Posts
If there are any flying monkeys left reading:
Credentials and training that aren't actually needed to do the job at hand are barriers to entry designed to inflate salaries for those on the other side of the barrier.
My example of needing to be an RN to do work that most anyone with a very basic amount of medical training can perform looms large here.
Cui bono?
ReplyDeleteIt isn't RNs that benefit. There's been a national RN shortage for 60 years. We don't need extra positions that needn't be actual RNs, because we're short about half a million nurses now compared to actual needs, the average age of an RN in this country is early 50s, and there isn't any demographic coming along behind to take care of the last half of the Baby Boom in their millions for the next 30 years as it is.
The employer takes it in the pants too, because it drives up labor costs needlessly.
Which gets passed on, and shafts the insurer, and just gets passed along to the end user who pays the premiums.
Does it happen? Absolutely, as in your example.
They have RNs (allegedly) doing work that a minimally-qualified CNA can accomplish.
Stupid and wasteful.
So who is it that's benefiting from such stupidity?
No one discernible to any simple inspection or explanation.
And the only salary inflation in your example was an unlicensed unqualified person getting paid for skills and talents they never possessed.
Yes, the position should have been one requiring only a CNA.
But the fraud previously named wasn't even certified to do that little.
Why require it in the first place?
I can't think of any reason to justify it that passes a first look, beyond employer stupidity.
But I'm completely open to a better explanation, if one exists.
You're almost understanding barrier to entry, but you're not quite there.
DeleteDon't forget regulatory capture when trying to understand how all of your objections are actually reinforcing my point.