A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

QC Haters - TexasMT

Posted: Aug 14, 2013

I'd like to share something. A few months ago I QC'd a report and was able to decipher a horrible dictator/dictation and found some obscure terms as well. I was able to fill in all the blanks and provide good feedback. I was pretty proud of myself and I found myself thinking.... wouldn't it be great if we can be compensated for the "things" that we do figure out? It is a tough job but I am not complaining. Never in my wildest dreams did I think that this QC bonus program would happen. You know the phrase.. "Be careful what you ask for... ?" There has to be some other way. I DO NOT want to be compensated for a good job at the expense of MTs... NO WAY!! I hope I don't start a string of nasty postings but I just wanted, again, to put in my 2 cents' worth!

wouldn't it be... - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
"wouldn't it be great if we can be compensated for the "things" that we do figure out?" Isn't that what you are already paid to do as a QC?

wouldn't it be - TexasMT

[ In Reply To ..]
Yes! I'm just meaning those really difficult dictations! I'm on your side fellow MT :)

Does it Pay? No! - The Hard Math

[ In Reply To ..]
Hypothetically beginning VR document = 100 lines, incoming job starting pay $4.00. Everything done to this job will only LOWER the pay.

Deleting 60 lines of incorrect text.
Transcribing 20 lines of correct text.
Final line count 40 lines.

Did that compensate for the actual work that was done to the report?

Let's look at the money math:
Average transcription pay for what was transcribed: $1.60.
Deleting 60 lines of incorrect text, done for free
20 lines @ VR pay for proofing 4 cents = 80 cents.

Total $2.40.

After a VR edit this 40-line report at standard VR pay only pays $1.60.

You tell me - DOES it pay us to edit?

No way. Not even close.

I completely agree with you - that editing/proofing does not pay... sm

[ In Reply To ..]
It doesn't pay MTs to edit either. That was not my question though. Have a nice night.

Not to worry - Not blaming you

[ In Reply To ..]
You are in same boat with the rest of us - doing the best you can and being hated for it.

Let us lay blame where it belongs. On the company that daily takes us to the battlefield. Their scheme seems to be, "Keep the employees on defense to thwart a good offense."

And every day it's something new, something else to criticize for. They've sent me to the whipping post so much I'm thinking of changing my name to Spanky Atwill. LOL.

Not To Worry - TexasMT

[ In Reply To ..]
LOL ;) I'm in total agreement.

Why not do it right? - nn

[ In Reply To ..]
Don't you think if they paid MTs well enough and left down on the Fiesa crap they could keep a better, more qualified staff instead of hiring so many newbies(not trying to offend). This in turn would provide a more accurate and quality report therefore eliminating the need for QC to have to double check the whole dang report. They keep pushing for more work at less pay, what the hell do they think they are going to get? JMO

SO sensible. Pay was too low to live off of - before. Now quality requirements

[ In Reply To ..]
are pushed up so high - for editing too, already paid HALF the paltry transcription CPL - that it amounts to another giant pay cut. Even good, highly experienced MTs can't possibly afford to slow down to meet that standard consistently and pay their utilities. Especially with incentive pay, once earned with every paycheck, now dangled mostly out of reach.

So instead of paying their editors better TO ENABLE the highest quality, they pay a second set of workers go over the reports with a fine-tooth comb.

Unbelievable. I resent the reasoning behind this that it's more profitable to push the cheap workers to produce as fast as possible AND hire a team of housekeepers to come along behind and clean up our messy (!) reports.

I often feel the same way. - sadmt

[ In Reply To ..]
It would be so nice if once in a while a QC would email back a comment like "Hey, good job finding that drug discrepancy" or "Glad you noticed the left/right breast discrepancy". But, no, all MTs get is "major error" "major error" "major error" and for what? Oh, forgot to put "the" in front of "patient". It's that kind of thing that gets me.

Now charging for blanks? - CrankyMT

[ In Reply To ..]
So, over a month ago I started seeing posts here about QC's now charging for blanks that they could figure out. Then a few weeks back I noticed it on my own FIESA. 0.25 here, 0.25 there. It added up! Especially when there was a brand new ESL dictator who had 101 formatting requests, and this is on your secondary which you rarely type.

I'm glad that the QC's can figure out what I can't. When I did QC work for my last job, I spent most of the day filling in the same things on every report, because out of 100 transcriptionists, they'd only get that doctor once in a very blue moon, but I was seeing the problems over and over. Of course I could fix it. But for someone who has never typed that doctor, or it's been a month, chances are it's going to be harder to remember when they are literally typing for thousands of docs.

And another thing, how many times do we message the SQC's (or whatever they're called these days) and ask for their opinion on something that is client specific and they say, "leave a blank." Actually, I used to have a SQC that in 3 months of interactions not ONCE gave me an answer. It was always "leave a blank." So, we leave these blanks and the QC's are able to make a decision (that if we made and were wrong about would end up with a 3.0 deduction)... but then charge us for leaving that blank? Even after I've left in the comments that my TSM or a SQC specifically told me to leave a blank?

I know that at the end of the day, we're all just doing our job. But we're being set up to fail, and we're being set up to hurt one another! Speaking of, I love when I get a job that is 10 minutes long and from a horrible dictator, and I notice that the job conveniently is 2 hours older than all the rest. But no... that couldn't be cherry picking! That's now allowed! BS!

QC - me

[ In Reply To ..]
What about all the things the MT deciphered prior to even sending it to QC...

Similar Messages:

Oct 27, 2010

I just wanna say, working for MQ isn't that bad... I mean where else can you have a beer with work, just to take the edge off!!! Happy Hump Day! Drinks on me! ...

Mar 02, 2014

Get this guys!!! I went to check my FIESA. Have 2000 lines edited over the last 2 days; 100% on at least 90% of them. The others are all where they could fill in the blank with their wonderful BIONIC ears and then there was this 30 minute report I had that was VR and I missed 2 spots where only 1 space was left instead of 2 after a period and they marked me down for it. How that changed or altered in any shape, form or fashion the meaning of the sentence is beyond me, but ...

Dec 04, 2012

seems to have no snow for now. Guess they are all grinches over there. LOL ...