In an informal way, yes. SM

Because we all change jobs a lot, we all run into what seems like the same people wherever we go.  For the most part, people come and go unnoticed, BUT if you have a blowout with a supe/manager, that's a different ballgame altogether. 

There is no official list of people not to hire, but the names of some who are difficult to work with are known by the recruiters and hiring management. 

• Is there a black list for MT's? I feel like giving up. - teelcee
  • Don't put them down as a previous employer - - say you took time off to raise kids/grand kids
    • And hope & pray the recruiters don't know each other :) - (sm) - A suggestion
  • In an informal way, yes. SM - in a manner of speaking
  • Blacklist - anon
    • Yes, there is a blacklist among recruiters, - Fellow MT
  • and keep it professional and keep a cool head (sm) - A suggestion
  • Do not put down your supervisor as a reference (sm) - A few suggestions
    • There is a "click" among recruiters and - they do not go through the normal
    • There is no such federal law! :) - SM
      • Not so, They can only confirm that you have worked there and for how long. - Thank God...
        • Open your eyes, wake up and smell the coffee - etc. - NM
        • You are very misinformed. - BDTD
        • law - Dawn
          • They can also verify salary and eligibility for rehire. nm - mm
          • Calif is attempting to revoke the "employee shares salary info with another employee" penalty. - That being "your fired." (NM)
          • This is true... - see message
      • I don't have time to refer to reference the law details but (sm) - A few suggestions

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Of course, any poll conducted here would be unscientific, but still I would like to find out if others hold the same opinion.

Twenty-some-odd years ago, when I first got into medical transcription, there seemed to be a lot of energy in the air and the scuttlebutt was that AAMT was going to help us get unionized. This would not only increase our pay but help us gain some respect/credibility (as several clinical professions were already unionized) and afford us some job security. A few years later I became a member of AAMT and eventually earned my certification. 

As an AAMT member, reading the journal and eventually the website, I *NEVER* had the impression that they were true advocates for us MTs. What I DID get a sense of was their pandering to the big companies. And I always thought that the dues were very high for most working MTs. Nevertheless, I enjoyed reading the journal with its interesting industry-related articles, quizzes, and ads.

Now of course AAMT has been replaced by Association for Health Documentation and Integrity, which I think it is a poor choice for a name. For one thing, it's entirely too long. Secondly, "American" has been completely removed from the title (reflecting its globalist philosophy, which as an American really pisses me off!).

Of course, the whisperings about unionizing NEVER came to fruition. And our wages have not only not risen commensurate with inflation but have been STAGNANT, with many of us working at the same rate we made years ago.

Recently I learned that it was AHDI who came up with the "industry-wide standard recommendation" that MTs only be paid for the black characters sans spaces, which results in ~30% decrease in our pay. Many hospitals have implemented this pay structure  -- certainly several hospitals here have. 

Finally -- and this is the last thing stuck in my craw -- if AAMT had DONE THEIR JOB way back when and launched a nationwide campaign to educate PATIENTS on the importance of obtaining copies of their medical records and checking them for accuracy, it would have benefitted us greatly. Patients would start complaining to their hospitals and doctors' offices about errors in reports, and that would have put the emphasis back on QUALITY. That would have prevented what we are seeing today with crap transcriptions coming back from India by those who don't even understand English. 

So, here are the informal and unscientific poll questions:

Do you think AAMT/AHDI did their best as advocates for us and our profession, yes or no?  If you answered no, why not?  What do you think they should they have done differently or better?