Respect could have prevented feud

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 23/11/2017 (2887 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Long-simmering animosity between Fire Paramedic Chief John Lane and the paramedics union could end up costing taxpayers, which would be a shameful expense considering it could easily have been avoided if colleagues treated each other with civility.

The union representing paramedics ended an arbitration hearing on Monday by urging that the union be awarded $50,000 and 350 paramedics receive a cash injection of $1,500 each into their personal bank accounts. The total tab to the city would be $575,000.

Even before the arbitrator’s ruling, which is expected in months, it’s clear this issue could have been resolved with a minimum level of respect in the workplace.

It started small. Lane was at an international firefighters conference in Maryland in August 2015 when a brochure promoting his presentation offered an opinion that paramedics back in Winnipeg found offensive. It said, in part, “This fire-based model is continuously threatened by single-role EMS providers and misinformed leaders. The speakers in this workshop will present how they use facts to thwart rhetoric and protect the service they provide.”

By the standards of memorable insults (“You are a stone in the shoes of humanity,” for example), the brochure hardly constitutes a stinging burn, but the paramedics union said it felt “belittled and demeaned” by the wording, and 156 paramedics filed a respectful workplace complaint against Lane.

An independent investigator upheld the complaint. The matter could have ended there if Lane had signed an apology the union had drafted for him, but he refused, saying he didn’t believe most paramedics were offended. He also said he was too busy to apologize. He eventually apologized, but not soon enough or with sufficient sincerity to suit the union, which alleges the chief continues to treat the paramedics and their union in a prejudicial manner.

The ongoing squabble is not surprising, given the history of a long-standing battle between unions representing paramedics and firefighters, which escalated when firefighters began to acquire paramedic training. Firefighters believe they can do most of what single-role paramedics can do. Paramedics disagree, believing they are better trained than dual-role firefighters to provide immediate medical treatment.

The paramedics union believes Lane clearly favours the firefighters union and its president, Alex Forrest. The chief has refused to meet with the Emergency Medical Responders paramedics union for almost four years, and has never met the new executive in a labour-management setting.

As far as the union’s argument that 350 paramedics each get a cheque for $1,500, it should be remembered that paramedics didn’t suffer personal financial hardship because of the conflict. Many taxpayers would take issue with the notion that paramedics deserve financial compensation for their boss’s reluctant apology, but few would dispute that they deserve a fire/paramedic chief who is respectful and willing to work constructively with their union.

If the arbitrator feels a financial penalty is necessary to punish the city for the actions of its fire/paramedic chief, perhaps the ruling can stipulate the fine be paid to a charity.

The animosity between the two sides seems intractable, but then again, it’s the beginning of the season when Christmas miracles happen.

During the First World War, there was a remarkable Christmas truce when enemy soldiers crossed trenches to exchange seasonal greetings and sing carols. If that could happen, perhaps it’s not too much to hope that unions representing Winnipeg firefighters and paramedics could set aside hostility.

One thing Winnipeggers want for Christmas is firefighters and paramedics who work together professionally to make citizens’ well-being their priority.