AMR and Piners vote to strike in northern California

[MadAxe]

none of us were on forced overtime. what we did was work on our off days....It made a really nice paycheck and it paid for a trip to Australia so I did it without hesitation.

Okay, fair enough. It's not for me to judge what people choose to do on their days off. And if you chose to take on another job to help pay some bills thats your business.

But the reality is that from an organized labour standpoint, your actions helped to keep the former employees from getting any sort of concessions, or managing to get their old jobs back with any sort of improvements. You and everybody else in your situation could have declined those extra hours and extra pay, and helped out some fellow workers to improve their lot. That's not an entirely selfless action, either - somewhere down the road you and your colleagues might have been prepared to walk out. How would you have felt if those employees also refused to move in and do your jobs on OT?

Again, it all comes down to sticking together for mutual benefit.

[Dustdevil]

Ah, now I understand where the confusion comes from. You are quoting me out of context, and I still have to wonder if you are not doing so intentionally to suit your agenda.

Let me try one more time to get it through your head...

I said IF THEY STRIKE... then the fire department would step in. They did not strike, so you can neither prove nor disprove my statement.

You're a smart guy and obviously have some keen insight. But your emotional passion for the topic seems to keep you from seeing the picture clearly. That is going to hold you back from doing the right thing and achieving the things you could achieve for those you represent. Step back and try to UNDERSTAND situations and statements rather than simply marching forth with the party line and not bothering to listen to others.

Also, you need to understand that this is not Canadia we are talking about. This is CALIFORNIA, where FD EMS is the rule, not the exception. There is not a decent sized fire department in the entire state that does not have a contingency plan sitting in the chiefs desk drawer, ready to implement on a moments notice, to take over EMS functions. Your understanding is quite valid for Canadia, but it's crap in California.

[MadAxe]

Ah, now I understand where the confusion comes from. You are quoting me out of context, and I still have to wonder if you are not doing so intentionally to suit your agenda.

Let me try one more time to get it through your head...

I said IF THEY STRIKE... then the fire department would step in. They did not strike, so you can neither prove nor disprove my statement.

DustDevil, your entire post is quoted above, and the words 'if they strike' aren't in it. And basic logic is clear in that a negative can't be disproved - hardly a victory for you.

I'm quoting you in full, but let's proceed from the notion that you did in fact mean 'if they strike Fire will step in'. Okay... so why didn't they? According to you the Fire Dept's in California are ready to go with their contingency in the Chief's desk drawer, presumably with little or no need for additional resources from the local governments. Why did the politicians let it get down to 10 hours to the strike deadline without mobilizing Fire to ensure a seamless transition? Do they enjoy living on the edge?

As for my passion clouding my judgement and 'having an agenda', you're the one typing in big angry letters and who started making insulting comments. Sounds like you're a lot more passionate about this than I. And my 'agenda' is to have EMS workers stand together and fight for improved wages and working conditions. Are you taking a stand against that idea? Are you arguing that we should all be poor and living in fear of our managers?

All I predicted was that if the medics stood together, they'd prevail. And I was right. Are you so intolerant of anyone disagreeing with you that you can't accept any viewpoint other than yours having some validity?

[Dustdevil]

More assumptions made by myopic judgement.

No, I am not taking a stand against your idea. I never said that. I merely pointed out the very real reality that has played itself out hundreds of times across this country that you obviously have never practised in. If the private provider implodes, the local government can and will provide service for their citizens without them. That is fact. It has nothing to do with whether or not I think workers should stick together or anything else. Unlike yourself, I am not here with an agenda to spout my political views. I am merely pointing out the obvious for the intelligent consideration of those in such a situation. I wish them the best. They just need not be naive and end up standing together in "solidarity" in the unemployment line because they thought their 80 hour EMT patch was indisposable. Remember, we don't have one and two year programs for basic level providers like you do. We have a huge glut of basic level providers, including every paid firefighter in the State of California. Sort of takes away the bargaining chip you seem to think they have there, doesn't it?

[MadAxe]

If the private provider implodes, the local government can and will provide service for their citizens without them. That is fact.

In the short term, they'll only be able to do so if a company like AMR is able to convince its staff to come in and work on OT, like the example already given above. If the staff in question were to show some solidarity and refuse to do so, that local government is in big trouble. As I've been saying all along, stick together and we all stand to benefit.

A fire service, even one that already provides EMS coverage, is going to be very hard pressed to upscale to meet the new level of demand without a significant infusion of personnel and resources. It's cheaper to employ an independant EMS agency to do that than to try and fund Fire to do it.

Those facts give workers, even those with an '80-hour EMT patch' that you so denigrate, some leverage in the bargaining process that they should be willing to use. If the rest of us will stand with them, they'll be successful.

I'd like to add that my wife was an NREMT-I for four years before we got married and moved up here. I'm well aware of the differences between Canadian and American pre-hospital care, and the issues facing American EMT's and Paramedics. The legislation is different all over the continent, but the basic principles of organized labour in the workforce are universal.

Unlike yourself, I am not here with an agenda to spout my political views.

Again with the 'agenda' accusations. WTF does that have to do with politics? This is a labour issue that directly affects every single one of us who does this for a living. What are you here with? Helpful comments like this?

Screw them. If the wankers spent less money on electronic cardiology stethoscopes, star of life tattoos, and useless crap from Galls, they could afford a $30 dollar co-pay for $300 dollars worth of medical care. Don't like that co-pay? Move to Canada and wait three months for your "free" doctors visit that cost you ten percent of your salary. Rolling Eyes

I am merely pointing out the obvious for the intelligent consideration of those in such a situation.

And if they had listened to you, they would have gotten nothing.

[Dustdevil]

Those facts give workers, even those with an '80-hour EMT patch' that you so denigrate, some leverage in the bargaining process that they should be willing to use. If the rest of us will stand with them, they'll be successful.

EVERY single professional firefighter in the State of California is at least certified EMT. A VERY large percentage of them are Paramedics. And a VERY large percentage of those wannabes who are trying to be firefighters are also EMTs and Paramedics. Not to mention that a couple of hundred schools are cranking out several hundred new ones every four months. Not to mention the "Boot Camp" there that cranks out EMT-Bs in 14 days. And have you not noticed how many Californians come to this website desperate for a job? You're crazy if you think anybody is going to have any problem staffing a service there without drawing on AMR and others.

The legislation is different all over the continent, but the basic principles of organized labour in the workforce are universal.

Yes and no. The principles are the same, but the results are not. Even in California, unions are fast losing their foothold. The governor himself is going against unions. Many US states are non-union and will never be union. Again, I really think you are not thinking realistically for the US work environment. In places like Ontario or BC, where all EMS is government run, the situation is not even remotely analogous to private systems in California. Canadians don't have to worry about private industries stepping in and taking over a government function. Canadians don't have a billion unemployed/underemployed EMTs just salivating at a chance for an ambulance job, no matter how low the pay or benefits. Maybe up in the northeast where Union is a way of life, and the government would rather sit back and regulate industry than provide it themselves, your theory would be valid. But, as most any American will tell you, the northeast isn't part of the US. What I said would happen has indeed happened many times over in this country. Ask anybody who has been in US EMS for a long time.

Again with the 'agenda' accusations. WTF does that have to do with politics? This is a labour issue that directly affects every single one of us who does this for a living.

This, you would know if you were more familiar with US EMS and labour issues. Politics and labour issues are synonymous. This definition of "political" from the American Heritage Dictionary says it all: Based on or motivated by partisan or self-serving objectives. Sounds exactly like your "solidarity" and "labour issues" to me.

What are you here with? Helpful comments like this?

Hey... you say screw the companies and the communities and the scabs. I say screw the wankers. What's the difference? We're both screwing somebody. What makes your point of screw so much more valid than mine?

And if they had listened to you, they would have gotten nothing.

And if they had listened to YOU, they would have been unemployed by now. Good thing they listened to neither of us, right?

[MadAxe]

EVERY single professional firefighter in the State of California is at least certified EMT. A VERY large percentage of them are Paramedics. And a VERY large percentage of those wannabes who are trying to be firefighters are also EMTs and Paramedics. Not to mention that a couple of hundred schools are cranking out several hundred new ones every four months. Not to mention the "Boot Camp" there that cranks out EMT-Bs in 14 days. And have you not noticed how many Californians come to this website desperate for a job? You're crazy if you think anybody is going to have any problem staffing a service there without drawing on AMR and others.

Again, if it were as easy as you're suggesting, why on earth would this company have caved? Why capitulate and offer a massive raise if they didn't have to? Why not just fire them all and hire on these droves of unemployed EMT-B's? Why is any EMS agency paying its staff anything more than minimum wage, if there are 'a billion' of EMT-B's just salivating for jobs, as you claim. Why?

The answer is that it would be fantastically expensive, and a huge beaurocratic hassle for any agency to just unload all its staff and try to re-hire new ones. That's where skill in demand setting comes in - make yourself the cheaper of all options while still getting the best offer you can. This isn't rocket science - every labour market on the planet does this. Why are you so convinced that EMS is any different? If anything, EMS has it better than most industries- our jobs can't be outsourced to India for $0.25 a day. A diesel engine manufacturer can shut down for two weeks to re-tool if they want to. An EMS service can't do that. That's the leverage we use to bargain with, and sometimes that might have to go as far as threatening to strike, depending on the conditions on the ground.

Even in California, unions are fast losing their foothold. The governor himself is going against unions. Many US states are non-union and will never be union....Canadians don't have to worry about private industries stepping in and taking over a government function.

Anti-union political sentiment and the actual labour laws written on the books are two very different things. Don't confuse them. Unions are a fact of life for the corportate world and will remain so. Look at the airlines. Look at all the major car manufacturers. Look at the movie industry - all heavily unionized. As for Canada, you obviously know even less than I know about California - government handover to private corporations is everywhere. Even our sacred cow of health care is slowly being privatized. EMS in Canada is one of the few exceptions, largely because we've got a strong labour movement within Canadian EMS services. And other than Ontario, none of the provinces have 2-year BLS programs.

This definition of "political" from the American Heritage Dictionary says it all: Based on or motivated by partisan or self-serving objectives. Sounds exactly like your "solidarity" and "labour issues" to me.

I'm trying to motivate and educate anybody and everybody who works for a living in this field to stand up and better their working conditions. Including you, assuming you do in fact do this kind of work. The pressures of government, budgetary, and corporate issues will form a natural opposition, and a fair solution for everybodywill be found in the middle.

That's it. I don't want to see the public endangered, I don't want to see anybody's business go under - but I'm also unwilling to be stepped on so somebody can reap a greater profit off my back. I want a fair wage for the work I do. I want a level playing field for all parties, and on the worker side that means organized labour, until something better comes along.

In the Perfect World of DustDevil, exactly how would things work? No unions? We take whatever companies offer without dissent? You've got a lot of hyperbole to offer, but that's about all I've seen from you so far. What exactly is it you think these people should have done? What do you think any service should do that's going into contract negotiations. I've got a plan - what's yours?

Hey... you say screw the companies and the communities and the scabs. I say screw the wankers. What's the difference? We're both screwing somebody. What makes your point of screw so much more valid than mine?

Well, for one thing the word 'wanker' never appears in anything I've written - I think that says a lot about the difference between me and you. I'm trying to inform and encourage every person reading this who is facing or will face this kind of situation in the future. I'm trying to provide cogent arguments and actual data to support my position. You're engaging in name calling and reactionary rhetoric. You've yet to coherantly respond to all but a fraction of the challenges I've posited to you.

And if they had listened to YOU, they would have been unemployed by now. Good thing they listened to neither of us, right

I said stick to their position and they Powers that Be would cave, and they'd get what they wanted. Whether that took a strike, or just the threat of one. Well, they stuck to their position, threatened to strike right down to the 11th hour - and the Powers caved and they got what they wanted. They all still have jobs, and they all got a raise. Is this somehow confusing for you?

[nsmedic393]

I'm joining the post a little late here, so sorry. All this hits close to home for me. My service which employs over 900 medics is currently a year and a half without a contract and in binding arbitration as we speak.

Dust and Mads argument aside, it seems to me there are alot of people out there that just don't understand how a union works.

I'm probably one of the few here that has actually been on strike. We did it seven years ago and i would be doing it right now if I had my way. We walked out in the morning and were back to work by supper. Thats how fast the company caved.

I suspect that if we striked this time round, the goverment would have enacted legislation to make us an essential service and take away our right to strike, but at least we are still left with the binding arbitration.

In short the threat of a strike and in the end a strike itself is a powerfull tool in a unions bargaining toolbox. To those that say that we should be hung and we don't care about the people we serve I say you are foolish on a whole lot of levels. I care about the people I serve, but I care much more about the people who live under my roof that I am responsible for providing for.

I enjoy the protection of a union and to those that don't understand it; nuts to you. You will get it some day.

[Dustdevil]

Again' date=' if it were as easy as you're suggesting, why on earth would this company have caved? Why capitulate and offer a massive raise if they didn't have to? Why not just fire them all and hire on these droves of unemployed EMT-B's?[/quote']

Is that a serious question? Because they didn't want to lose their business! Had there been a strike, they would have been sacked, and the FD would have taken over before they ever had a chance to hire the droves as replacements. You seem to not realise that the business owners have exactly the same concerns as the workers to consider. Strike = game over. For everybody.

Because they can. Because it's the right thing to do. Because it attracts better people to work for them. Because, as you yourself have proven, the better you treat your people, they better they will work for you. I know in your utopian workers paradise, all warm bodies are the same, but better employers don't necessarily see it that way.

Bingo. That's why striking would kill the company, and the jobs you were striking for.

Because it is! Because unlike auto workers and pipefitters, closing down the plant for a few days or weeks is not an option. While the government will not step in and take over your car factory, they absolutely WILL step in and take over EMS in a heartbeat and never again look back at a private provider. How can you not see the difference?

Exactly, but any use of leverage has to consider balance. Ever use a lever and end up lifiting something too far, causing it to tumble over and break? That's what will happen when the business owner calls your bluff. Remember, strike = game over in private EMS, especially in California. You are still missing my entire point, which is IF YOU STRIKE, YOU HAVE JUST LOST YOUR JOB. PERIOD. That is ALL I am saying. I am very happy to see workers bargaining with management to improve conditions. Not opposed to that at all. You just have to be smart about it. It's like poker. Bluffing is a great strategy, but sooner or later it's time to put up or shut up. And if all you have to put up is a strike, you just lost.

And because it is an exception, my point is proven.

Which is why I said ONE OR TWO YEARS. I know what I am talking about.

No argument there. I am not against fair and equitable solutions. I am against professional suicide. And I am against this socialist "they shouldn't make so much money and only pay us this much" class warfare by people whose only qualification for the job is a school that can be completed in two weeks.

Anybody making over ten dollars an hour for a two week certification is overpaid. And if you don't like the way the business is run, or think the playing field is not level, go start your own. Put YOUR money, heart and soul into starting the business and trying to run it. Put YOUR life savings at risk and tell me how much claim all your flunkees with two weeks of training have to YOUR profits. Again, if you are working for the government with a one or two year diploma, you have a gripe. If you are working for Joe Blow's Ambulance Service with a two week certificate, you don't have dick. Sure, you can cut off your nose to spite your face by striking. And you can brag about all the power you yield with your "solidarity" in the unemployment line afterwards. And while you are on welfare bragging about how you took down Joe Blow's Ambulance Service, Joe will be selling off all his equipment and property and still be living in a mansion. And now you and all the others who are too fat or stupid to get hired by a fire department can reminisce about the good ol days when somebody with two weeks of training, who is out of shape and half retarded, could actually get a job on an ambulance without being a fireman.

I just told you. If you want to make more money than a two week certificate can buy you, go back to school and better yourself and quit blaming "the man" for holding you down when it is your own lack of intelligence, education, and personal motivation that is holding you down.

Bull$hit. I didn't call you a wanker. And it doesn't matter how much data you put forth if it doesn't amount to a solution. You're not giving solutions. You're just issuing challenges. That is the very definition of hyperbole.

Apparently it is confusing for you. You are confusing a good hand with a successful bluff. Just becuase you win a hand of poker with a bluff does not mean you had anything of value in your cards. Your friends in California won a bluff. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't. But it's awful easy for you to sit up in your cozy little government job in Canadia and tell them to take such a risk. It's not you who is unemployed when Joe closes his shop.

[kevkei]

I'm probably one of the few here that has actually been on strike.

We did too 3 years ago and ended up getting twice what they had offered. The result was due to them not bargaining at all, the offer on day one was the same as their final offer at the 11th hour (bargaining in bad faith).

In short the threat of a strike and in the end a strike itself is a powerfull tool in a unions bargaining toolbox. To those that say that we should be hung and we don't care about the people we serve I say you are foolish on a whole lot of levels. I care about the people I serve, but I care much more about the people who live under my roof that I am responsible for providing for.

I enjoy the protection of a union and to those that don't understand it; nuts to you. You will get it some day.

Agree'd. It isn't a bargaining tool if they don't think you will do it, so sometimes you have to prove them wrong. They sold it to city council and the tax payers that they had an adequate contingency plan but failed to mention they could only survive for 12 hours with half of the units we would normally have.

Using the addage about serving the patients, all they do is use that as a hostage tool. Why should we care about the patients when our employer doesn't care about us?