Should we go back to Drivers ?

[Christopher.Collins]

...

Maybe we could ship you some of ours? :wink:

Dwayne

I volunteer! I need some change in my life, begining with location and people.

[crotchitymedic1986]

no, i was talking about USA. Maybe in your region there is no shortage, but my friends there tell me the paramedic shortage is still high.

[spenac]

no, i was talking about USA. Maybe in your region there is no shortage, but my friends there tell me the paramedic shortage is still high.

But staffing with 1 basic plus a driver is just an extremely bad solution.

[Dustdevil]

To justify paying someone as a professional driver, they need at least a CDL, which is more education than most EMTs have. And they demand more money than EMTs too. So while the professional upside of this is obvious, what exactly is the economic upside?

[WolfmanHarris]

Why do we want to take one under-trained, low requirement job and replace it with a lower-trainer even lower requirement job? If someone's lost their job and doesn't have more qualifications than a hundred or so hour job, they might just have to go to McDonald's until they can take the few weekends to become a Basic.

Now in terms of the plan itself... who are you hoping to help? Giving cities and counties an out to pay less for a service they don't care about or understand doesn't help anyone but the politicians who can tout out those savings and how they've managed to cut costs without cutting services with the remarkable thinking. I don't see how this helps providers at all.

Also I've never known a government to get rid of something in bad times only to bring it back when it gets good. Once they're allowed to save money by putting totally untrained people on the Ambulance, why would they be inclined to pay more in good economic times?

[VentMedic]

This may call for drastic action, in order to keep services afloat for the next two years. My thoughts are that maybe we should go back to just having "drivers" on the ambulance, maybe with an EMTI or Paramedic partner. This way, we could open jobs up to all these unemployed folks, keep our ambulances manned with lower payroll (maybe have medics on rover cars).

Many states do not require that an "ambulance driver" must be an EMT. In some states only one of the two people on a BLS truck must be an EMT. I do know this to be true in Florida.

We operated for many years with just one certified or licensed person on a truck. Some of the specialty teams have an "ambulance driver" since there is usually no role for the EMT. FFs can be assigned to drive for Rescue/Ambulance and not be required to have an EMT cert. We did operate with a FF driver and 2 Fire/Paramedics back when 3 person rescue/ambulance trucks were the norm. We also didn't have to run engines and ladders to every call with this arrangement. But now, almost every FF is a Paramedic in my area and we have certified Paramedics still working at Burger King waiting for the FD to call. Oh well...so much for that train of thought.

[Christopher.Collins]

Probably already mentioned somehwere but I feel like crap and am currently too lazy to check...

Dont some companies like Rural Metro and Southwest Ambulance have proffesional drivers that do that, just drive? My uncle is constantly asking me to move out to Tennesee and saying I could take a job doing that untill I get my state certifications.

[firedoc5]

I don't have a problem with having a "designated driver". IMHO, in a perfect world there would always be two in the back and a driver. Even though the driver wouldn't be medically trained, but could be an extra set of hands and a "gopher". But there is the requirement that you must have at least two EMT signatures. A lot of places do just run two EMT's, one to drive and one in the back. So that means you are having to hire a third person to drive, which costs more.

But I do have a problem of hiring someone off the street to drive. Anyone on an ambulance crew must have some kind of emergency training, which takes time and money. It might not have to be medical training but they do need instruction in some form. Whether it be for extrication, emergency driving, various rescue techniques, etc.

All in all, an EMT-A/B (Basic) would be the best suited. Preferably one who is wanting to become a Medic eventually. They get experience working with Medics and can gradually work their way up. So getting rid of basic EMT's is counterproductive.

I more than agree with DD of a professional driver, especially one with a CDL, will require more money. Even a professional limoseine driver makes more than an EMT.

And I'm sorry, but opening up posistions for EMS drivers won't effect the jobless rate one bit. That idea is just kind of reaching.

Hopping off my little box now.

[VentMedic]

But there is the requirement that you must have at least two EMT signatures. A lot of places do just run two EMT's, one to drive and one in the back.

What state are you in?

Several states, like Florida, only require one EMT on a BLS truck and the other can be a driver only. However, with the over abundance of EMTs and Paramedics that can not get hired by the FD, 2 EMTs are the norm on the ambulances.

[firedoc5]

What state are you in?

Several states, like Florida, only require one EMT on a BLS truck and the other can be a driver only. However, with the over abundance of EMTs and Paramedics that can not get hired by the FD, 2 EMTs are the norm on the ambulances.

I'm in IL. Unless it's changed in the last 12 yrs or so, it's always been required to have two EMT signitures of at least EMT-A or higher.