Rival Ambulances.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 19240, 29 November 1930, Page 8

Rival Ambulances.

To the Editor. Dear Sir,—l would like, as one who was out of work for some time, to comment on what I consider to be an extremely unfair thing. The St John Ambulance Association, I understand, pay only their secretary for his services; the remainder of the work being voluntary. Is this fair? The Christchurch Free Ambulance, Incorporated, on the other hand, pays all its officers and men. Although none of them receive high salaries, they all receive a living wage. This is surely the only proper and satisfactory method of running a Free Ambulance Service—the men can be expected, in fact, compelled, to give an efficient service; which is impossible with voluntary labour. It is not reasonable to expect or ask any man to work for nothing when there are hundreds of men practically starving for want of work. I admire the Christchurch Free Ambulance for the splendid way !h which they treat their employees, and for their courage and enterprise in inaugurating and controlling the first Free Ambulance service in Christchurch, which was so very greatly needed, and which, although in operation but a few weeks, has already proved of inestimable benefit to the public of Canterbury. The St John Association may be gaining a certain amount of publicity at the moment, but their methods in the past have not been conducive to public support. When a patient is lying seriously ill or injured, the nerves of his relatives are strung to the highest pitch; and when they arg asked for guarantees of payment before thg ambulance will come they are not likely to forget. No amount of publicity will undo the harm that these methods have caused, and that is why so many people are turning to the Christchurch Free Ambulance.— I am, etc., FAIR PLAY,