No MTSOs publicly post their pay wages, etc.

Am considering taking 1 and 1/2 cent a line cut with a new company, unlimited work, no set schedules, employee status with benefits.  They count each line typed (including headers, carbon copies, etc) and spaces.  I am thinking I will come out ahead over DQS program.  I know after being on DQS all this time my line count has NEVER returned to what it was prior, close but not there. 

Anyone taken this big of a cut without a suicide note? 

I think I will try it part time to be sure, but if the LPH are better than DQS I may take the dive and go FT. 

organize MTs throughout the country?  It seems like, judging by what I read in MR forums, that part of the problem is that when people first come into the business, they have no idea of what their hard work is worth.  Regardless of the fact that hospitals want to pay the lowest possible price for transcription, the only people who should be settling for less than 10, 12 or more cents/line are ESLs in India, etc.  American workers should be standing up for American wages.  Yes, there are some companies who will say, Fine, I'll contract with India.  Believe me, you wouldn't want those companies as employers, or to work for hospitals or clinics that operate that way.  Heck... I sure wouldn't put my care in the hands of a doc that uses offshore transcription services, that's for sure! 

SO, what I'm saying is, there must be some way to bring MTs from all areas, and of all experience levels together (OUTSIDE of AAMT, which has been in large part responsible for alot of the problem!), and organize for a decent living wage and health benefits.  If all of us were to stop working for 3 days, 1 week max, do you think that work would all suddenly be sent offshore?  I don't think so.  Some might, but then again, it's a good way to week out the undesirable clients & employers. 

I think we our often our own worst enemy when it comes to wages.  If we continue to accept less than what we're worth, then that's all we can expect to earn.

Also, I'm surprised that some entrepreneuring MT company hasn't cashed in on all the newbies and in-school MTs out there who just want experience and a chance.  Imagine if one of the larger, more respected services were to open an MT SCHOOL as well.  They would receive an income from instruction fees.  MTs could gradually cross over from student to trainee.  MTs could earn extra money as teachers.  (And should be paid well for it, too.)  The company training the MTs would have first pick of the best and brightest for work in their own company.  Beyond that, there would be more money to be made when it comes to referrals. 

The healthcare industry needs to be more educated in the fact that transcription is a vital part of their work, and how well their reports are done is a direct reflection of their competency.  If you look at how much money is wasted in these establishments on FLUFF -- excess management, inept management, some community programs, and in some cases excess in building glitz and glamour, one has to wonder why they feel transcription is a less-valuable service than those provided by their janitors, groundskeepers, or food service personnel.

One way to fight the low-wage problem is to continue to lobby for an end to offshoring of personal information, not only in the healthcare industry, but in ALL American industry.  NO personal data: phone numbers, credit card numbers, etc. should EVER leave American soil without the express written consent of the owner of that data.

Another way to fight low wages is to do as much research as possible on prospective employers.  Remember, they are not just interviewing you, you are also interviewing THEM!  Go with the best-paying company you can find.  If you are new to the field, that will be harder, but in your case finding the best learning environment is your best bet, and then work hard at getting proficient enough to be able to LEAVE a low-paying employer ASAP for a better-paying one. 

In terms of being an IC, I know it's difficult to deal with people undercutting you.  But once again, don't forget that when someone turns down high-quality transcription and goes with the lower-quality provider, simply because of a couple-cent-per-line difference in cost, the way to look at that client is Good Riddance!  I used to have my own, non-MT, service-related business.  I had two ways of weeding out the undesireables: 

One was a waiver of liability.  If they squawked about signing it, or started picking it apart like they were big legal experts, then I knew right away they were a future legal liability.  (Of course, that is less of an issue with MT... I don't know of MTs that make clients sign waivers!  It's just a 'fer instance.)  But the best way to weed out the cheapskates and nit-pickers was to charge a slightly HIGHER fee than my competitors.  I offered a higher-quality, more personalized service than my competitors.  So I stood firm on my prices.  And you know what?  There are clients who will actually LOOK for the higher fee, knowing that if you can command and get a higher fee, you are probably a better service provider. 

Also, steer clear of new clients who want a special deal or discount right off the bat.  They will NEVER be satisfied; give them an inch and they'll take a mile.  I believe that discounted rates are EARNED, not given out on demand.  A long-time client who is honest, pays on time, tips, is slightly flexible, etc., who gives you steady, reliable work that is easier to do, should be rewarded with a deal.  But that deal should only be between you and them, and not broadcast to other clients.

Some of my BEST business clients turned out to be people who at first pooh-poohed my fees, and went with the cheaper provider.  Quite a few of them came crawling back on their hands and knees later; sadder but wiser, and more than willing to pay what I charged.  And often they had such a big mess that needed to be straightened out (usually caused by the cheaper provider) that I initially had to charge EXTRA, on top of my normal fees, to straighten it all out!  These people often came to be my biggest TIPPERS, as well! 

 I think we have all been conditioned to believe we are lucky to have a job at all, and we need to start rethinking that.  MT's need to stick together, network, lobby against offshoring and unfair pay, UNIONIZE if at all possible or beneficial, and be far more VOCAL.  The normally quiet nature of most MTs and their behind-the-scenes work usually works against them when it comes to fair labor practices!  Those of us with many years of experience & skill need to TURN DOWN job offers that are insultingly low. 

Anyway, that's my take on the el-cheapo employers & clients, and the low pay they think we'll get down on our knees and thank them for!   

Happy 2007!  

It's facinating watching THEM dissect our pay in the most inventive and --don't forget-- cost-effective ways. 

Most unusual is the tiering of wages related to lines produced, and, of course, the *visible black character* and *not paying for spaces* continuing controversy, among the glut of other insidious ways they have their hands in our pockets. 

Bollocks.

and I didn't really think it would be like pulling teeth because MOST people at Transcend are willing to help when you ask WITHOUT the attitude.  But if you post on the forum like you do here, it's obvious who you are.

The numbers are in from the weekend USMLSU poll regarding fair compensation for full-time US MT employees:

BY THE LINE:  All work types

• $0.11 per line base starting pay for MTs with 10+ years experience and scores of 95% or higher on pre-employment testing.
  
• $0.095 per line base starting pay for MTs with 5-8 years experience, and scores of 95% or higher on pre-employment transcription testing.
  
• $0.085 per line base starting pay for MTs with 3-5 years experience and scores of 95% or higher on pre-employment testing.

BY THE REPORT - Radiology and Pathology

• $1.10 per report for plain film radiology, CT, MRI, ultrasound
  
• $1.25 per report for interventional radiology
  
• $1.25 per pathology report

HOURLY PAY FOR MANDATORY BABYSITTING NO OR LOW PRODUCTION ACCOUNTS

Hourly pay would benefit those of us who spend countless mandatory scheduled 8-hour shifts babysitting overstaffed, underproducing accounts with little to no transcription work to be done.  As it stands now, in order to sit in front of our PCs for 8 hours doing little to no work (because there is none), in order to be paid for this mandatory idle time we must work weekends or night shifts to make up pay and quota for benefits, or request to use precious PTO time in order to be paid to sit idely for 8 hours to fulfill an unreasonable request promised to the client by the company:

• $18.00 per hour base MT pay to monitor an account with little to no work - 10+ yrs experience and 95% or greater on MT pre-hiring test.
  
• $15.00 per hour base MT pay to monitor an account with little to no work -  5-9 years of experience and 95% or greater on MT pre-hireing test
  
• $12.00 per hour base MT pay to monitor an account with little to no work -  3-5 years of experience and 95% or greater on MT pre-hiring test

Please email your comments/suggestions/opinions.

');

---

Actually, I'd be happy to work for 80s wages -- I made a lot more then. nm

---

Hey, wages were even still good 5 years ago, now pretty much gone. nm
x

---

You're happy your wages have stayed the
same, even though:

Gallon of milk, 1992: $2.78
2009: $3.75

Gallon of gas, 1992: $1.13
2009: $2.50+

Dozen eggs, 1992: $0.93
2009: $2.25

So your salary stayed the same while everything else skyrocketed... yay!

And according to the IIAP, the median salary for a 'secretary' in 1992 was around $25,000, and in 2005 was already up to around $40,000 (no stats listed for 2009 yet). So are you still feeling good about sliding backwards?

---

I agree to disagree with you. In many fields wages

have not really changed that much over the last 10 to 15 years, however, in my case, as well as many, MANY others, the wages in this field have changed drastically.  They are still changing as evident on the job board most days.  While I have been a MT for over 20 years, fifteen years ago I was making 15 cpl and today I am at 8 cpl.  I feel like I have every right to be angry about this and had you taken a cut in pay as such you would be angry as well. 

As far as VR, I have no experience with it and hope that I never do but I am not stupid enough to believe that it will not ever happen. 

As far as our jobs being sent to India, if you cannot get pissed off as a MT about this and seriously have no fear that your job will be sent there, then at least as an American and a patient in the healthcare system, you should be pissed that patient's personal information is being sent to another country, as well as fellow Americans are losing their jobs.  All, IMHO. 

---

Surgical Notes Transcription wages
Their offered wages are more than the $12 hour I was paid in a rural hospital.

---

We were getting laid-off, wages cut, losing bennies
Like for the last 5-7 years.

---

Numerous times I have been told our wages are lower because
we are now competing with (almost third-world) countries, who think 2 and 3 cents a line is a LOT. Therefore, to stay competitive, we must now work for a lower wage.

There are times there have been actual threats that we would lose our accounts, if we do not comply as hospitals would just take their accounts overseas.

Leaves a lot of room for corruption, i.e., whether it is true the hospitals would actually go that route (I think they might, considering CBay and how huge they are) or whether it is the MTSO duping us into accepting lower pay.

We are in a similar situation as in the 1800s (Funny you can almost substitute these people with 'MTs' and 'India', if you know what I mean:

(From Wikipedia) ...between 1830 and 1850, as the Industrial Revolution gave way to the Second Industrial Revolution, sweatshop production of inexpensive clothing displaced members of the tailors guild, and replaced them with lower-skilled workers performing piece work at lower wages and in inferior conditions. The trend away from tailors was accelerated by the advent of a practical, foot-powered sewing machine in 1846.

The terms sweater for the middleman and sweating system for the process of subcontracting piecework were used in early critiques like Charles Kingsley's Cheap Clothes and Nasty, written in 1850. The workplaces created for the sweating system were called sweatshops, and variously comprised workplaces of only a few workers, or as many as 100 or more.

In the sweatshop of 1850, the role of the sweater as middleman and subcontractor (or sub-subcontractor) was considered key, because he served to keep workers isolated in small workshops. This isolation made workers unsure of their supply of work, and unable to organize against their true employer through collective bargaining. Instead, tailors or other clothing retailers, would subcontract tasks to the sweater, who in turn might subcontract to another sweater, who would ultimately engage workers at a piece rate for each article of clothing or seam produced. Many critics asserted that the middleman made his profit by finding the most desperate workers, often women and children, who could be paid an absolute minimum. While workers who produced many pieces could earn more, less productive workers earned so little that critics termed their pay starvation wages. Employment was risky: injured or sick workers would be quickly replaced by others.

There you have it...Nothing will most likely be done until there is another type of revolution in this country.

---