Posted by Nate on December 19, 2007, 1:31 am, in reply to "Re: to dd"
Sure, you are entitled to your opinion. I never disputed that.
My opinion though is based on my fundamental economic beliefs. Is it "fair" that a CRNA can make nearly the same salary as a doctor who goes to school for so much longer? Is it “fair” that a 26 year old investment banker on Wall Street is making twice the salary of a 55 year old cardiac surgeon? Is it “fair” that Paris Hilton makes more money than all of them?
The job market does not determine salaries based on what you or I think is most beneficial to society or what requires the hardest work. Society places value on jobs and that value (in a free market) is reflected in the salaries the market supports. The salary a career is paid is a fluctuating number like the price of gold or share of a stock - no different. Coke is worth more than Pepsi regardless of how you personally value them. Likewise the salaries of CRNA’s, anesthesiologists, and AA’s should all depend on how the market (i.e. society) values them rather than using some restriction a particular individual feels is “fair”. If CRNA’s are getting paid “too much” then I guess the rest of us need to be more competitive rather than hoping to somehow restrict CRNA’s through artificial means. It’s no different than if Pepsi starting outselling Coke and Coke said “Wait, this isn’t fair. Someone please put on cap on their profits!” Instead of resorting to questionable legislative practices, Coke would be better offer figuring out why the market is changing and adapting its strategy accordingly.
Of course, that is the foresight that the ASA has had when promoting the AA profession. The ASA realized that the number of anesthesiologists is too small for the growing market. This is the reason why CRNA’s have gained so much ground in recent years. Attempts to prevent CRNA’s from advancing have largely failed (think back to the Coke analogy). So instead of relying on a negative campaign, they have started a positive campaign to support the growth of the AA profession. Guess what? It’s working. The CRNA’s can’t stop AA legislation for the same reason why the ASA could do nothing to stop increasing CRNA supervisory ratios and independent practice. That is why dd and others come here to bash AA’s. They want to do their part to “prevent” people from entering the profession since there is really no way to legislatively stop AA’s except through unsupportable negative AANA campaigning against the profession. Try as they might, there is no valid argument showing why AA’s shouldn’t practice as assistants to anesthesiologists. Thus in the long term, the AA profession can only grow bigger.
The last thing the AA profession needs to do is start fighting for an artificial salary cap on CRNA's. That is just about the worst possible thing I could ever imagine doing. It makes absolutely ZERO sense from a health care perspective. Again, this is analogous to the negative tactic from the Coke example from before. It holds no ground and only makes the AA profession look bad. If we want AA’s to succeed, then we must support the profession ONLY through positively supporting who we are and spreading the profession to more states/hospitals. As soon as we start fighting for legislation based only on hurting other professions, we have turned into hypocrites. If that is the fight you are proposing, then I ABSOLUTELY do not stand with you and I hope that I am not associated in any way, shape, or form with the agenda you are promoting. If nothing else, I hope I have at least convinced someone reading this to stand for the “good” side instead of the side with a negative, unjustified agenda. I really hope we are better than that.
