sign of things to come?

http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/canada/2011/01/12/16859186.html

bunch of elderly people who still live at home went as long as two weeks without being bathed because of staffing shortage at local clinic and no one was sent to their home to bathe them.

“It’s impossible for us to meet everyone’s needs, especially since the elderly population just keeps increasing,” she said.

I have a couple of questions.

1) WTF? Family just sits there and says... yeah grandma it sucks that they clinic never sent anyone to bath you.. can you sit back from the table you stink a little...INSTEAD OF HELPING HER BATH??

2) So...... they can be left at home, but cant manage the simple task bathing themselves? you sure these people should be left at home alone?

3) Two weeks? ppft... most old people I know dont bathe that often. No reason to, they wash what needs to be washed and thats it, its not like they are going anywhere or causing themselves to sweat.

4) Two Weeks??? pfftt.. I bet some of these older people went two months or more when they were young before running water was generaly available.

Bathing is not likely the problem. Getting in and out of the tub is.

Some old folks have a great deal of trouble maintaining good hygiene due to bladder and other control problems. Then there are the folks that have trouble with reality.

This is not a simple problem. If health care aides are demanded daily or weekly they should show up. To say: “It’s impossible for us to meet everyone’s needs, especially since the elderly population just keeps increasing,” is completely moronic. She should be fired as she has no concept of reality.

Probably cheaper ( and more dignified) to install those shower chairs for them

Family just wants the retirement pension cheque...
Poor old folks who worked their @sses off...
And staff in those clinics just can't wait for payday...

"Family just wants the retirement pension cheque.."

ugg.. watching that Ultimate Pawn (or whatever the hell it was called) last night. Grandma was brought into the pawn shop to pawn her dentures... They wanted $700 because it had one gold tooth in it. He told them most he could give was $75 and they were offended and started bitchin and shiat but left and got into their car and drove somewhere else.

PAWN HER DENTURES.

...yeah, a little off topic, but one sorta relevant, if you want to keep and maintain the number of health care aides in Manitoba, then the WRHA needs to adjust it's "zero tolerance policy" towards unfounded accusations.

basically, if you don't like the HCA that's been sent to assist your elderly family member, all you have to do to get that person fired to accuse them of taking money (there's no minimum or anything, $5 is all you need to claim is missing) and next thing you know, WRHA will have an offer for you! Option 1) you can resign, and WRHA will not make comment on your employment, other than to acknowledge that you were a former employee, or Option 2) is immediate termination, in which case WRHA would be delighted to tell anyone and everyone that you were terminated due to accusations of theft. (unfounded or not)

No investigation, no recourse. Zero tolerance means exactly that, even a completely unfounded and frivolous claim of money theft from a senior (client) or the clients family (even if the client has a disorder, such as Alzheimer's or dementia) your a$$ is gone! Don't bother going to the union, they won't do anything for you except pressure you to choose faster.

Happened to my wife, turned our whole lives upside down for several years, and now after re-schooling (who'd want to work in this field after a pleasant experience like this?) she's happily in a different field...trying to pay back tuition and other accumulated debts since.

So yeah, with an aging population, the demand for HCA's is only going to increase. And when I see and hear comments like "It's impossible for us to meet everyone's needs"...I get a little pissed off.

Maybe this is a little too personal....maybe too off topic. But retention of HCA's will probably be a subject in the near future that will have the same similarities as retention of good doctors in this province.

Good posting JT

Hey JT..."Option #2" is illegal...so personally...I'd say "go ahead...see you in court"

And it's illegal even if it was true.

The ONLY thing a former employer is allowed to verify is that you worked from date 1 to date 2.

That's it...nothing more.

And I've deal with people who work the court cases to prove it.

where is it illegal?

In Manitoba you can fire terminate anyone pretty much at the drop of a hat. You dont even have to give a reason just sufficient notice or pay in lieu of notice.


This is even more true when there is a collective bargaining unit in place and they have gave away your rights for you.

it's illegal here in Manitoba.

We've let several people go, and received calls from somewhere they've applied to verify "employment".

And any questions asked outside of time-of-service are to be rebuffed.

I have a friend who works at EI, and a couple of friends who are lawyers...and they all confirm this (cause it sounded funny to me too when I first moved here).

Basically, if you get fired, and go to apply somewhere...and they call your previous employer who tells them you _____ (stole something, harassed someone, were violent, etc.), and you don't get the job because of it...then you have grounds to sue your previous employer for defamation of character, plus loss of potential wages.

MOST people never face/see that, because they aren't told why they weren't hired, or what a previous employer said. And it has to be proven that was the reason you weren't hired.

I'd be surprised if anyone could successfully sue for defamation provided the allegations were proven true.

I've often heard former employers were precluded from providing poor references. I don't understand that. If the employee sucked at the job so badly they were fired why the hell could that not be repeated?

one of my lawyer friends says it's rare.

TYPICALLY, the ones that win are those who do so with some friends involved.

They fill an application at a company with someone they know working there, who then calls the previous employer for references and gets the "personal" information.

Then writes a letter to the "applicant" explaining that "because of your previous..."


Basically it becomes a money scheme...but makes it through court because it IS illegal for a previous employer to offer that information.

oooo... you mean the "tell people why they were fired part" being illegal

that makes more sense but it not true.

you would be stupid to tell anyone why they were fired because you could be sued... but that dont make it illegal

AGEsAces wrote:it's illegal here in Manitoba.

We've let several people go, and received calls from somewhere they've applied to verify "employment".

And any questions asked outside of time-of-service are to be rebuffed.

I have a friend who works at EI, and a couple of friends who are lawyers...and they all confirm this (cause it sounded funny to me too when I first moved here).

Basically, if you get fired, and go to apply somewhere...and they call your previous employer who tells them you _____ (stole something, harassed someone, were violent, etc.), and you don't get the job because of it...then you have grounds to sue your previous employer for defamation of character, plus loss of potential wages.

MOST people never face/see that, because they aren't told why they weren't hired, or what a previous employer said. And it has to be proven that was the reason you weren't hired.

Get new friends and lawyers that know what they are talking about.

If you fired a person for stealing and have proof, you are not defaming them...you are telling the truth...they are the ones to blame for their own reputations.

Most companies just don't want a hassle, but it is not illegal.

Riddle me this: if you fired someone for stealing, because you had proof, could that still be defamation if it has not yet been proven in court?

First off, why would anybody that got caught stealing want to press the matter?

Secondly, with proof, you can easily defend your position.

Thirdly, I doubt that the person fired could afford a lawyer as a lawyer would be asking a lot of up front cash to take on this suicide mission. (Lawyers hate these types of cases btw....just try and find a lawyer that wants to sue for defamation)

...that's just off the top of my head....

Maybe when they pay better money for the work then maybe people will look at it as career instead of a job for now . And I do know several people who do and have worked in the field it is on of the most demanding jobs around working with the elderly.
And ageages i fired someone for theft and checked if i could give out that info to people asking for a reference they never said I couldn't .