Physicians Unionize in Oregon

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

geogil

Still training.
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
May 1, 2006
Messages
918
Reaction score
22
This happened in my home state recently: The local group of hospitalists is currently employed by the hospital, but the hospital was hoping to farm this out to a third party. So, the hospitalists joined a union in order to protect themselves. To my knowledge this is the first time this has happened in the country. Is this a harbinger of things to come? Do you think anesthesiologists will join unions to protect themselves in the context of AMC's?

heres a link to the original article:
http://registerguard.com/rg/news/lo...eacehealth-doctors-vote-to-unionize.html.csp#

Members don't see this ad.
 
Here's the text of the article:
In an unusual move spurred by unhappiness with their employer, a group of doctors who treat patients in PeaceHealth’s Sacred Heart medical centers in Springfield and Eugene have voted to unionize.

Seeking greater say in patient care and working conditions, the doctors, known as hospitalists, voted on Tuesday to join the American Federation of Teachers, a trade union that represents 1.6 million workers nationwide in education, health care and public service.


It’s not uncommon for hospital workers such as nurses or facilities or maintenance staff to unionize. But it’s rare for physicians, the health care system’s elite employees, to do so.

Of the 36 hospitalists eligible to vote, 30 voted in favor of the union, three voted against and others were out of town, said Dr. David Schwartz, a spokesman for the union, which will be called the Pacific Northwest Hospital Medicine Association.

The hospitalists were spurred to unionize because PeaceHealth is considering no longer employing them directly. Instead, PeaceHealth is looking at having them employed by a separate, outside company that PeaceHealth would contract with, Schwartz said. Hospitalists are physicians whose main focus is the general medical care of hospitalized patients.

The leader of the teachers union lauded the move.

“The partnership between our union and doctors at Sacred Heart Medical Center is a great step forward for both patients and physicians,” said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers. “It’s a partnership based on mutual interests, mutual respect and a mutual desire to provide our members with the tools and conditions they need to advocate for the people they serve.

“Physicians unionize for reasons that are similar to their other health care colleagues,” she said. “To give them the voice and power they need to utilize their professional judgment, and ensure their patients receive safe, high-quality care; and get the respect they deserve.”

Schwartz said the new union at PeaceHealth is “the first type of union of its kind in the country.”

Calling the vote “rather historic,” Schwartz said, “this is giving an opportunity for hospitalists all around the country to unionize — to have that one voice and have bargaining rights under the National Labor Relations Board.

“Even though it happened in our small community here, it’s going to have implications nationwide,” he said.


ri

It is estimated that there are more than 30,000 hospitalists in the United States.

The local hospitalists’ action might also lead other types of workers at PeaceHealth to organize, Schwartz said.

“It might have a little bit of a domino effect,” he said. “It might kind of embolden people. That wasn’t our intention. We certainly don’t want to create an antagonistic relationship with the administration. None of the hospitalists thought that we’d be in a union, or would need to organize.”

Two other groups of workers have unions at PeaceHealth Sacred Heart Medical Centers: Oregon Nurses Association and the International Union of Operating Engineers for facilities engineers and biomedical engineers, said PeaceHealth spokeswoman Monique Danziger.

The hospital administration in May decided to seek an outside private company to employ the hospitalists instead of continuing to have PeaceHealth Medical Group employ the hospitalists, Schwartz said.

These outside national contracting groups have “very high turnover rates, which leads to very inconsistent quality of care,” he said.

“The thought of working for a national company whose primary goal is to make money off of us is a little disconcerting. It’s not why we got into medicine. It’s not the kind of medicine we want to practice.

“We just felt that we needed a way that we could have a stronger say and a stronger stand in being able to advocate for ... the safety of the patients in the hospital, and the union gives us a way we can do that,” Schwartz said.

For the time being, the hospitalists remain employees of PeaceHealth Medical Group. If PeaceHealth contracts out its hospitalist work, the contracting company would likely need to work with the now-unionized hospitalists.

PeaceHealth officials say they are committed to high-quality care.

“Though PeaceHealth prefers to maintain a direct and unrestricted relationship with our caregivers, the vote to choose union representation does not diminish our common purpose: We share with our hospitalists a deeply held commitment to provide safe, high quality care to our patients and their families,” Danziger said.

PeaceHealth decided to look at outsourcing hospitalist services at Sacred Heart Medical centers after Premier Inc. analyzed them early this year, Schwartz said.

Premier Inc. is a publicly traded health care performance improvement alliance of hospitals and other health care providers. Alan Yordy, president of PeaceHealth, a three-state hospital system based in Vancouver, Wash., has served on Premier’s board of directors since its inception in May 2013, according to Premier’s website. PeaceHealth is a member-owner of Premier, the website said.

Sacred Heart is in the midst of the “request for proposals” process for hospitalist services at RiverBend in Springfield and the University District, near the University of Oregon campus. John Hill, CEO of PeaceHealth Oregon West Network, declined to give specifics about the process or the groups that are bidding.

He said implementation of the federal Affordable Care Act has led health care organizations nationwide to seek more efficient ways to deliver services.

“We refer to this transition as the movement from volume, where health care organizations are paid for the number of patients treated, to value, where the focus shifts to payment for improving the overall health of the population and lowering costs,” Hill said.

“For Sacred Heart Medical Center, a key component of addressing this care transition is analyzing all care provided by hospital-based physicians,” Hill said. “First up in that process is the hospitalist service at Sacred Heart Medical Center’s RiverBend and University District hospitals.”

The next step for the hospitalists will be to have the vote to unionize certified by the National Labor Relations Board.

“Assuming certification, PeaceHealth honors the hospitalists’ choice and will prepare to enter into good-faith bargaining with the AFT to reach agreement on a mutually beneficial contract,” Danziger said.

The hospitalists work with more than 1,300 nurses at Sacred Heart Medical Center who are represented by the Oregon Nurses Association, an affiliate of AFT.
 
What I like about this is that this hospital system declared in advance that they were going to take a **** on these 36 doctors. And the docs played an awesome pre-emptive strike in doing this.

Being a hospitalist is rough. I work with a lot of them. Farming them out to a management company was not going to make their jobs easier, I'm sure. And with families, kids, lives around the area, the ability for a lot of them to find work elsewhere was probably limited. So, now the hospital will have to deal with the union instead of the individual doctors.


Which is also precisely what I don't like about this deal: now the doctors will have to do what the union says. This doesn't necessarily mean better working hours, better pay, more autonomy, etc. It means standardized salary, mandatory breaks, paying union dues, etc.

It's really sad that it's come to this. But, this is the future. I suspect that this is going to happen to a lot of docs in the U.S. And again I'm not sure it's best for patients.

(I changed the font because I absolutely can't stand this new forum interface update. It is horrible.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
What I like about this is that this hospital system declared in advance that they were going to take a **** on these 36 doctors. And the docs played an awesome pre-emptive strike in doing this.

Being a hospitalist is rough. I work with a lot of them. Farming them out to a management company was not going to make their jobs easier, I'm sure. And with families, kids, lives around the area, the ability for a lot of them to find work elsewhere was probably limited. So, now the hospital will have to deal with the union instead of the individual doctors.
.

Which is also precisely what I don't like about this deal: now the doctors will have to do what the union says. This doesn't necessarily mean better working hours, better pay, more autonomy, etc. It means standardized salary, mandatory breaks, paying union dues, etc..

It's really sad that it's come to this. But, this is the future. I suspect that this is going to happen to a lot of docs in the U.S. And again I'm not sure it's best for patients..

(I changed the font because I absolutely can't stand this new forum interface update. It is horrible.)
Try the old school forums. Look in the lower left corner of the screen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Very interesting...why haven't more anesthesiology groups tried to unionize?

Usually there's nothing in it for them. And you can't unionize unless you are a hospital employee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
What I like about this is that this hospital system declared in advance that they were going to take a **** on these 36 doctors. And the docs played an awesome pre-emptive strike in doing this.

Being a hospitalist is rough. I work with a lot of them. Farming them out to a management company was not going to make their jobs easier, I'm sure. And with families, kids, lives around the area, the ability for a lot of them to find work elsewhere was probably limited. So, now the hospital will have to deal with the union instead of the individual doctors.
.

Which is also precisely what I don't like about this deal: now the doctors will have to do what the union says. This doesn't necessarily mean better working hours, better pay, more autonomy, etc. It means standardized salary, mandatory breaks, paying union dues, etc..

It's really sad that it's come to this. But, this is the future. I suspect that this is going to happen to a lot of docs in the U.S. And again I'm not sure it's best for patients..

(I changed the font because I absolutely can't stand this new forum interface update. It is horrible.)

Buzz,

What kind of income are most hospitalists getting? Would you consider being a hospitalist if you could do Anesthesia?
 
Usually there's nothing in it for them. And you can't unionize unless you are a hospital employee.
Couldn't AMC employees unionize? It doesn't matter who you work for, so long as you're an employee and not a shareholder/manager, if I understand union law correctly.
 
Buzz,

What kind of income are most hospitalists getting? Would you consider being a hospitalist if you could do Anesthesia?...

The hospitalists I work with are all boarded in IM, not anesthesia. They work one week on/one week off. They make about $250-270k/yr, which ain't bad for 26 weeks/yr of work.

But, my annual salary is a lot more and I don't work (honestly) nearly as hard as they do. So I wouldn't trade. It's an apples to oranges comparison.
 
Couldn't AMC employees unionize? It doesn't matter who you work for, so long as you're an employee and not a shareholder/manager, if I understand union law correctly.

I think if you are a contracted employee for a corporation and not an actual partner in an LLC that, yes, you could unionize. There may be specific employment language that makes this difficult in some AMC contracts, although it would be illegal for them to tell you you couldn't. I'm not sure of this, though.

My point is that most AMCs are self-indemnified these days. The bigger ones have insurance set-up as a trust in the Cayman Islands or the like. So, I'm not really sure why you have to sign a contract at all if you are an "employee" in a "corporation". My dad worked for 30 years for various companies and he never had to sign an employment contract.

I think that's the next step: if you go work for an AMC, refuse to sign an employment contract. Since in most of those arrangements you're just collecting a salary anyway, there's no need for them to outline how they're going to pay you otherwise unless it's a profit share, etc. And that can certainly be done without a contract.

Anyone else have an opinion on that? I don't remotely profess to be an expert here or an employment attorney. But, provided they self-indemnify and cover you under their corporate umbrella, it seems kind of stupid to do anything other than sign a letter of intent. You wanna leave? Give 'em the standard two-weeks notice. That seems a lot more fair to the "employee" in that situation, which is all you really are.
 
I think if you are a contracted employee for a corporation and not an actual partner in an LLC that, yes, you could unionize. There may be specific employment language that makes this difficult in some AMC contracts, although it would be illegal for them to tell you you couldn't. I'm not sure of this, though.

My point is that most AMCs are self-indemnified these days. The bigger ones have insurance set-up as a trust in the Cayman Islands or the like. So, I'm not really sure why you have to sign a contract at all if you are an "employee" in a "corporation". My dad worked for 30 years for various companies and he never had to sign an employment contract.

I think that's the next step: if you go work for an AMC, refuse to sign an employment contract. Since in most of those arrangements you're just collecting a salary anyway, there's no need for them to outline how they're going to pay you otherwise unless it's a profit share, etc. And that can certainly be done without a contract.

Anyone else have an opinion on that? I don't remotely profess to be an expert here or an employment attorney. But, provided they self-indemnify and cover you under their corporate umbrella, it seems kind of stupid to do anything other than sign a letter of intent. You wanna leave? Give 'em the standard two-weeks notice. That seems a lot more fair to the "employee" in that situation, which is all you really are.
This is pretty much how I feel about it. I originally started knocking out my prereqs to go into anesthesia a few years back, but the proliferation of AMCs has pretty much obliterated any chance that I'd enter the field unless I had some bargaining power. Unfortunately, it seems that many anesthesiologists are willing to be boned on two levels- they take on all the responsibility of being a partner while having all of the downsides of being an expendable employee. Being a straight employee has its upsides if you aren't also being forced to act in the capacity of a partner/manager, one of those being the ability to up and leave without instance and a couple others being the ability to unionize and have other employee protections. AMCs are having their cake and eating it too at the moment and no one is bothering to do a damn thing about it. If people don't put their foot down in one way or another, anesthesia is destined to be a dead field in the not too distant future.
 
I will say this, Mad Jack. I'm currently very lucky that I'm in the situation that I'm currently in right now. How long that will last? I don't know. But you have a good grasp of the problems with the current, what is in my opinion, illegal (anti-trust, surrogate billing, etc.) situation that many new residency grads find themselves.

I'm riding this pony as long as I can. I started in an MBA program beginning of September. I'm saving as much money as I can. I'm not optimistic. If the winds blow a different way, I'm setting sail and heading in that direction. Right now, I have it pretty good. I don't anticipate that is going to last...
 
Members don't see this ad :)
What are you going to do with an MBA title, unless from a top school?
 
It is a top 25 B-school. I'm preparing to leave the field. I'm going to move into hospital management, or leave healthcare altogether.

Adapt or die.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I agree with adapt or die. But hospital management? You have capital. Why not start your own business? And I'm not talking about necessarily in the medical field.
 
Have you seen some of the salaries that management is making in healthcare? The CEO of the... ahem... 'non-profit' in my town pulled $1.3M last year. That's over three times what I make. Why would I want the hassle of trying to start my own business if I can work my way to some deal like that by the time I'm 50? (I'm 38 now and will be done with my MBA by the time I'm 41. Already work for "the man" and am involving myself in the management of the local hospital I'm at.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Have you seen some of the salaries that management is making in healthcare? The CEO of the... ahem... 'non-profit' in my town pulled $1.3M last year. That's over three times what I make. Why would I want the hassle of trying to start my own business if I can work my way to some deal like that by the time I'm 50? (I'm 38 now and will be done with my MBA by the time I'm 41. Already work for "the man" and am involving myself in the management of the local hospital I'm at.)

Maybe more anesthesiologist should be going into management positions. They might have a role in protecting the field from AMCs and militant CRNAs.
 
Not going to happen. Once you "graduate" to management you become part of the problem. Your allegiances change to protect the hospital or corporation. It is human nature. If your motivation is to advance to a "stable" position to ensure high salary you aren't going to upset the status quo. Personally I don't see why you would work yourself up to a position to make a little more money in a job you really aren't that passionate about. If your goal is to become rich then work for yourself.

1.3m per year is a lot of money but is what you give up for the extra salary really worth the extra toys you can purchase?
 

(I changed the font because I absolutely can't stand this new forum interface update. It is horrible.)

Agreed.

Was SDN getting a lot of complaints about the layout?

I hope they were in order to change it. Otherwise, it speaks volumes about ego and ******edness if they just changed it to change things.
 
Was SDN getting a lot of complaints about the layout?

I hope they were in order to change it. Otherwise, it speaks volumes about ego and ******edness if they just changed it to change things....

Not that I am aware of. Just use the old one:rolleyes:
 
1.3m per year is a lot of money but is what you give up for the extra salary really worth the extra toys you can purchase?
Money buys time if you don't spend it on toys. 1.3M per year would get you to a comfortable and secure retirement many, many years sooner than $300K or $400K.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Have you seen some of the salaries that management is making in healthcare? The CEO of the... ahem... 'non-profit' in my town pulled $1.3M last year. That's over three times what I make. Why would I want the hassle of trying to start my own business if I can work my way to some deal like that by the time I'm 50? (I'm 38 now and will be done with my MBA by the time I'm 41. Already work for "the man" and am involving myself in the management of the local hospital I'm at.)

Wow. Why are you leaving health care? Would you have entered medicine if you could go back in time? What else would you have done?

I can't believe that you will be able to do better financially than Anesthesia in most other areas, but good luck.
 
Have you seen some of the salaries that management is making in healthcare? The CEO of the... ahem... 'non-profit' in my town pulled $1.3M last year. That's over three times what I make. Why would I want the hassle of trying to start my own business if I can work my way to some deal like that by the time I'm 50? (I'm 38 now and will be done with my MBA by the time I'm 41. Already work for "the man" and am involving myself in the management of the local hospital I'm at.)

Why not just spent 70-100K each year over the next 10 years buying properties around the country?
 
Because the owner has to be there to manage/maintain them, otherwise s/he doesn't really make money.

Property mgmt. only takes about 8-10% of yearly profit. That's a pretty good deal.
If you set up the properties as an LLC then I believe a number of the costs, etc.., are tax deductible.

Have any of you checked out Auction.com or Loopnet.com?
 
Do you really think it's that easy? Buy a property at a good price, rent it out under the care of a management company, collect the difference?

I don't think it's a good deal unless it is your own property management company.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
It's easy to make money on rental properties.

Until the day the deadbeats won't move out and you need to evict them, and they take all the appliances and copper pipe with them and you need a hazmat crew to clean up the meth lab in the garage. Even if it's not THAT bad, a few months without a tenant or some damage from a lousy tenant, and there goes a year or more of positive cash flow ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Pgg's right. That was more or less what happened to me when I couldn't sell my house before med school. My tenants quit paying rent, siphoned the heating oil out of the tank and left the house to freeze after they'd already trashed the place. After only having them in there for five months I had to repaint every wall, tear down the shacks they'd built in the backyard for workshops, replace half the plumbing that had frozen, and replace the bathroom floor. Property management companies don't put much effort into screening for good tenants, and with anti-discrimination laws there's not a lot you can do to keep bad people out these days. If you're going to try to make money through rentals you'll need to treat it as at least a part-time job. For most of you it just won't be cost-effective.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Wow. Why are you leaving health care? Would you have entered medicine if you could go back in time? What else would you have done?

I can't believe that you will be able to do better financially than Anesthesia in most other areas, but good luck.

I want to be the one calling the shots. You can't fix the system from the outside. We (the entire medical profession) is moving in the wrong direction. It is becoming less and less physician and patient-centered, and more and more about layering on of cumbersome and meaningless protocols and procedures with the (false) belief that the overall delivery of healthcare will be more efficient. The individual patient gets forgotten in that system. It's more about throughput.

I want a system in place that will effectively treat me when I am (inevitably) a patient someday. I don't want a bunch of handcuffed doctors with their backs turned towards me spending more time filling out forms and making sure data is entered correctly into the computer rather than taking care of me. And I certainly don't want some midlevel trying to cram me into some diagnostic box left only scratching his/her head when my signs and symptoms don't add-up on the form(s) they're filling out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Do you really think it's that easy? Buy a property at a good price, rent it out under the care of a management company, collect the difference?

I don't think it's a good deal unless it is your own property management company.

I think it's a lot easier than trying to become a CEO to make 1.3 mil LOL.
And yes, I know a lot of people who own rentals who have done extremely well, and they rent to very low-end clients. Abusive renters who tear apart the property are not the norm.
There is also commercial property.
You can avoid the aforementioned problems through careful renter selection. On dentaltown there is a thread called "the passive income thread," and a lot of the dentists have done very well with owning properties.

There are also databases like these to screen renters:
http://www.donotrentto.com/
http://www.badtenantslist.net/
http://www.veda.com.au/business/property/national-tenancy-database
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Pgg's right. That was more or less what happened to me when I couldn't sell my house before med school. My tenants quit paying rent, siphoned the heating oil out of the tank and left the house to freeze after they'd already trashed the place. After only having them in there for five months I had to repaint every wall, tear down the shacks they'd built in the backyard for workshops, replace half the plumbing that had frozen, and replace the bathroom floor. Property management companies don't put much effort into screening for good tenants, and with anti-discrimination laws there's not a lot you can do to keep bad people out these days. If you're going to try to make money through rentals you'll need to treat it as at least a part-time job. For most of you it just won't be cost-effective.

Why didn't you go after them legally?
 
I want to be the one calling the shots. You can't fix the system from the outside. We (the entire medical profession) is moving in the wrong direction. It is becoming less and less physician and patient-centered, and more and more about layering on of cumbersome and meaningless protocols and procedures with the (false) belief that the overall delivery of healthcare will be more efficient. The individual patient gets forgotten in that system. It's more about throughput.

I want a system in place that will effectively treat me when I am (inevitably) a patient someday. I don't want a bunch of handcuffed doctors with their backs turned towards me spending more time filling out forms and making sure data is entered correctly into the computer rather than taking care of me. And I certainly don't want some midlevel trying to cram me into some diagnostic box left only scratching his/her head when my signs and symptoms don't add-up on the form(s) they're filling out.

Everything you describe is what happens when government encroaches on a system. I don't think that becoming a CEO will allow you to change much of that, because the changes happening in health care are occurring at the federal level.
 
Why didn't you go after them legally?

I thought about it, but it just wouldn't have been worth it. The husband?/boyfriend?/baby daddy?/whoever in this particular happy family was the one that caused most of the damage. His wife?/girlfriend?/baby momma? took the kids and left him about three months after they moved in to my house. She was the one with a job who was paying the rent. She claimed he was beating her and the kids, and I later found damage to the house that supports her story. I didn't really feel like going after her legally, and he would have been difficult if not impossible to find after he left. In any case I later found out that they'd already been evicted once before. If their previous landlord had made a successful legal claim for back rent or damages then they would have had to pay him first. Between the low likelihood of ever seeing anything come out of legal action and the lawyer's fees it would have cost to try, it just wasn't worth trying.

In the end it took me five weeks of work to fix everything. The damage deposit almost covered the cost of the materials. I came out ahead on the rent they did pay, but that's only because I own the house free and clear. Even so it wasn't worth having them in there. Anyhow, the house is rented out again because I still haven't been able to sell it. My current tenants are better, but I still can't recommend owning rental properties as a hassle-free investment.

Anyhow, back to physicians unionizing...
 
Why didn't you go after them legally?
Because you just spend dollars trying to squeeze cents out of people who by definition have no money, no assets, and no inclination to pay debts.

Getting screwed by a tenant is an angering, emotionally draining experience. It's worse if it's your home (that you plan to return to) that they trash, and not just an investment property you bought to rent. This pain and hassle must be accounted for when you draw up the risk profile of rentals as an investment.

So while maybe there's some satisfaction to be had if you pursue legal revenge, if you treat the whole rental endeavor as a profit/loss issue it's usually just better to let it go and cut your losses. Get the bastards out, clean up, and get a paying tenant in there ASAP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Have you seen some of the salaries that management is making in healthcare? The CEO of the... ahem... 'non-profit' in my town pulled $1.3M last year. That's over three times what I make. Why would I want the hassle of trying to start my own business if I can work my way to some deal like that by the time I'm 50? (I'm 38 now and will be done with my MBA by the time I'm 41. Already work for "the man" and am involving myself in the management of the local hospital I'm at.)

While I respect physicians that want to get into hospital leadership, it's a money losing proposition. You need to have lots of full time experience working on the business side for 50K to 100K per year and then graduate your way up the ladder. You can't just slide over from the clinical side to take over the CEO job. You gotta give up a good decade plus of income while making 5 figure salaries to get there. And when the CEO steps down, most places paying that much money conduct a national/regional search to hire and then generally hire the CEO from a separate smaller entity.

My advice if you wanted to ultimately be the CEO of your local "nonprofit" would be to retire from anesthesia, or at least not work more than 1 day per week and take a job in the lower levels of your hospital administration. Work your way up for a few years through various promotions and what not and then try to secure a higher up job at a smaller hospital in the area. Try to wow everybody with results at the small hospital and become CEO of the small hospital and then see if you can't slide over when the bigger job opens up. It's a 10-20 year plan, but that's probably what it would take. And you'd be making 25% of your current salary for that 10-20 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Everything you describe is what happens when government encroaches on a system. I don't think that becoming a CEO will allow you to change much of that, because the changes happening in health care are occurring at the federal level.

You are correct. An individual can have more influence on those things by becoming a member of congress. There are several physicians in congress. We could use even more.
 
While I respect physicians that want to get into hospital leadership, it's a money losing proposition. You need to have lots of full time experience working on the business side for 50K to 100K per year and then graduate your way up the ladder. You can't just slide over from the clinical side to take over the CEO job. You gotta give up a good decade plus of income while making 5 figure salaries to get there. And when the CEO steps down, most places paying that much money conduct a national/regional search to hire and then generally hire the CEO from a separate smaller entity.

So, you think I think that I'm going to finish my B-school program and then go land a CEO job somewhere? :lol:

No, I'm not stupid or naive. But our CMO had no previous hospital leadership experience before being appointed. Granted he had a very large, very successful FP group that was bought by the hospital corporation I work for and was offered CMO following this acquisition.

My advice if you wanted to ultimately be the CEO of your local "nonprofit" would be to retire from anesthesia, or at least not work more than 1 day per week and take a job in the lower levels of your hospital administration. Work your way up for a few years through various promotions and what not and then try to secure a higher up job at a smaller hospital in the area. Try to wow everybody with results at the small hospital and become CEO of the small hospital and then see if you can't slide over when the bigger job opens up. It's a 10-20 year plan, but that's probably what it would take. And you'd be making 25% of your current salary for that 10-20 years.

^ This. Sort of. Already in the works. I'm currently diversifying and integrating myself, including being in the process of starting a new Palliative Medicine service in our hospital. My master plan is already started. I anticipate that I will be Chief of Anesthesia within the next five years. That's the first step. The MBA is just icing on the cake.

Diversify or die.
 
No, I'm not stupid or naive. But our CMO had no previous hospital leadership experience before being appointed. Granted he had a very large, very successful FP group that was bought by the hospital corporation I work for and was offered CMO following this acquisition.

A CMO is unrelated to CEO. Not even the same ballpark. By definition (at most hospitals) the CMO is a physician. It has nothing to do with business or hospital leadership. Almost every CMO I've ever met had no hospital leadership experience outside of perhaps chief of staff. Being CMO doesn't position yourself for any move up the hospital administration ladder as it is a separate branch out off that hospital administration tree. At most places it's a figurehead position for an old retired doc that has no real importance. They just sit on some committees, give some reports, and give pep talks to various chiefs of service.

Like I said, if you really want to move up the business side of the hospital ladder you have to essentially drop clinical practice and take a massive income hit for a long time.
 
While I respect physicians that want to get into hospital leadership, it's a money losing proposition. You need to have lots of full time experience working on the business side for 50K to 100K per year and then graduate your way up the ladder. You can't just slide over from the clinical side to take over the CEO job. You gotta give up a good decade plus of income while making 5 figure salaries to get there. And when the CEO steps down, most places paying that much money conduct a national/regional search to hire and then generally hire the CEO from a separate smaller entity.

My advice if you wanted to ultimately be the CEO of your local "nonprofit" would be to retire from anesthesia, or at least not work more than 1 day per week and take a job in the lower levels of your hospital administration. Work your way up for a few years through various promotions and what not and then try to secure a higher up job at a smaller hospital in the area. Try to wow everybody with results at the small hospital and become CEO of the small hospital and then see if you can't slide over when the bigger job opens up. It's a 10-20 year plan, but that's probably what it would take. And you'd be making 25% of your current salary for that 10-20 years.


THIS.


I have no idea why so many people on these forums think that they can just slide into a CEO position because they have an MBA. Even if you have an MBA from a top school, if you lack the schmoozing skills and social panache to be a real glad-handing leader, then your MBA won't do anything for you.

I agree also about starting at a smaller hospital and then jumping ship after a number of years.
 
I know I stated what the CEO was making at the local non-profit, but don't get hung up on being CEO. I'm not. The CMO at the same non-profit (an pulmonologist) pulls over $750K/yr plus... "ahem"... incentives.

We need more physicians in leadership. There used to be a time when this was the case. But they had no business training. So they got shoved out. It's high time we get physicians back into running the hospital. Baby steps. I'm not going to give up seeing patients for a long time - if ever - even if I move into leadership, which I will. You are right about the schmoozing skills. But this also comes with age, experience, wisdom, knowledge, and a little more gray hair. People tend to listen to you the more you've been there. I know. I was invited back to this job. Part of that was growing certain areas of our practice. And I'm gaining all of the above. Never said I was going to automatically be CEO. It all depends on what you want and what you're good at.
 
You've got to have the right temperament and personality to be a hospital administrator or politician (same thing, really). The Venn diagram of traits between typical administrator and typical anesthesiologist has some overlap, but not much.



In the military, it's quite easy to transition from clinical practice to non-clinical management. Actually, the challenge for many is to avoid that transition because there is very aggressive pushing and a lot of incentive to get doctors to do more of that work. There's no pay cut to cross over to the dark side (indeed promotion beyond a certain point and pay increases are largely degree dependent upon becoming one of those managers) and there's less competition from typical admin suits because military hospitals are run by people on active duty.

Nurses tend to be much more eager to make the switch. Despite the existence of some good administrators who were nurses first, this, on balance, is a problem in its own right. Many of the evils of modern medicine can be laid firmly at the feet of nurses bringing their protocol-driven thinking to positions of authority. We need more doctors there.

And that need is a big reason why, for about 9 months I did a turn in the barrel and served as the director of surgical services at a Navy hospital. Sat on the board of directors, counted beans with the comptroller, met with the CEOs and other leaders of nearby civilian hospitals, put out more people-fires than I can count. I was about 80-90% nonclinical. It was fascinating to see how the business side of medicine worked, in the government system and in the private system. It was rewarding in a way to have an actual voice (albeit a small one) in real decisions that really affected how the clinics and ORs were run. I got to work with some really wonderful people and I think the things I had power to influence were better when I left.

I was pretty good at the job - at least, everyone told me so. We made it through a JC inspection and a major hospital service realignment involving a lot of interaction and cooperation with another hospital. In a way it was harder work than being a doctor.

I'm fairly confident that, if I chose the administrator path, in the next 8-10 years I could probably find myself as the XO or CO of a military hospital; from there, it's a short step to leaving federal service and moving into a civilian hospital admin position, and working up from there. I could be a mid-upper level suit by my 50s.

But I look back at that Director position as a good place to be from, but not a place I really want to be. Even though it was a positive experience, I don't really want to make a career out of that kind of work. I could manage people, but I didn't really like doing so. I could resolve their conflicts, mostly, when resolution was actually possible, but I often found myself resenting the need to solve other peoples' problems. One reason I chose anesthesia was because I could have a short, high-impact conversation with a patient, and then make them stop talking so I could get on with their goal-directed care, without needing any further cooperation. I missed clinical work, a lot. I'm really glad to be back in a primarily clinical position now, where my only administrative duties are within our department.

In short, I've stepped in those waters, and my Venn diagram doesn't overlap enough. I think most anesthesiologists don't, either; there's some truth in stereotypes, and as a group, that stuff just ain't our bag, baby. These threads about quitting clinical medicine to do something else for more money always strike me as a little too similar to the I-coulda-been-an-ibanker threads ...


But I hope Dr Phreed and others can make it happen, and enjoy it enough to keep doing it, because we really do need more doctors in those positions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
But I hope Dr Phreed and others can make it happen, and enjoy it enough to keep doing it, because we really do need more doctors in those positions.

I gots those mad skillz.

That was, ironically, the reason why I initially left this job in the first place. Namely more opportunity to be involved in the business end of what we do. But, as many of you know, that was a bunch of b.s. and didn't pan out for me. Now I actually have that opportunity. And am being encouraged in that direction. They're even splitting the tuition of my MBA program with me. That in my opinion = no brainer.

Adapt or die.
 
If in the near future all anesthesiology partnership jobs are going to be gone and every doctor is going to end up being an employee for some huge corporation, unionizing seems like the best shot at ensuring these corporations don't take advantage of the physicians. Unions can be very powerful and if this becomes the norm in the future, it might benefit the field. While it may not improve things, it might keep them from getting any worse and may prevent the specialty from dying. If private practice dies and we all become employees, unions would help protect us from CRNAs and greedy AMCs. This is true not only for anesthesiologists but also every other specialty. What would happen if a surgeon+anesthesiology union were created? Unity between the two would really ensure the best working conditions in the future "employee only" market.
 
Top