Labrador-Grenfell Health releases statement on air ambulance service

Staff ~ The Telegram
Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

Labrador-Grenfell Health has confirmed that two situations have occurred recently which have caused concern about the ability to respond to medevacs in a timely manner.
According to a news release, the first situation occurred April 26 whereby the aircraft and the pilot remained in St. John's while a protest rally was occurring at Confederation Building.
The second situation occurred on May 7 where a pilot refused to fly a routine flight because the individual felt he was unable to do so. The pilot did not inform the health authority prior to the medevac request that he was unable to fly. A second pilot, when contacted, indicated he was also unable to fly. As a result, the air ambulance was unable to be put into service.
"Labrador-Grenfell Health takes situations such as these very seriously," says Boyd Rowe, CEO. "Our priority remains the safety and health of patients and we are committed to a quality and improved air ambulance service."

Organizations: Labrador-Grenfell Health, Confederation Building

Geographic location: St. John's

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • John
    July 02, 2010 - 13:33

    If I just decided I wasn't going to work just because I didn't feel like it or left work to participate in a demonstration, I'd soon find myself without a job. Even if i'm in a hospital, I still am required to produce a doctors note. These pilots that refused to fly should be fired. I'm sure that there are lots of pilots who would't mind getting a job and doing it rather than getting involved in political demonstrations.

  • Sue
    July 02, 2010 - 13:31

    Based on the inclement weather and the distance to fly, it only makes sense to have an appropriate well equipped and staffed aircraft in Labrador. A round trip from St.John's to mid Labrador including ground transfer and hospital times can be well over 6 to 8 hours. Significant and valuable time can be saved by having an aircraft on the doorstep on the north.

    In comparison, the BC system has very few aircraft mostly based in Vancouver. Many times critical patients from their northeastern areas are serviced by the Alberta aircraft, of which their are 14 and are spread about the province.

    Nutshell...keep an aircraft in the north. Seems to work well.

  • Eugene
    July 02, 2010 - 13:29

    The politics is getting too personal here.

    1. The team could respond to an emergency faster when both the paramedics and plane were in the same location. April 26 -- the aircraft and the pilot remained in St. Johns while a protest rally was occurring at Confederation Building . I would think that if the paramedics were in St. John's protesting and the plane were some where else, that it would be of more concern.

    2. Pilots are always in command of a plane (by international laws). If a pilot has the flu or plugged sinuses, he or she can not fly. Sorry but Boyd Rowe does not have legal rights to override any pilots judgement relate to flying.

    I'm curious as to what he means a pilot refused to fly a routine flight . There are many reasons for this; For example a pilot can not under any circumstances (including emergencies) exceed maximum air time or duty time as directed by international laws.

    Either the move to Goose Bay is justified or it is not. But don't shift blame to others who have nothing to do with the decision making.

  • Paul
    July 02, 2010 - 13:18

    You have to feel that this was refusal to work as a protest as opposed to any other condition. If so the pilots involved should be fired and others hired. You don't fool around with people's health care, something paid for in advance, and expect to keep your job. Put a stop to the situation by firing these people and send a message both to unions and the public that the job comes first. If it doesn't then go on welfare.

  • John
    July 01, 2010 - 20:22

    If I just decided I wasn't going to work just because I didn't feel like it or left work to participate in a demonstration, I'd soon find myself without a job. Even if i'm in a hospital, I still am required to produce a doctors note. These pilots that refused to fly should be fired. I'm sure that there are lots of pilots who would't mind getting a job and doing it rather than getting involved in political demonstrations.

  • Sue
    July 01, 2010 - 20:19

    Based on the inclement weather and the distance to fly, it only makes sense to have an appropriate well equipped and staffed aircraft in Labrador. A round trip from St.John's to mid Labrador including ground transfer and hospital times can be well over 6 to 8 hours. Significant and valuable time can be saved by having an aircraft on the doorstep on the north.

    In comparison, the BC system has very few aircraft mostly based in Vancouver. Many times critical patients from their northeastern areas are serviced by the Alberta aircraft, of which their are 14 and are spread about the province.

    Nutshell...keep an aircraft in the north. Seems to work well.

  • Eugene
    July 01, 2010 - 20:17

    The politics is getting too personal here.

    1. The team could respond to an emergency faster when both the paramedics and plane were in the same location. April 26 -- the aircraft and the pilot remained in St. Johns while a protest rally was occurring at Confederation Building . I would think that if the paramedics were in St. John's protesting and the plane were some where else, that it would be of more concern.

    2. Pilots are always in command of a plane (by international laws). If a pilot has the flu or plugged sinuses, he or she can not fly. Sorry but Boyd Rowe does not have legal rights to override any pilots judgement relate to flying.

    I'm curious as to what he means a pilot refused to fly a routine flight . There are many reasons for this; For example a pilot can not under any circumstances (including emergencies) exceed maximum air time or duty time as directed by international laws.

    Either the move to Goose Bay is justified or it is not. But don't shift blame to others who have nothing to do with the decision making.

  • Paul
    July 01, 2010 - 20:00

    You have to feel that this was refusal to work as a protest as opposed to any other condition. If so the pilots involved should be fired and others hired. You don't fool around with people's health care, something paid for in advance, and expect to keep your job. Put a stop to the situation by firing these people and send a message both to unions and the public that the job comes first. If it doesn't then go on welfare.