Jennifer Slauenwhite 2019-05-28 Jennifer Slauenwhite 2019-05-28

15 reasons why the RMTBC Membership does NOT represent the best interest of BC RMTs, and why I'm no longer a member.

15 Reasons Why I Left The Association

THE SHORT VERSION

Currently, in BC, there is no union or association actively working to protect RMTs from being exploited by large corporations, advocating for better pay and benefits, bargaining for better workplace conditions and agreements that are fair and equitable and compliant with BC Labour Laws, ensuring clinics are compliant with CRA’s definition of “self-employed”, lobying for benefits packages, job satisfaction, higher education, lateral movement within the profession, or opportunities for advancement or growth within the profession, retirement and pension plans. It’s a crap shoot of a career.

The Association is the ONLY organization with a mandate to represents the interests of the registrants and profession, theoretically.

The association has either been turning a blind eye to and allowing the following issues or are unaware of these issues within the profession for which they are advocates. I’m not sure which is worse tbh.

1) Bias & Conflict of Interest in advocating for the benefit of workign relationships between clinics and registrants. Four of six of the board members are clinic owners, the board has a natural bias towards decisions in the best interest of clinics not registrants

2) Remaining silent on (aware but are failing to address) or ignorant (are completely out to lunch on) the exploitation of registrants with pseudo-contractor positions that violate BC Labour Laws, CRA terms and definitions of what is self-employment and what is not, and exposing registrants to potential tax fraud and penalties and back taxes by misclassifying their relationship with their clinic. All the financial burden of self-employed but without any of the freedom or flexibility of self-employment. All the restrictions of employment but without any of the benefits of employment.

3) Price Fixing the minimum % splits for “contracted” therapists in a private social media group. I have to through myself under the bus, I was there when this conversation happened.

4) Remaining silent on (or ignorant of) the frequent threats of litigation as a form of coercive control, manipulation, bullying, and intimidation from a certain clinic or group of clinics in the lower mainland.

5) The dumpster fire of working conditions and compensation agreements for RMTS and the appeal to antiquity.

6) Failing to address the issues around non-compete clauses which are just another appeal to antiquity and a sign of employment not self employment…. Just so many levels of messed up.

7) The dearth of health benefits or pay differentials for registrants. There are no stat or holiday pay differentials, weekend pay differentials, health benefits, sick leave, maternity leave, etc. Young registrants are taking jobs at Starbucks for the benefits.

8) The WSBC compensation negotiated by the RMTBC is horseshit and puts the registrants in a position of a conflict of interest.

9) Is ICBC manipulating RMTS into writing reports for free and is that a serious boundary violation?

10) The crappy reality of buying real estate for pseudo self-employed RMTs.

11) Perpetuating and proliferating pseudoscience from within the profession by promoting organizations and modality empires, in their advertising, magazine, and social media, that are outdated, have been quantifiably refuted by current research, and aren’t willing to adapt or update their content with current science and evidence.

12) NO opportunity for professional advancement, promotion, growth or lateral movement.

13) Failing to collaborate with other stakeholders to update the competency document and support changes and advancements in knowledge and understanding. Leading to generations of RMTs who paid a million dollars for outdated education.

14) The ubiquitous and unfair competitive advantages or opportunities afforded to a select few RMTs.

15) Inadequate, or complete lack of, education and training for registrants around sexual harassment in the workplace, discrimination, ableism, and inclusivity in the workplace, and trauma informed practices.

THE EXTENDED EDITION

Of the 6 board members of the Association, 4 of them are clinic owners, 3 of which private clinics and 1 the owner of the school and student clinic. The RMTBC board could not actually have an unbiased meeting to discuss issues in the best interest of registrants because the majority of their board is biased, Four of their six memebers would have to recuse themselves for conflict of interest… I suspect they don’t do that.

Voula Moreau (Soursos) – Owner at Body Mechanics Massage Therapy Clinic
Lizette Tucker – Owner at Trail Integral Therapeutics
Sandra Coldwell – Owner Ridgeview Therapy Centre
Roxanne Petruk – Owner of OVCMT

Contractors vs Employees

This is a serious issue, putting both clinic owners and registrants in a position to violate CRA’s definition of self-employed and at risk of huge financial implications and penalties and back taxes (CPP, EI, etc). This also puts them in violation of their bylaws which include provisions to abide by all local laws and regulations. The same situation was prevalent also in the Physiotherapy profession, but the Canadian Physiotherapy Association acted, and now they have a set of guidelines based on the CRA definitions. Here’s a quote from the CPA (link below).

“The Canadian Physiotherapy Association (CPA) has been made aware of instances where the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has overturned the self-employed status of physiotherapists working in private clinics and determined they were employees of the facility. The status was changed due to the actual working relationship between the physiotherapist and the clinic. The existence of a contract stating that the physiotherapist is self-employed is not sufficient to establish that employment status. According to CRA, it is the actual terms and conditions of employment that will determine the employment status. A change in employment status from independent contractor to employee will have huge financial implications including penalties and back taxes.”

Many BC RMTs are caught in a bizarre and horrible place of neither being employed nor self-employed or an unfortunate combination of both. The relationship many RMTs have with many clinics does NOT comply with the Canada Revenue Agency’s definitions/determination of the working relationship for Employee vs Contractor.

CRA Form Employee or Self Employed

RMTs are being taken advantage of by clinics. RMTs have all the burden of being self-employed with none of the benefits, and all the restrictions of being employed with none of the benefits. They deserve better.

Presidents have been set by the BC Physiotherapists:

https://physiotherapy.ca/independent-contractors

https://physiotherapy.ca/app/uploads/2022/07/new-independent-contractor-info_table-1_en.pdf

https://physiotherapy.ca/app/uploads/2022/07/new-independent-contractor-info_table-2_en.pdf

(SEE FOOTNOTES FOR A PDF COPY OF THE TABLES)

TABLES 1: Determining Self-Employed versus Employee

TABLE 2: CHECKLIST OF MAIN CHARACTERISTICS FOR EMPLOYEE AND SELF- EMPLOYED PHYSIOTHERAPISTS

Note: If you are self-employed, there should be no boxes checked in the left column.

3) Price Fixing the minimum % splits for “contracted” therapists in a private social media group. I have to through myself under the bus, I was there when this conversation happened.

There is a particular group on facebook called the Clinic Owners Hub.

I was a member of that group several years ago, and I recall the time price fixing was discussed and agreed to by the members, whereby they would all raise the base minimum rent going forward. Many things were discussed in this group to support and benefit clinic owners and their profitability. I’m not saying businesses shouldn’t make a profit, I’m just pointing out that there is a lawful way for businesses to operate, and for some reason, registrants of this profession and the respective clinics are evading the law in several ways.

Now consider that the organization that is supposed to represent the best interest of the registrants, has several (at least 2 of the 6) board members who are (or were) a part of this group at that time..

There is an increasing trend amongst some clinic owners who are using the threat litigation against self employed workers who wish to relocate their practice or practice at another location, often under the notion of a radius or non-compete clause. It’s tyrannical and bullying at best, unlawful at worst and could ultimately prevent a therapist from working and earning a living, resulting catastrophic financial circumstances.

It is another appeal to antiquity, from a time before the internet, social media and online everything, when it was more difficult to build a practice and we had to march uphill both ways in 10’ of snow just to deliver a few flyers. I remember being taught these things by more “senior” clinic owners myself. Times have changed. These big clinics have 70+ people on their wait lists, they dominate the SEO and will out google AdWords you faster than you can say Zuckerburg, and their therapists are booked months in advance… there is not a single shred of evidence that a single therapist moving to another clinic would cause any financial damage to their clinic, nor would anyone believe that. However, a therapist who is the sole income for his/her family could be in a dire situation if they were prevented from earning an income as a result of this type of litigation.

The volume of registrants who have been harassed and victimized by the tyrannical and bullying behaviour of some large clinic/corporate owners is increasing.

It seems that many registrants aren’t familiar with contract law, corporate law, and labour laws; they aren’t aware of their rights and how they’re being violated.

It seems that some clinic owners aren’t familiar either, or maybe they are and are turning a blind eye because it allows them to manipuate and take advantage of their workers, and reduces their expenses by avoiding paying cpp, ei, etc.

Furthermore, part of what defines self-employed workers is their ability to work at multiple locations and have full autonomy over their practice. CRA suggests a non-compete is an indication of an employee/employer relationship.

I have personally been asked to sell my house and move my family to another city/province, asked to leave my profession and do something else – landscaping I think it was, and then I was threatened with litigation if I continued to practice. I know I’m not alone. I know of dozens other similar stories, and they’re all scared to stand up to these corporate bullies, understandably.

Many RMTs don’t understand their rights, the laws, and/or don’t have the income to pay for legal fees to be represented, and often back down (or fawn) to these corporate bullies. Like any behaviour, the more times they repeat the behaviour the more entrenched it becomes and the more difficult it is to correct it.

BC RMTs deserve work environments free from toxic culture, bullying, and discrimination.

BC RMTs deserve security and freedom from threats of litigation of this nature for exercising one of their rights as self-employed workers.

5) The dumpster fire of working conditions and compensation agreements for RMTS and the appeal to antiquity.

Failing to advocate for the best interest of registrants and the continuous advancement of workplace compensation and agreements. By doing nothing we are allowing clinics/corporations to continue with “the way we’ve always done it-% splits, exploiting new and green registrants for maximum profit, and other outdated agreements that only serve to benefit the clinic and not the patients or the therapists.

To earn enough to pay these fees in addition to living expenses, many RMTs are taking on more treatment hours than they can sustain for their physical and mental health, contributing to burnout of the registrants and probably poor patient care

I’m aware of many RMTs who rarely take breaks during their shifts in clinics because they are often limited to a set 6-hour shift, usually, 8-2 or 2-8 in a shared treatment room/clinic and often have a “minimum rent” to pay.

There is one clinic that charges “rent” on invoiced and pays the therapists on “cash collected”, essentially they are running 2 sets of books (which isn’t always illegal) and exploiting the registrants. If you invoice $1000 but only $500 is cash collected, and your rent is 30%, that therapist will only be paid out $200. Cash flow mismanagement like this is one of the top 5 killers of small businesses in BC. How are these businesses continuing to get away with this shit?

These aren’t ideal working circumstances for ANY worker in BC and RMTs deserve better.

BC RMTs deserve fair compensation, positions that accurately reflect their work environment and relationship to the clinic along with the appropriate compensations such as CPP, EI, WSBC, etc.

AT PRESSENT NO ONE REGULATES CLINICS

BUT IT’S CLEAR THAT PERHAPS SOMEONE SHOULD.

6) Failing to address the issues around non-compete clauses which are just another appeal to antiquity and a sign of employment not self employment…. Just so many levels of messed up.

Where do we even begin to address this antiquated practice? Oh, I know, how about with the law. You can NOT prevent a person from earning a living. And, being able to work in multiple places IS a quality of a self employed individual, whereas a non-compete is an example of an employee/employer relationship.

I am guilty of this when I owned a clinic too, because I believed the old guard. I was wrong. I’m sorry.

However, with some big clinics having 70+ people on their wait lists, they can NOT claim that a therapist leaving is potential “financial” damage. Rather, they’re attempting to prevent a therapist from leaving because they want to continue to exploit them for profit.

The only person who benefits from a non-compete clause is a clinic.

The only people who get angry about your boundaries are the ones who benefits from you not having them.

I know registrants that have taken jobs at Starbucks and other companies for the benefits they require.
It’s shameful that registered, regulated, primary healthcare professionals have to take part-time jobs working at a coffee shop to meet their needs because it is the industry standard for them to NOT receive these benefits.

It’s embarrassing when I tell other healthcare workers about the reality of working as an RMT in BC.

BC RMTs deserve fair compensation differentials for working weekends, stats, and holidays

BC RMTs deserve fair health benefits package opportunities without having to take a part-time job as a barista.

8) The WSBC compensation negotiated by the RMTBC is horseshit and puts the registrants in a position of a conflict of interest.

RMTs are only compensated $23.50 (24.00 in 2023) for 15-minute appointments up to a maximum of 45minutes/day or $70 maximum for a 45-minute appointment. Which is inconsistent with the fee schedule of most RMTS, and the suggested fee schedule created by the RMTBC. I’m aware of some clinics billing for three 15-minute units but only offering 30-minute appointments to make it financially worthwhile. In addition to this, the clinic is taking at least 30% of that number. It’s a boundary violation. It puts the RMTs in a position of conflict of interest because they don’t feel they’re fairly compensated for their expertise and time.

Initial assessment and tx

RMT $23.50/15 minutes max 45 minutes

Physio $185.00

Treatment visit

RMT $23.50/15 minutes max 45 minutes

Physio $83.00 no max or min duration

Extension Request Report

RMT $28.00

Physio $55.00

9) Is ICBC manipulating RMTS into writing reports for free and is that a serious boundary violation?

RMTs are the only healthcare professionals who are not compensated for writing “reports” to ICBC. For the answers to the same group of questions, physiotherapists and all other healthcare professionals bill for their time. There’s a note on the ICBC website that states that RMTS do NOT submit reports… except for the reports we submit for free.

ICBC has created another term for the same report for RMTS, the extension request. It’s manipulation to avoid paying for the time and expert opinion of the registrants. Stating that RMTs don’t write reports but they are required to submit “extension requests” that provide the same information as the “progress reports” for all other healthcare workers. And, if they don’t do this their patients will lose their coverage for further treatment. Son of a nutcracker, is that blackmail? Seriously. I consider manipulation and blackmail for free services and my expert opinion to be a severe boundary violation. It puts the RMT in a position of conflict of interest because they aren’t fairly compensated for their expertise, time, and opinion.

Either my expert opinion isn’t needed or valuable to determine the need for further treatment and therefore no report or “extension request” is necessary.

Or, the expert opinion of the RMT is integral to determining the need for further treatment and therefore their time should be compensated.

No other healthcare profession is NOT compensated for this same task.
Here’s a quick comparison of the compensation of RMTS with Physios.

Initial assessment, tx, & report

*NOTE on their website MASSAGE THERAPISTS DO NOT SUBMIT REPORTS

RMT $113 (formerly $110) no report - Physio $133 (formerly $265) with a report

Treatment visit:

RMT $85

Physio $84

Telephone consult:

RMT $0-$15 but requires explicit authorization/approval

Physio $30 15minute consult

Progress Report *the same questions as the treatment plan and extension request.

RMT $0

Physio $128.00

Reassessment Report

RMT $0

Physio $80.00

Care plan meeting

RMT $0 - Physio $15/5minute increments

Non-standard tx (in-home, concussion/vestibular, spinal injury, complex muscular injury, remote location, hand therapy)

RMT As per regular treatment visit $85, no travel time, no mileage.

Physio $145/session, plus travel time @ $0.71/min, mileage @ $0.47/km

10) The crappy reality of real estate for self-employed healthcare workers.

Admittedly, this is not a reason to disassociate from the association, it is an important topic for any self-employed professional.

RMTs get the short end of the stick due to being classified as self-employed when trying to qualify for a mortgage.

Most lenders won’t give you a mortgage if you want to move to another city where you haven’t practiced for 2 years, even if there is a higher need for therapists in the new location.

With the agreement of internal trade being a catalyst to accommodate professionals moving across provinces, one very important detail was overlooked. RMTs are primarily, and arguably falsely classified as, “self-employed” workers who are unlikely to qualify for a mortgage in their new city or province, leaving them to pay high % splits and even higher rental fees. Super.

I would like to see the removal of outdated courses and severed ties with the organization and outdated modality empires.

These modality empires have exploited registrants for as long as I’ve been in the field. Registrants were “required” to take a certain number of continuing education courses per cycle (2 years = 1 cycle). These modality empires preyed upon this requirement. Some of them going as far as to trademark a psuedoscientific technique, market to the public so that they go looking for a therapist who has take their “magical course”.

12) No opportunity for professional advancement, promotion, growth or lateral movement.

The RMT designation is still barely recognized by other colleges and universities, with the rare exception of TRU.

There’s no opportunity for higher education within the profession. Sure, you can get your BHSc and go on to get your Master's degree in something else, but it isn’t as an RMT anymore and it doesn’t change or benefit your compensation as it does in any other profession. You’re still just an RMT with a bunch of word salad at the end of your name. When you’re an RMT that’s all you will ever be.

Experienced RMTs with 10, 20, or 30+ years of clinical practice, an equal number of years of stupid CEC requirements, and research consumption have the same earning potential as a brand-new graduate fresh out of school with an entry-to-practice skill set. And, our bylaws prevent us from advertising that we have any greater skills or alluding to being able to do something another RMT can’t. lol.

We can not specialize in anything, although I definitely think we do, but can’t advertise it. We can not use language in our advertising to suggest or allude to being able to offer anything different from any other registrant. Are you f’ing kidding me?

THE PUBLIC DESERVE TO KNOW THE SKILL SET AND SPECIALIZATION OF THE THERAPIST THEY ARE BOOKING WITH.

Whether it’s a concussion, prenatal, a specific sport, a specific condition, or a specific demographic. This isn’t about the therapist, but about the patient who is shopping for the right therapist.

This is stagnating; discouraging professionals from seeking higher-level education or training and diminishes job satisfaction… or makes ambitious therapists look to other professions for growth and advancement.

An RMT could teach at the college for $30/hour (with 2200 hours of education and 2 years in practice). Which is, I hear, a really enjoyable position, but not the compensation I can survive on.

An RMT could be a sessional lecturer for $50/hour for a 3-hour class for a total of $150/session. But similarly to being a contractor, there are no benefits or security. Add in the hours of commuting, pay to park, and gas, and one will quickly realize it isn’t a financially viable choice for many either.
Compare these scenarios to Nurse Educator positions and compensation packages.

There are no positions for RMTs with any of the health authorities.

BC RMTs deserve an opportunity for advancement and growth within the profession.

BC RMTs deserve recognition for special training and expertise like every other group of healthcare professionals.

The association, as a significant stakeholder in the profession, has failed to adequately advocate for the impartial and unbiased involvement of appropriately educated and qualified persons to collaboratively, systematically, and continuously update the entry-to-practice curriculum AND the competency document along with the current body of science.

How has there not been a class action lawsuit of gruntled graduates who are PISSED OFF that they paid a million dollars for an education that included egregiously outdated material (30 years) because the stakeholders can’t work together to create a living document that would keep the curriculum for RMTs current and evidence-based?

How do you interpret this in light of the bylaws and code of ethics?

I do not put the responsibility on the shoulders of any one stakeholder. It is a shared responsibility.

BC RMTs paying privately for a non-transferable education deserve better.

BC citizens and health insurers paying top dollar for treatment deserve better.

14) The ubiquitous and unfair competitive advantages or opportunities afforded to a select few RMTs.

We saw this with the new grad seminars and sponsored first aid courses.

You only need to do a quick google search to see the volume of sexual misconduct cases for BC RMTs.

But, the number of registrants who have experienced sexual harassment in the workplace is also alarming, and under reported due to shame and fear.

From fielding questions about “happy endings” or “I don’t want a dude rubbing me down” from the public on the phone to sexual discrimination and harassment in the workplace and academic environment. Yet, I can’t think of one single part of my education or training over the last 20 years that included how to recognize sexual harassment or discrimination or how to handle it, what my rights are, what the law says, or how to mitigate it from happening.

RMTs receive no training or support on how to recognize, manage, and prevent sexual discrimination or harassment even though it is a problem in the profession.

Without education on how to recognize harassment, toxic and unsafe work situations, and how to manage harassment if or when it does happen, RMTs are just sitting ducks.

Despite sexual misconduct being a prevelant problem and major issue for our regulatory body (the CMTBC), there is paucity of education for therapists on:

Understanding their rights and what constitutes harassment, sexual or otherwise.
Developing skills to recognize and manage harassment in the workplace.

Knowing who to contact when sexual harassment or harassment has occurred.

Knowing where to acquire trauma informed skills to work with patients who have experienced sexual harassment/harassment, or trauma.

Skill development for registrants working with patients with a history of sexual health conditions or sexual trauma (these people sprain their ankles too you know).

The profession would be best served with an comprehensive educational upgrade that includes better business literacy, how to recognize toxic and unsafe work situations and environments and education that is science based to further promote safe and effective healthcare.”

Many clinic (but certainly not all) foster an ableist environment.

There is little to no education or dialogue about accomodating diversity and invisible disabilities in the workplace. Such considerations as noise, lights, smells, accessibility, for therapists with special needs.

RMTs lack training and education for working with people with histories of trauma, survivors of domestic violence, and sexual abuse (because they sprain their ankles and have low back pain too).

There are many reasons someone may have gender preferences when it comes to choosing a therapist. It can be as simple as they feel more comfortable discussing the reason for their visit with someone who shares certain experiences, or it could be because of past trauma, abuse, domestic violence, LGBTQIA+ issues.

Where is the Association on this? Silent. So, no, I don’t think they represent the best interest of the profession. Do you?

Jennifer Slauenwhite 2019-05-28 Jennifer Slauenwhite 2019-05-28

Is It Safe To Speak Up?

Is it safe to speak up against a Society, a Union, an Association, or other large Not For Profit organization in a position of power and authority?

While we may face belligerent, arrogant, misinformed, ableist, and gaslighty responses from the comments section, we should not be fearful of retribution or threats of legal action if and when we speak up and point out our association is not in compliance with the bylaws and Act.

The Societies Act, governs all unions and associations in BC including our Association, the RMTBC. And, their bylaws can't conflict with it.

Can a Society "assert themselves" against a person for pointing out they are not in compliance with their own bylaws?

No, the Society’s Act prohibits the society, it’s directors, senior managers, and agents from asserting themselves against any person who points out they’re in violation of their bylaws or holds them accountable to their bylaws.

Societies Act
Part 2. Division 1.
Persons may rely on authority of societies and directors, senior managers and agents
8 (1) Subject to subsection (2), a society may not assert against a person dealing with the society that
(a) the bylaws of the society have not been complied with,

In this context, “Assert” means to make any claim or demand, or to enforce, bring, file or serve any claim, demand, counterclaim, suit, action and/or cause of action before any legal, judicial, arbitration, administrative, executive, governmental or other body.

They can not use forceful means to assert themselves against a person who points out the bylaws have not been complied with.

This means the can't use threats of legal action as a means of silencing or preventing a person from discussing or pointing out their bylaws have not been complied with. Conflicts of interest, lack of disclosure, and failing to meet their objectives are all examples of bylaw items.

Furthermore, extortion is an actual crime in this country.

Criminal Code
Section 346. (1) Every one commits extortion who, without reasonable justification or excuse and with intent to obtain anything, by threats, accusations, menaces or violence induces or attempts to induce any person, whether or not he is the person threatened, accused or menaced or to whom violence is shown, to do anything or cause anything to be done.

This means that it is an offence for ANYONE - including a person, clinic owner, manager, administrator, etc - to threaten legal action against you as a means to get you to do anything.

As soon as legal action is a motivator to get you to remove a post from social media, work in or away from a certain area, or stop you from talking about a certain issue, it is extortion. And our profession is ripe with it. It’s unacceptable, and It needs to stop.

I have received 12 messages in the last year alone from colleagues scared into leaving their community practice, during a time of healthcare shortage, over these types of threats. Our profession is ripe with it, and it needs to stop.

Be brave and speak up if you see something happening that you know is wrong, think is wrong, or mistakes you see being made.

Jennifer Slauenwhite 2019-05-28 Jennifer Slauenwhite 2019-05-28

We Are All Complicit In The Failure to Update the Foundational Education Guidelines.

The disappointing saga of a regulated healthcare profession in BC that failed to appropriately and adequately update the foundational education of their registrants for nearly 30 years.

I’m exhausted from raging against the machine for the greater good. The days of masking, fearful/quiet acquiescence, and toxic compliance are over. This is the year of civil disobedience, social justice, and accountability.

In my opinion, BC RMTs may not be qualified to provide safe, ethical, evidence-based, medically necessary care for injured and vulnerable patient populations.

This is the disappointing saga and logical consequence of a regulated primary healthcare profession in BC that failed to appropriately and adequately update the foundational education of their registrants (Guidelines For Foundational Knowledge-GFK, and the Interjurisdictional Competency Document-IJCD) for almost 30 years. Thereby harbouring major gaps in learning along with a plethora of outdated content and pseudoscientific explanatory models of “massage techniques” that have been quantifiably refuted by current medical literature and research…for decades.

In failing to update these critically important legislative documents, we put the public and registrants at risk for neglectful care, increased risk of exploitation and predation of vulnerable populations, and open ourselves up to insurance fraud.

After all, it is really easy to just rub nice-smelling lotions and oils on people and not think about their injury, their story, their goals, assessment, home exercise planning or self-care strategies, and collect 126+ dollars from insurance companies for it. Easy. The public doesn’t know better and expects it, the practitioners are indoctrinated to believe it, and healthcare insurance companies are paying for it.

The GFK was written by a group of RMTs, and the IJCD was written by a group of 5 lawyers. Both groups were unqualified; I understand why they did it, but that’s a tale for another day. It was a necessary evil, and we have known it needed to be appropriately reviewed and updated for the entirety of my career (2006-2023) and have not done so. We know that there is content in our GFK that has not been updated since at least 1994, and there were major gaps in learning along with a plethora of outdated content snake oil mumbo-jumbo at that time.

Additionally, there’s no character and fitness assessment for applicants to the profession, and a dearth, a toxic denial even, of necessary education, training, and resources for BC RMTs on working with various ambiguous situations and vulnerable and divergent populations such as survivors of sexual abuse, domestic violence, trauma, and pelvic health conditions and injuries.

From the 30s to the early 90s, the professions of massage therapy and physiotherapy were together under one regulatory college, the College of Physiotherapists & Massage Therapists of BC, and we shared the same foundational education up to 1994. At that time, the profession of massage therapy was separated from physiotherapy to be a separate health profession. I’m uncertain of the details of the separation, other than the resources of the college weren’t divided equally, and this is where our story begins. Rebuilding a newly minted healthcare profession.

Since 1994 the physiotherapy profession has become a master’s degree program and their guidelines for foundational knowledge are updated by special committees at the Universities comprised of qualified professionals and experts in the subject matter. Although their GFK is far from perfect and has challenges of its own, it is a far cry better than what the RMTs have done.

Comparatively, the massage therapy profession has failed to accomplish a meaningful critical review and audit of our foundation education by qualified professionals and experts since separating from physiotherapists, nearly 30 years ago. We lag behind, hamstrung by corporate greed and pseudoscientific rhetoric.

I appreciate the magnitude of the task to review and update these critically important documents (IJCD and GFK). These matters take time, money, effort, and expertise in health sciences and education.

The outcome of such an update will mean big and costly changes for private institutions, and an overhaul of the curriculum which is based on the IJCD and GFK.

Possibly and plausibly, it may mean that RMT education could conceivably be delivered, at least partially, in a public university or college. Naturally, the corporations that are “educational stakeholders” have a material interest in keeping things as they are. This doesn’t mean that all those involved in education share that perspective. Rather, it is a transparent acknowledgement of financial & logistical hardships the educational corporations may face as a result of the update to the foundational guidelines for education. And, this would mean that those with a material interest in these educational corporations have a conflict of interest in any discussion and influence of decisions regarding these matters.

The responsibility of a self-regulated profession means the burden of responsibility is on us. To bear witness to these critical issues and do nothing is to be complicit.