How does your compensation compare with that of your peers in EMS?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on October 9, 2009 at 6:49pm

I can't complain about the compensation package. It almost pays for the blood pressure medication.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Samuel Curatola on October 12, 2009 at 1:37am

In the USA I hardly know anyone in fire, police and ems who don't have two to three jobs just to allow thems to work fire, police and ems so many know its not the buck$. I am getting back my medic to use in conjuction with nursing. Here in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma I make more as a security/EMT basic at a warehouse then I do as a EMT basic on any non fire service and none of them offer real benifits, and lets not forget right to work! Wages are min wage $7.50 hr to $10/hr on a 24hr truck that your only paid 13 hrs for and the rest your on call and only paid if called out!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Skip Kirkwood on October 12, 2009 at 10:21pm

Samuel, why do people take jobs that pay like you describe? If people wouldn't work for peanuts, they'd have to pay more.

Is the local economy bad, or are there just too many volly-whackers?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Robert Sullivan on October 13, 2009 at 1:17pm

Paramedics in Delaware are compensated well; better than in the surrounding states. We can afford a middle-class lifestyle without overtime. There are also plenty of opportunities to make more by working part time on BLS ambulances.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Earl Culvey on October 15, 2009 at 6:01pm

I don't know where Samuel is from, but in my area I believe I am compensated to the point that my employer can afford. I am paid better than some of my co-workers, due to extra work I do. Most of you will probably cringe, but I make 9.25 an hour as and EMT-B and managing OSHA programs and doing most of the vehicle maintaince. Ouch I know. I did make significantly more at a hospital based service 30 miles down the road. Sometimes, money isn't everything. I am definitely much happier where I am at.

The only reason I'm not working in a factory right now is because they decided to pay for my paramedic education last year. I will graduate November 15, YEAH!!!!! I will make a decent wage as a Paramedic, they do pay the medics well.

Skip Kirkwood said:

Samuel, why do people take jobs that pay like you describe? If people wouldn't work for peanuts, they'd have to pay more.

Is the local economy bad, or are there just too many volly-whackers?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Robert Sullivan on October 16, 2009 at 9:21am

I'm interested in seeing how the generation that is entering the EMS workforce now is going to affect pay. The 20-something people entering the workforce now don't appear as willing to work 60 hour weeks and marathon shifts, or to do it for free on their days off, which is what enables our broken system to continue. If you make $10. an hour, please, move and work somewhere that pays more. If you must increase your income, please get a part-time job outside of EMS instead. Pay will never go up as long as two warm bodies are on an ambulance who are willing to work for table scraps.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Robert Wales on October 16, 2009 at 12:07pm

The pay isn't terrific here in South Carolina but because of the low cost of living, it's a decent living. Most of the EMS services in the Upstate pay between $33k and $42k per year for new paramedics. That's comparable to the average that I have seen for other urban and suburban areas in the country. The difference is the low cost of living in South Carolina; that makes living here a little more affordable than with the same income elsewhere.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Skip Kirkwood on October 16, 2009 at 1:12pm

Being compensated "to the point your employer can afford" is not necessarily very good. Earl is talking about $19,000 annual salary. Employers need to find a way to pay a living wage (not below the national poverty level) or people should decline to work there. I'll bet the employer is not paying himself $19K per year!

Earl Culvey said:

I don't know where Samuel is from, but in my area I believe I am compensated to the point that my employer can afford. I am paid better than some of my co-workers, due to extra work I do. Most of you will probably cringe, but I make 9.25 an hour as and EMT-B and managing OSHA programs and doing most of the vehicle maintaince. Ouch I know. I did make significantly more at a hospital based service 30 miles down the road. Sometimes, money isn't everything. I am definitely much happier where I am at.

The only reason I'm not working in a factory right now is because they decided to pay for my paramedic education last year. I will graduate November 15, YEAH!!!!! I will make a decent wage as a Paramedic, they do pay the medics well.

Skip Kirkwood said:

Samuel, why do people take jobs that pay like you describe? If people wouldn't work for peanuts, they'd have to pay more.

Is the local economy bad, or are there just too many volly-whackers?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Nathan on October 17, 2009 at 4:44pm

ParamedicTV is powered by EMS1.com
I think this video speaks to a number of common problems related to pay found all across the nation, not just in Oklahoma.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Skip Kirkwood on October 17, 2009 at 6:31pm

Does anybody else think that trying to run an ambulance service (never mind a legitimate EMS system) on what you can bring in from transport-based revenue is just silly?

The largest payor, Medicare, pays what even THEY acknowledge is 6-9% below the cost of providing the service. Other insurers ride on Medicare's coattails, with Medicaid paying even less.

How about if we just stop trying this failed approach and try something else? It will take a little courage - you have to be able to walk away or close up shop - but sooner or later, someone will start to get the message. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is somebody's definition of insanity!

Think?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Nathan on October 17, 2009 at 6:53pm

"But then people would die because I didnt help them!"
I think most people either have a guillty conscious or are addicted to the rush of responding on a call. Some people would argue that people would die if a service shuts down. Think about it this way, If you run a sub par service for years and years how many people do you think will quietly die because of sub par training, inadequate supplies, and poor equipment. If a service shuts down and only one person dies because of it the media will bring it to the attention of thousands of people. There will be public out cry and the problem stands a much better chance of being solved. Its harsh but its the way it is.


Skip Kirkwood said:

Does anybody else think that trying to run an ambulance service (never mind a legitimate EMS system) on what you can bring in from transport-based revenue is just silly?
The largest payor, Medicare, pays what even THEY acknowledge is 6-9% below the cost of providing the service. Other insurers ride on Medicare's coattails, with Medicaid paying even less.
How about if we just stop trying this failed approach and try something else? It will take a little courage - you have to be able to walk away or close up shop - but sooner or later, someone will start to get the message. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is somebody's definition of insanity!

Think?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Gul Dukat on October 17, 2009 at 7:55pm

No offense to my municipal friends but money is what money is. If you are already admitting that the main payer of Ambulance services in the U.S. is paying below cost of providing the service exactly where is this magic money going to come from that we all just demand that the provider of services pay for?

If you are going to say tax revenue then may I ask what magic state you live in that is not suffering from budget deficits? Also may I ask what magic elixir you are giving the tax payers in your area that makes them willing to pay additional taxes to increase the money for a service that they may or may not ever use?

Walking away and forcing rates to come up sounds great but have you ever considered the fact that it might have the exact opposite effect you are looking for? Instead of raising standards and therefore raising pay scales did you ever consider that some areas may just decide to lower standards and therefore cut costs?

I am pretty sure I am not just fantasizing about this either as just a few months ago I believe Cleveland (or maybe it was Columbus) mulled over this very idea. They were considering dropping ALS services to save cost. In the end they did not, but if a major city was willing to take this into consideration don’t you think that some smaller less well financed areas might do more than just consider this?

▶ Reply to This

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last