No. They start out stating how (sm)

• Amphion - mary
  • so-so...sm - Amphionite2
  • No. They start out stating how (sm) - ExA
  • Yes - Amphionite
    • My take on Amphion - just me
      • I don't believe you. - nice try though
      • I work at Amphion, and - Listenup
      • I would definitely be saying something. - exA
        • If it really happened she would have said something. - sm

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

If the company is advertising for "shifts" meaning 7 a to 3 p, then that is an employee that they need, not an IC. 

ICs choose their own hours; yes they do.  Anything dictated by an MTSO for shifts meaning the MT must be accountable for those hours equals EMPLOYEE, not IC.

The OP is absolutely correct.  These MTSOs take advantage by instituting a shift or schedule.  As an employee, that's great.  The reason behind the MTSO doing this is that they feel they can just not hire the employees which cost more money and get away with not paying the taxes.  So many MTs fall for this scheme. 

This is the whole reason you see posts about companies that hire ICs and then ICs are on here complaining of no/low work and there is nothing they can do about it. 

Such a shame not all of us are smart enough to see this racket, which is what it is a "racket."

Kudos to MTSOs who hire employees.  Bah Humbug to MTSOs who hire ICs and then dictate the hours or shifts to that IC.  When in fact an IC equals self-employed which means I make my own hours. 

They may or may not decide to keep you.  You don't really "ask" as an IC.  You "state" as an IC.  You will risk them finding cheaper services.  So, you need to ask yourself if it is worth losing the account for a few more cents per line.  The only other thing you could do is attach an "administrative fee" to each bill and let them know it is for tasks not related to the actual production; this would be a little raise.

The bottom line is that raises are nonexistent as an IC.  Normally what quote you've given them in the start of the work is what they expect to pay or they'll find someone cheaper like an offshore company.  I wouldn't stir the waters if I was you, but that's just me. 

I tried to barter with one account over a raise and the doctor met me halfway.  I was being paid per page.  I had to drop him though because once I raised the rate, he quit paying me on time.  I guess I was last on the list.  He switched to me doing handwritten note dictation (no dictation).  It was hard on the neck and eyes, so I quit.

wide open and landing accounts with no contacts was an easy thing to do, I'd tell the OP to go for it and good luck.  But I know from experience what is true.  I have plenty of accounts and ALL of them came my way via connections.  First I worked as an MT in a hospital for many years and I left there to start my own business and from my hospital connections accounts came my way.  Then my clients referred accounts to me.  Not one of my clients has come from advertising or cold calling or sending letters of introduction or flyers.  Not one.

AAMT.  Look at the medical transcription industry, what exactly has the AAMT done to improve it?  Wages have not gotten better over time, they have gotten worse.  That right there is a big indicator that their association has done nothing for medical transcription.  They do for themselves.

My grudge aside, I am being supportive to CS by telling her to forget about the AAMT and move forward in her career.  She doesn't need the CMT credentials, none of us do. 

As far as her problems with studying the weekend before the test, I hate to sound harsh - but if she were truly an experienced MT, one noisy weekend should not have affected her test scores to the point of failing.  However, the CMT examination isn't truly a test of medical transcription.  It is a test of how well you've memorized the BOS rules and regs. 

CS is probably a very good MT and if she were tested on MT skills alone, her in-laws visiting her right before the test wouldn't have made that big of a difference.  The fact is she had to memorize the BOS and that is probably where she failed.  In my OPINION, that's not really failing.

Hence my initial comments that her only disappointment should be that she shelled out $298 bucks - not because she failed and is out the money, but because she shelled out her money for credentials that mean nothing.  In my book, she was wasting her money pass or fail.

a legal secretarial organization and screw that up for half a million people.  They've done enough damage in this field.

How can I get an idea how much I want to deduct for the year, not what but how much money I should be trying to deduct or can.  I need to get better prepared and deduct what I can this coming year. 

Thanks in advance for your help!!

My mom was an LPN for 30+ years and she came home one morning in tears.  She (a devout christian) admitted to me (then just a little kid) couldn't believe how mean she was to a nurse's aid who was just starting out on HER floor.  My mother's ego was bruised because this "kid" (even though she was a lady with kids, she still called her a "kid") had the same type of training my mother had but yet had a different initials on her name pin and my mother felt she had no business giving shots or doing something or other....it was so long ago I forget what the problem was. 

My mother was so upset at her own behavior she vowed to take all the new people under her wing and show them not all people were bitter, and that we all have to start some place.  It really did her heart good to do that.  Now mind you, I'm not preaching here, because I'm an atheist (boy did that really frost dear old mom's patootie!), but I do belive in life's lessons.

Try not to be so hateful and bitter towards her.  It sounds like you kinda already have her discounted before she's even had a chance to begin.  You said it's a high-volume office, so maybe you could use the extra hand.  Try, at least try, to be a little tolerant and kind is all I'm saying.