Social Media

Social Media back in the head lines!

Though it is the current "IN" thing to push boundaries in and will be the topic of debate for more years to come. Its another instance of some one posted something they shouldn't have and then got in trouble. Now some one's crying because they have to face consequences for their actions! I personally find it ridiculous that people use Social Media as a public medium for complaining....that's what phone calls are still used for!!  

For those who are interested about what on earth I'm talking about,here are the post from the Journal of EMS website pertaining to our topic.The links: Think before you post,  Feds rule EMT facebook firing Illegal

But for all those to lazy to read it all let me break it down for you.

An Ambulance Agency in Connecticut (AMR to be specific) has allegedly fired an employee "wrongfully" after said employee posted disparaging remarks about her Supervisor on a social media outlet (Facebook) along with over other complaints about her work.

National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled that the firing to be wrongful and illegal. Now there seems to be some discrepancy over why it was considered illegal. From what I took from it was that due to AMR being a Unionized work force, there has to be a Union representative for all disciplinary hearings and the termination decisions. Which seems to be where AMR is in the wrong here, there was no disciplinary hearing and thus no representative present before termination. The talk over the social media aspect is gaining all the attention and focus about it being a ground breaking decision. The NLRB does protect the rights of employees, and this protection allows for the ability to talk to fellow coworkers about your concerns and gripes towards management both in and out of work. Where it is less clear is the social media outlet, does it count for a protected form of complaining? I guess NLRB thinks yes, but I pose a few questions to consider.

1. Was the said employees Facebook privacy setting set to public or private? This is important to know because if it was more than "friends" that she was venting to then it could stain the reputation of the company.

2. What was said about the supervisor, and was slanderous? Now you don't have to like your supervisors, nor do you have to agree with or like their appointment to the position. But you can not speak or publish verbally abusive statements effecting ones reputation. Obviously if it was slanderous then the NLRB would not cover their freedom of speech in this aspect.

Though after I learned of what was reportedly said I see no reason not to fire the said employee.

The NY Times reported that the posting to Facebook was: "Love how the company allows a 17 to become a supervisor"—17 is the company lingo for a psychiatric patient  

Now I'm no lawyer type, and never passed the Bar exam, but this seems to be slanderous. On a possible public forum to call your supervisor a Psychiatric patient, granted the lingo "17" may not be world wide known as this, but it spreads a poor reputation on the supervisor and company, thus is slanderous.

Definition of Slander: a false,malicious statement (spoken or published), especially one which is injurious to a person's reputation. I see no way in which it doesn't fit the definition.

I am sure this is not the last we will hear about AMR or their employee, and there will be some fall out from this situation. I'm not sure that this will be ground breaking by any means for the realm of social media and the work place.  What I can assure you is that this will happen again and when it does some Blogger will shed light on the situation....and take a few fun jabs at the problem.

By the way all complaints can be made to the Ambulance Junkie's Blog Fan page on Facebook. Cause it seems appropriate! 

Be Safe

Ambulance Junkie

An EMT's take on not Needing more Medics.

Recently fellow bloggers have put forth a topic of discussion that I feel I would weigh in on. Medic 999 posed the question of  "Do we really need Paramedics on ambulances?", which caused a well thought out response,   "We don't need more Medics"  from 510 Medic.

Both Bloggers are Paramedics and offer, in my opinion, a surprising response. They both seem to say that more medics is not the solution to an overwhelming problem in EMS. There is no need to have a Paramedic on every single ambulance let alone two. In fact I am willing to argue that the common place of having Medics on every single rig has lead to a decline in patient care and a Medic's overall ability. 

Now don't get on your soap box and assume I'm saying that Medics abilities are poor, or we don't need medics. One the contrary my dear reader, I am merely making reference to my comment on 510 Medic's blog, which was:

"I agree totally, I feel it is leading to a downward spiral of our providers. EMT’s who may not get the experience from the BLS truck, may not be as experienced with the “basics”. EMT’s only riding on ALS trucks then feel the need to advance them selves in order to get more patient contact and more experience. Thus becoming Paramedics, and with declining con-ed budget’s, are still not being as experienced as their predecessors. These newly carded Paramedics who have a lack of the “basics” typically turn out to be poorer providers. "

By this I refer to the idea that EMT's are rushing them selves into a Medic class before having confidence in their own ability or exposure to really bad patients. EMT's see Medics doing more skills, being paid more, and being the "life saver". They do not get a sound fundamental skill set that they can rely on through their career in EMS by rushing their advancement. These providers are then welcomed into a world of diminishing providers by being thrown into the captains chair by being cleared. The expectation of a systematic transition to gain and hone the much needed street skills is pushed aside to the need for a warm body to fill a schedule hole. The response to the negligence of clearing a provider before they are ready? They can make up needed skills in the continuous education training that is expected of all providers and catch up on their need. Sounds great, and almost reasonable right? Except we enter the new age of declining education budgets and fewer instructors. Now the much needed continuous education isn't being offered or being set aside for a later date. Now the new medics have to rely on their experience and their fundamental skill set. When all else fails they can rely on the basics after all right?

So if you have followed along, you may have picked up on the criticism systematic failure that faces EMS. 

"I’m not saying we need to triple the BLS trucks on the road but rather put weight on the experience gained for our EMT’s in a BLS setting. As with any performance overhaul its typically a good idea to start at the bottom/beginning."

I think we need to understand and credit that there is an enormous amount of applicable skills that can be learned in the Basic ambulance arena. By putting weight on this experience, EMS will only benefit with strengthening our base structuring and ultimately our future Medics.

Be Safe
Ambulance Junkie