Time for the Lowering of Dues at the AANA? - page 2

I am posting this letter in hope of bringing positive change to the profession. I am not an insider to the inner workings of the AANA, but nonetheless, there are clearly inefficiencies noticeable to... Read More

  1. Visit  sccrna profile page
    1
    Gasmanstevo, yes you are correct that we need more people running. Are you one of them? Have you served on your state board of directors or on a national committee or as an officer? If not, why? On average it takes one of our dedicated CRNAs around 7 - 8 years of active service to become President of our organization. By the time the work their way up the state system, serve on the board, then as a lower level officer and finally as president. Have you done that. If not then don't complain about our having people serving who have been around for awhile. To serve as an officer of this association you must have passion for our profession and you must be willing to give of your time. I am proud of our officers and those who serve us and our profession.

    As for the AAs, that is an issue that unfortunately we probably will not win. The ASA has a great deal of money from their PAC that they expend at the state level to push their agenda. How much money did you give last year to our PAC? We have great national and state officers but they cannot do it on their own. In most states the state organizations are begging for members to become active and help. We need serious members who understand our organization, are willing to give of their time and money and who have a passion for what we do.
    rubyrn36 likes this.
  2. Visit  cessnadriver profile page
    0
    I am not a huge fan of the AANA for reasons I will not go into here, but can be found on other forums. The AA issue is a direct result of the absolute contrarian attitude of the AANA dealing with the ASA. The AANA would not budge an inch... soo the ASA did an end run around them.. viola AAs. The AANA is protecting the rural solo practitioner at the expense of the large hospital ACT " stool monkey".

    In addition, the AANA is unresponsive to concerns of their members on issues dealing with the image and treatement of CRNAs on the net, again not to be covered here but can be found on other forums.
  3. Visit  foraneman profile page
    2
    Quote from GasManStevo
    even though the original poster made some inadvertent mistakes, he is correct that the AANA can cut costs a lot. the truth is, they would probably achieve more with less if they had better leadership. just because other professional organizations overcharge their members, does that justify the AANA doing it also? To me, the anser is a resounding no. There is no question that the AANA can accomplish the same by cutting the fat. every business is doing this, so why not the AANA?

    secondly, since we are talking about the AANA. the AANA needs a total makeover. It is made up of a lot of long time incumbents recylcing old ideas. Why do you think they have been so ineffective fighting the AA's. They are in 18 states now. Did you know that John's Hopkins director of anesthesiology introduced a bill in the maryland legislature to permit AA's to practice there and for Hopkins to create an AA program? Do you know what that means for you? it means AA programs will start everyone and your job security is going way down. And the reason the AANA keeps losing is because their defense is fictitious and that is that AA's are unsafe. There is way too much evidence to show the contrary. So what does the AANA and MANA need to do to stop it? First, come up with a new argument such as that there are 5000 crna students right now and the need will be filled shortly. The AANA would do much better if it would communicate with members to get ideas before they issue stupid ficitious position statements.

    the aana would be a much better organization if they ushered in a complete change, including costs, reasoning for position statements, and how all of these processes are done.
    SOME inadvertent mistakes? Not understanding in the least how the organizations committees work AND having no argument except there must be waste because I think there is but I really don't have the facts....are not inadvertent mistakes.

    Let's hear some informed examples of how/where costs can be cut 'alot' without decreasing the effectiveness of the organization.....not just blanket statements. What is this 'fat'? The AANA is not 'every business', as most do not have offices/members/issues in every state. I never cease to be amazed that people making $150,000 annually think their less than $1000 anual dues are an 'overcharge' for working to protect the profession and that salary. How much would you suggest since 0.5% is too much?

    We elect the AANA leadership every year by popular vote. Sometimes there is only ONE candidate running for a position. Who is to blame for that? The AANA also?

    'Come up with a new argument' I assume does not mean make things up', so graduation of SRNAs over the next decade filling even the loss of retiring CRNAs (average age 48 right now) much less creating a net gain is out.

    And by the way, the Maryland AA legislation was defeated March 11 thanks to the lobbying and senate testimony of MANA lobbyists, members and officers....paid for with AANA dues.

    Lets not lose sight of the fact that there are ~1000 AAs and over 35,000 CRNAs...AND that AAs have existed for many decades. AA programs 'starting everywhere' and job security scares are poppycock.
    rubyrn36 and NRSKarenRN like this.
  4. Visit  daudi profile page
    0
    I do agree with you
  5. Visit  jwk profile page
    0
    Quote from foraneman

    And by the way, the Maryland AA legislation was defeated March 11 thanks to the lobbying and senate testimony of MANA lobbyists, members and officers....paid for with AANA dues.

    Lets not lose sight of the fact that there are ~1000 AAs and over 35,000 CRNAs...AND that AAs have existed for many decades. AA programs 'starting everywhere' and job security scares are poppycock.
    Defeated means it came up for a vote - it didn't. The legislation was withdrawn. "Paid for with AANA dues" would be correct though. You should ask yourself how much money is spent on illegally fighting AA legislation at every turn. Restraint of trade and perjury are both illegal - sooner or later this crap will catch up with you.

    And if "job security scares are poppycock", then again, why spend so much money on the fight? What exactly is it that you are so afraid of?
  6. Visit  jwk profile page
    0
    Quote from mammothsnw
    OK so...$645 is .0043% of the avg CRNA yearly salary....most make more than that in a day. I'm an SRNA with $0 income and I probably spend that much on coffee in a year...I have to agree with Mr. Zwerling...The AANA is a great advocate for our profession, and I would glady pay double those dues...
    I hope your math for your drug calculations is not off by a factor of 100. If "$645 is .0043% of the avg CRNA yearly salary", then the average yearly salary is $15,000,000.
  7. Visit  foraneman profile page
    1
    Quote from jwk
    Defeated means it came up for a vote - it didn't. The legislation was withdrawn. "Paid for with AANA dues" would be correct though. You should ask yourself how much money is spent on illegally fighting AA legislation at every turn. Restraint of trade and perjury are both illegal - sooner or later this crap will catch up with you.

    And if "job security scares are poppycock", then again, why spend so much money on the fight? What exactly is it that you are so afraid of?
    Defeated:

    1. The act of defeating or state of being defeated.
    2. Failure to win.
    3. A coming to naught; frustration: the defeat of a lifelong dream.
    4. Law The act of making null and void.

    The bill was withdrawn by its sponsors in the house after an unfavorable report was made after the Senate heard testimony in committee. It was withdrawn because it would have been a waste of the house's time to discuss it after the senate's report. Defeat is certainly an appropriate term for a proposal which is deemed to have so little support that discussion, much less a vote on it is pointless.

    But thanks anyway for your useful contribution regarding AANA dues. Non-AANA members clearly have reason to opine.
    rubyrn36 likes this.
  8. Visit  dseig3513 profile page
    1
    Does anyone know the pros and cons of only paying membership dues on your recertification year? I realize the AANA does a lot for our profession in general but I'm not sure I see the specific benefits for the military.
    LindseyLee likes this.
  9. Visit  loveanesthesia profile page
    0
    The dues we pay is a small amount of money for the numereous benefits that the AANA has obtained for the profession-I pay my own, not my employer. We would not be CRNAs because we would have been eliminated without the representation of the AANA. If we look to our history and the big picture, it is clear that CRNAs sticking together through the AANA has had huge benefits.
  10. Visit  wtbcrna profile page
    3
    Quote from dseig3513
    Does anyone know the pros and cons of only paying membership dues on your recertification year? I realize the AANA does a lot for our profession in general but I'm not sure I see the specific benefits for the military.
    The AANA is principally responsible for our independent practice model in the military and our bonus rates in the military (up to 45K a year). The ASA PAC gets approximately 3x as much as the AANA PAC, and yet we have been able to get 1/3 of the states to become opt-out states not mention numerous pain bills and AA bills that have been defeated by the AANA. It is a bargain when you consider the benefits to costs. The ASA would have CRNAs making almost nothing if they had their way while MDA salaries would increase by paying us even less.
    foraneman, ckh23, and loveanesthesia like this.
  11. Visit  foraneman profile page
    0
    Quote from dseig3513
    Does anyone know the pros and cons of only paying membership dues on your recertification year? I realize the AANA does a lot for our profession in general but I'm not sure I see the specific benefits for the military.
    PRO: Apparently eases your conscience or something since recertification is not dependent on membership. Giving something to the organization that "does a lot for our profession in general". Paying 50% of your already relatively low cost dues.

    CON: Living with yourself being cheap. Ignoring efforts by the AANA on behalf of military CRNAs, of which there are many. Pretending your profession in general and practice in the military are somehow separate.
    Last edit by traumaRUs on May 11, '12


Nursing Jobs in every specialty and state. Visit today and find your dream job.

Top
close
close