nursing association, or how about (insert profession here)? See my point? A paramedic association needs to be directed by paramedics

.

I can start a paragraph any way I wish too ... the semantics you are perpetuating and the government definition of "terms" can you explain just what an "artificial" barrier is vs a Standard of expected care and Education? If you believe for one microdrop that this forced agreement is being discussed by PARAMEDICs in the first place your delusional, again check on the website and look to what level's are looking forward for the profession and the past transparency and fiscal responsibility ... check Facebook out and look to a respected member of this board and just why HE is running ... James Hersey I am not the ONLY one sees the true colours.

Better yet don't forget the political math in this as the ratio is 1:3 for the highest level of training/education. Then do the democratic MATH ... so just what levels collectively have the most clout in a vote ... DUH your not making your point re: non-paramedic based association THEN throw in 2 "public appointed" LOL "overseers" with a vote. It becomes quite apparent political science was not your major !

What level of care or training shall we train those paramedics at? How exactly would this economic grant favor non-citizens exactly? I don't follow your logic.

Umm ok maybe the strings attached ..it is a grant from Immigration Canada and Economic development to fund a goal established and agreed upon over 10 years ago ... Want a positive idea STIPEND http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stipend on that concept alone in AB I would have enough votes from just the current students in Alberta Medic programs ... better sleep, better marks, more focus and not a full time job burning 2 ends of the candle to feed themselves or their dependants... and a little thing called RETENTION of trained providers as this goes a long way.

Canada supports the rest of the world? Really?

I guess you missed the news lately, rebuilding Afghanistan, Haiti, medical support in Chili, supporting to the deep dark continent ... um remove head from dark places please. The question is we HAVE to set a limit and with the current Harper Government (in recession) the pockets will eventually run out of "spare pocket change" We have many social issues in Canada but fail to support within out own borders, again for clarity Charity begins at Home

When did this become a discussion regarding us green cards, or Canadian residency? Here is a question for you: why do you think governments hand out green cards, and have immigration? Growth is the answer. When a population grows, so does the economy. People work, make money, spend that money, and demand services. I know I promised to not dive into economics but next time you are in a town with declining growth (decreased population) take a look around. What do you see? Next take a look at a boomtown (increased population). What do you see? This also applies to countries. Where do you want to live?

Oddly enough I can live and now practice anywhere with my registration ... So if you enjoy a boom and bust economy where public service sectors (ps public EMS is in AB) are the first heads on the chopping block or you could be a opportunistic capitalist or a businessman, perhaps debating the "employer stakeholders position to get cheaper labour only ? I believe in sustainable controlled growth and immigration based on proven needs assessment on this topic we are diametrically and philosophically opposed.

Delinquent? I pay my taxes every year! J Sorry, I always thought my federal income tax, well, went to the federal government… If it doesn't go there where does it go then?

You have missed that point in its entirety, fortunately the AB Labour Minister did not and he advanced my concerns up the food chain, ps when I go fishing I throw the little ones back, I like playing the BIG FISH.

Oh no, here comes the Alberta advantage/rest of Canada is ripping us off discussion. If you want to talk economics, Ontario pays the most into the federal system and until last year they didn't receive a single transfer payment. I could go on here; however, I don't want to turn this thread into a flame war on taxes, and transfer payments. Perhaps I might already have.

You should pay more attention to Canadian current affairs (try CBC news) and cut the sarcasm because your just embaressing yourself and it appears you don't need me to help you.

Regardless of who pays into the system, stability is the key. A country with solid banking laws, strong government, and all that is a place I want to live, and a place that people want to invest in. Someone has to pay the bill, but then you can't turn around and beat up the system that provides that very stability. If you disagree I have some stock in a nice Liberian mining company for sale

!

Stability is in this Profession's best interest, timely, well researched data and deliberate actions NOT A GRANT MONEY GRAB and the topic of this thread in Alberta takes a step forward ... well its looking like a very slippery slope right now with Gene Z. trying to running for his political life and for higher ground ... good luck Gene a Wild Rose is right beside you and may be pushing your buttons right quick. (stay tuned)

If one regulatory body has allowed a glut of "labourers" and flood the Profession with IMHO substandard (I an entitled to my opinion)

Well we are our own forefathers in our destiny and we best wake up and associate for common goals to maintain and dare I say INCREASE the Pre-hospital Standards not these "artificial barriers to business" good grieve J.H. can't you see the difference ?

Note my words well and in closing: If one "supposed untouchable" group threatens job security they just may find that the principles of democracy will defeat them. Is it a far stretch of the imagination to believe they too will be found pounding the pavement themselves and with a "restricted" practice permit. don't count the Unions out of this JUST yet.

cheers

ps I do enjoy your screen name as I do like to eat Chocolate.

Edited March 19, 2010 by tniuqs

[emtannie]

I have been watching this thread for some time, and am finally going to interject with some of my observations and comments.

Jamie asked Personally, I am happy that a paramedic-based association is working on this. The discussion of why ACoP was chosen aside, would you rather it be a non-paramedic based association addressing this issue? After all if we (paramedics) can't get this right, then who can?

I have a number of issues with a certain regulatory body taking on the role of determining the national standard.

- the organization in question is not a democratic organization, regardless of what they try to tell their members. The paramedics who are members do not get input into the decisions made by this regulatory body. Oh, they talks a good line, and has an AGM every May, but it doesnt matter what the members vote, the board can overturn each and every vote that the members make. So, Jamie, IMHO, we dont get input, so we wont get it right.

- this regulatory body began the process of computer-based testing several years ago, and after spending several hundred thousand dollars on it, shelved it, and most members do not know that this was shelved. On top of the money spent, I am still not sure why they were trying to re-invent the wheel, when it would have been much more efficient and cost effective to involve a group who had already designed EMS computer-based testing. Is this going to be another situation where this group starts a project and does not finish it?

- this regulatory body has obvious management issues, given the number of board and committee members who have resigned in the past 2 years. I would have to look back through the paperwork, but off the top of my head, I think it has been over 50% turnover on the board. This tells me that there are internal issues that are not being resolved, and members are unable to work with each other to solve the issues.

- I know of specific circumstances where the ethics of this regulatory body are in question. I will not divulge complete details here, as I do not think that is appropriate, but I know of events at exams where neutrality has been questioned. I question the ethics when it comes to determining what organization is qualified to provide education and instruction, when there are providers who have had classes with 100% failure rates at exam writings with no investigation, and other providers who have had almost 100% pass rates and yet have had their authorization to provide classes revoked.

Given what I have seen, and my questioning of the ability of the regulatory body to provide a quality product, and their lack of allowing practicing members to provide quality input, my faith in their being able to build a national standard is almost non-existent.

Now, to my comments about the Alberta situation:

- AHS took over all EMS operations; however, they negotiated contracts with a number of services, and specifically amalgamated services, so really, they did not take over the operations.

- Before provincialization of EMS, there were 2 pilot projects Peace Region, and Palliser region. I work in the area formerly known as Palliser (why does the artist formerly known as Prince come to mind). In 4+ years, the powers that be were never able to completely integrate services and amalgamate operations so that it was truly a unified region. There were a number of areas that were never addressed, including renumeration and equipment standardization, and problems that were never solved. I am aware of similar issues in Peace region. If those powers that be couldnt consolidate a region, how can they possibly think they can consolidate an entire province?

I will comment a little on tniuqss rant on immigrant staffing (and tniuqs, please correct me if my interpretation is wrong):

- as an instructor, I am well aware on the limitations we put on class sizes and how hard it is for students to get into programs. The Alberta regulatory body and CMA puts limitations on instructor:student ratios, and there are limitations due to availability of practicum sites as well.

- it is frustrating to see allowances for workers to come in from other regions, and offer training with decreased cost and hours to those workers, when we are limiting training of our local staff for example, EMTs who want to get into medic programs, but due to cost and limited spaces, cannot get in; however, if they were from out of country, they would be allowed training at a reduced rate. What is the advantage to this system? Isnt it better to train local, so that those students will remain local, instead of training someone who is more likely to leave? As an employer I want an employee who will stay with me the costs of staff turnover are huge, and I want to avoid that (hmmmm… back to the regulatory body board member vacancy rate… oh never mind), and by bringing in employees from out of region, it also increases the probability that those same employees will not stay here as long.

- I am not saying that we have to have protectionist policies. I am saying that we need to improve our current system for our own population first, and build off the resources we have currently, rather than continue to limit access for our own population. We need to open the doors for more providers to allow for more students, rather than grant one time fast track programs for foreign students the fast track programs are a short term, short-sighted solution, not a long term improvement to EMS. Instead, they have done the opposite they have recently implemented a 1 year moratorium on applications to provide EMS instruction, so that those that are currently under review are being put on hold, and new applications from educational services will not be considered.

Now, I have a couple other questions…

Jamie Hershey, I am curious as to what your background is and where you work, and what you do. Unless I have missed it, and if I have, I apologise, but where do you live and work, and what is your certification? How many years of EMS experience do you have? I know you are not ACoP registered, so where are you certified to work? If I have missed it, please re-post it for me. Because of my generally pessimistic nature, I am curious what your background truly is.

Edited March 19, 2010 by emtannie

[Jamie Hersey]

Emtannie,

To answer your question I did work in Alberta. I started my EMS career there back in 1998, but I have moved on. Currently, I mostly do contract work which keeps me moving around. Currently I seem to prefer warm and sunny locations with the army. Also, the majority of my work is at the critical care level. I like the varied nature of the work, and having a bit more time with my patients, but I still do moonlight in ground-EMS. So I guess that puts my time in at about 12 years.

Perhaps working a variety of places give me a different view on what EMS is, or what it could be. I have worked with US medic, UK medics, and practitioners from a few places in between. To me I see them as colleagues, thus any move to make providers from wherever work wherever they want is a good move in my books. It opens doors for everyone.

Now, I didn't find an Emtannie on the ACoP website either

If you want any more info feel free to PM me, and we can talk on this further if you wish. I am not trying to downplay the changes that are going on in Alberta, or ACoP new role, or the AIT, and all that. I just hope it has a positive outcome. Where do you work right now? Who knows, perhaps we might have worked in the same town at one point or another, or know mutual friends in the industry.

[tniuqs]

Back on topic (more or less)

Emtannie,

To answer your question I did work in Alberta. I started my EMS career there back in 1998, but I have moved on. Currently, I mostly do contract work which keeps me moving around. Currently I seem to prefer warm and sunny locations with the army. Also, the majority of my work is at the critical care level. I like the varied nature of the work, and having a bit more time with my patients, but I still do moonlight in ground-EMS. So I guess that puts my time in at about 12 years.

Perhaps working a variety of places give me a different view on what EMS is, or what it could be. I have worked with US medic, UK medics, and practitioners from a few places in between. To me I see them as colleagues, thus any move to make providers from wherever work wherever they want is a good move in my books. It opens doors for everyone.

Now, I didn't find an Emtannie on the ACoP website either

If you want any more info feel free to PM me, and we can talk on this further if you wish. I am not trying to downplay the changes that are going on in Alberta, or ACoP new role, or the AIT, and all that. I just hope it has a positive outcome. Where do you work right now? Who knows, perhaps we might have worked in the same town at one point or another, or know mutual friends in the industry.

cheers

Next topic on my ranting list stay tuned all, and sorry for the sabbatical ... True artificial barriers in Labour Mobility Canada, the WCB in B.C. or the OFA level 3 !

Edited April 30, 2010 by tniuqs