Jump to content

Hiring practices in EMS ... the NEW trend?


tniuqs

Would You want to work for a service with this hiring practice?  

8 members have voted

  1. 1.

    • YES.
      4
    • NO run away the operation is doomed.
      4


Recommended Posts

No, they are building a camel (building a horse by committee)

The only way I'd be ok with it is if the decision was going to be made in front of me.

I'm not going to jump through hoops if Mikey the muscle head or Suzie the office slut can torpedo me because I didn't give off the right 'vibe'.

Besides, it sounds as if none of the pertinent questions were asked.

I would ask peoples opinion's about the 'scuttlebutt' on you, and then probably ignore it, but I'm not choosing my employees Democratically.

The main problem I see with this system is people being 'job scared'. A very qualified employee isn't going to have a chance of winding his/her way through a system of people afraid that someone that shines is going to make them look weak. Most employees, and perhaps even more managers prefer to keep those around them weak so that it's easier to appear successful.

I'm a true believer that a manager's success should be directly tied to the success of those they choose to employ.

This system is idiotic. Only in the most rare and unsustainable of circumstances is it going to provide a good company.

I would run, not walk away from them unless there is something so amazing about this company that you can't afford to pass it up.

Dwayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 25
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I own an EMS company and I don't interview like most companies in this area as well. In fact I don't interview in an office or at the station, 90% of the time I interview at a coffee house. Personally I think it is more relaxing for everyone. But a second interview is conducted at the station and other staff members are a part of it, mainely for the reasons already stated. You will be working side by side with these people.

I happen to have some experience in job interviews, on both sides. What do you think is accomplished with an interview at a coffee house? I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I do believe such a discussion should be held in private. There will be some personal questions. Also, most applicants worth hiring already work somewhere else, so they may not want people to know that they're looking at other options.

Which staff members, exactly, join you on that second interview? Some kind of middle management, the successful candidate's future direct supervisor? If so, then great. If not, I question the involvement of additional people in a job interview, where an applicant is put on the spot and has to answer any question he gets on himself. This should be as private and confidential as possible.

If you include just any staff member on the same level as the one you are hiring, people who are going to be working with him every day, if he'll be hired...well, that's probably the most unprofessional thing I've heard in a long time. Would you want to discuss why you left (or want to leave) your previous (or current) job, your salary expectations, etc. in front of the people you'll be working with? I wouldn't.

Just stop whining and putting a company down cause you didn't care for the interview or whatever your hidden problem is, cause based on what your posted you have some other issue that is causing you to react like this. By the way, added years or letter after your name doesn't mean your better then anyone else.

Actually, it very probably does. Those letters you are referring to are signs of what we like to call education. Basically, it means that the individual has completed a program in which he had to work very hard to obtain certain knowledge and actually being successful in using it. The years are the time where he has been using that knowledge, learning from mistakes and accumulating experience. That's important, and it DOES make him a better employee than those who don't have those "added years or letters after their names".

Just something I took from your post you seem to have a problem with, also the information you place on a resume is not anything that is private so not sure what your getting at with that either. Small company or not, you never really do know who is looking at your resume. Why would it matter who views it, all it is stating is your experience and knowledge.

First of all, the actual thing that he is applying for the job is confidential, as explained above. There is no reason for the general staff to know any of the information on it, except a brief excerpt, if the applicant gets the job.

You've posted a total of 13 posts, including this one. It may or may not be important to you, but if you do care about your reputation on this forum, I suggest that you clarify your position on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"emtannie"

People have already commented on some of the other areas, but this is a paragraph that caught my eye.

Yes about equal to 20 watt/seconds for the candidate as well (in most cases) I highly suspect.

I feel that the passing around of resumes is not professional. An application provided in confidence should be reviewed by the supervisor and human resources, not the entire staff. Management and Human resources personnel are generally held to a higher standard of care, and responsibility regarding personnel issues than "regular staff".

I have absolutely no issue of passing out my C.V. to someone I KNOW ! In fact it is quite diverse and stimulates much conversation in most cases, yet it this arena there were absolutely no questions by the staff on any issue of the CV .... quite odd.

It only takes one slip for an employee to mention to a friend that "so and so" applied for a position, and then the friend mentions it to someone, and it gets back to so and so's current employer, possibly causing issues there.

Te he .... Yes agreed in most cases, thing is that I am on staff with 4 other major players my employability (sp) is not threatentened in the slightest I hope!

And, to add my two cents to the group dynamic thing... if the entire staff is allowed to be in on the decision, who decides what the criteria is for hiring?

Very good point (s) :shock:

There is the danger of the staff wanting to hire someone who is good at making coffee, brings donuts every day, or for the women to want the guy who looks great in uniform, or the guys to want the girl with big ****... I know this is presenting shallowness to the extreme, but it is possible.

NO say it isn't so :roll: I think you have underestimated this "social type interview" interaction these concepts are very often key motivating factors !

Sex does sell .... unfortunately for me if I were scantily clad on the hood of a sports car .... many would be looking at the new VW BUG in the next booth. :oops: OR running away screaming ?

Did I mention that a huge shift pattern had just been implemented ... from the old 4 on (24sa) and 4 off, to 2 on (24s) and 4 off ? Therefore changing the revenue base from 16 shifts per month to 10.

Personal economic factors have not been introduced? my bad? Could it be that a series of rejections of possible candidates could result in more possible overtime and a reliance on core staff to improve their paychecks ? Despite the management sheduling issues / and difficulties arising from this situation. A quiet underlying disagreement with Staff vs manager OR Manager vs Owner ?

One will never be certian, would it not be a true waste of my time or any other possible candidate if this is the case ...... ???

The wants of employees may be completely different than the wants of management, professional jealousy is not "an unheard of concept" in the workplace either.

Another good point's here: SO just who "runs the show" anyway and traditionally paramedicine in most cases is similar to a paramilitary chain of command.

SOMEONE has to be the leader, can one imagine at a major MCI and the Incident Commander being given 12 options on how too, perhaps mass confusion would be my bet ? As in every team there must be a leader well thats is my silly theorum.

Perhaps management wants someone who can come in and be a leader, be a mentor, and push the other staff to improve their professionalism and skills.

Could the Manager be intimidated as well ? But as who would really know the dynamics in this very small snap shot of this operation and behind closed management/ ownership doors ? Just sour grapes or fair plausable concept ? I dunno really and perhaps not even fair to introduce this idea at this juncture and raise false suspicions. I do not have the bigger picture .... or do I?

As squint introduces yet another "twist" related to provincial health care politics and forshadowing of the government recient releases .... hmm the plot thickens.

Perhaps the staff are happy with the status quo and don't want anyone who will disrupt their current situation. If this is the case, the group decision may not go well regardless of who gets hired, and the new hire will be the scapegoat for anything that happens.

Really ? :wink: . Most operations buck any change this is just my observation but in passing thing is change is inevitable. That said Change for Change Sake is not a good idea either.

I agree with MIke's comment - if it doesn't feel right, it's not... trust your gut..

Oh my spider senses were tingling from the get go! :shock:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"kristo"

I happen to have some experience in job interviews, on both sides.

And this becomes quite apperant after your post, thanks for your positive input it confirms some of the concepts of the tradtional hiring practices, based on an evaluation system that is proven.

cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I don't interview like most companies in this area as well. In fact I don't interview in an office or at the station, 90% of the time I interview at a coffee house. Personally I think it is more relaxing for everyone.

You'd be wrong. Supposing your applicant isn't a coffee drinker? Supposing he had a good breakfast or lunch right before the interview, as the experts would advise you to do? Just how relaxed do you think he or she is going to be sitting there twiddling his or her thumbs, trying to figure out what kind of game you are playing with them? Sounds to me like you're just looking for an excuse to get out of the office at your applicants' expense.

But a second interview is conducted at the station and other staff members are a part of it, mainely for the reasons already stated. You will be working side by side with these people.

Dwayne is spot on with this. A hiring committee is one thing, but a democratic society within a corporation is a recipe for mediocrity, if not disaster. Do you, as the boss, let all your people in on other important corporate decisions? Do you let them decide what your rates are going to be? What your benefits are going to be? What brand of trucks you're going to buy? What your protocols are? I submit that, if they aren't smart or trustworthy enough for those decisions, then they damn sure aren't smart or trustworthy enough for the much more important decision of who is going to represent your firm in the public. As was already said, you can't have it both ways. And trying to do so is an insult to your current employees.

By the way, added years or letter after your name doesn't mean your better then anyone else.

He didn't imply that it made him any better than anyone else. He correctly implied that it reflects a proven record of education and professional stability that is beyond the reproach of a bunch of twenty-somethings who have never worked anywhere else in their lives. That means, whether or not this person is fit to work there isn't something that is going to take a committee decision. All it's going to take is a couple of days checking references. That's a one man job. Sure, you can have twenty years in the field and be an annoying arsehole who sucks. But it doesn't take a committee to decide that, and it doesn't sound like this bunch is capable of it in the first place.

...also the information you place on a resume is not anything that is private so not sure what your getting at with that either. Small company or not, you never really do know who is looking at your resume. Why would it matter who views it, all it is stating is your experience and knowledge. Sure your name address and phone number are on it, but it's also in a phone book. So unless you put some untruths in it, why does it matter who looks at it.

First of all, it is private. U.S. civil case law holds so. If you are ignorant of that fact, you are in way over your head as a business owner. Second of all, neither my name, address, nor phone number are in the phone book. Neither are many other people's, especially in the era of the cellphone. Third of all -- and the biggest point here -- is that any untruths on the resume are almost irrelevant in this case, because the employer is not even bothering to address them. All he's doing is a psychobabble, round-robin inquisition of the applicant, utilising inquisitors who aren't qualified to do so.

I've been hired places where there was a large committee involved. I've worked in two large medical practices where all of the physicians, the head nurse, and the office manager all sat down with copies of my resume (and background results) and gave me the third degree en-masse. No problem with that. First, they all had a need to know. Second, I was told from the beginning that this was how the process went. Conversely, blind-siding me with the process, and those inquisitors being nineteen-year-old EMTs with less than a year in the profession, is a completely different scenario.

This just looks very unprofessional for the employer. It doesn't say anything positive about him, whatsoever. He may think it does, and he may think he is doing something positive for his staff by letting them in on the process, but it's a charade. This business owner needs to do one of two things; He needs to either man-up and take control of his own hiring practices, or else he needs to establish a formal committee, comprised of those with a need to know, as well as those who have been formally educated about their responsibilities in this practice, including confidentiality.

Right now, it looks like he's trying to use his employees as a way to escape some responsibility, while trying to make them feel like he is giving them some say in the operation of the company. The latter is an illusion, while the former is just lame.

I just thing this post is childish, and unprofessional. Whining and knocking a company cause you didn't get the job or cause you need justification for not getting it.

Doesn't that work both ways? And besides, unlike the company in question, he never named any names or breached any confidentiality with his post. What's with the double standard?

Even in M&M conferences, we obscure the name and ID number of the medic when discussing the case. Not only because it is simple courtesy, but because it is not the job of those in the conference to do QA. The same should apply to applications. If you want input from key employees, they don't need to know his or her name, address, telephone number, Social Security number, date of birth, date of graduation, or even the schools they attended. All they need to know is the education attained and the work history and experience. Anything else is subjective, and serves to possibly prejudice the reviewers. And if you're not looking for an objective process in the first place, then again, your process sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks so much for sending on the information and spending the day with our service. After discussion with the staff it was decided that casual employment with our service is not going to work out. I really enjoyed meeting you and wish you all the best in your future endeavors in EMS.

Sincerely the Manager[/quote]

This was the "e-mail reply" (ps no phone call) that I recieved the next day. I do enjoy the giving a personal touch when I have been in the opposite role to address any issues that the unsuccessful candidate may have as one never knows in this rather small comunity that I work when one may have to 'change standards' to fullfil the many holes and give that indivdual a call back. I bet you can just guess what I would say then .... ?

Just my jaded opinion this "smacks" of defurral of responsibilty for a Manager I dare say.

And of course included the standard social political correctness thang "all the best in your career stuff" meh.

Dust:

I do so enjoy these professional type of interviews straight to the points, no BS, and no head games. I Guess I am just that kind of Joe, judged by peers / employers not rookies with questionable motives, I believe I may know what side of the bread is buttered.

cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Touchy feely Kumbaya crap. I don't give a flying f*ck if I like the people I work with.. I do care how they treat patients and how competent they are. A company like this is going to hire someone who might be friendly but will kill patients with absolute incompetency. Give me an asshole any day that cares for their patients over someone the mechanic thinks is cool because he has a tribal tat. :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A term that is used here primarily as a part time position that is none scheduled.

PRN I think is the term my friends in Louisiana called it ?

An employer has a opening or someone books off for illness or whatever they then give you a call to fill in the blank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely disagree with this type of 'interview process' as well as the 'coffee klatch' interview.

Neither represent the company in a good light.

The 'round table interview' is complete bull! The other employees have no say in whether a new person gets hired or not.

Never have I applied to a company in order to:

Join a social club

Meet new 'beer drinkin buddies'

Become a member of the 'Good Ol' Boy Network

Round out the 'little black book'

There is no room for the 'hugs and kisses, happy faces and belly rubs' in the REAL 'professional environment'!

If you're in a position to hire people, and use these 'techniques'; then I think you need to go hug your trees and eat your grass some place else, because in the 'real world', you need to figure out that those with the best training and experience usually make for the better employee. More education and more experience means better patient care, beter patient care means word of mouth advertising, and that could be potential new/increased business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...