Should I get an attorney to review my contract?

[ramen]

Looking for opinions here from people who have done it. Or if you haven't, why not?

I am finishing my fellowship and have an academic job lined up for next year. The lawyer I was referred to wants a $1500 retainer and charges $430 per hour. If I was going into a private group I would get the contract reviewed for sure, but I wonder at a major academic center if it's really worth it. Thoughts?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[coroner]

I wouldn't. I spent a bundle on an attorney when I went into PP (supposedly one of the best in the nation), and the changes they made in the contract that were finally agreed upon mutually were negligible. When I was a resident, everybody in my hospital (including non-pathology residents) always talked about getting a lawyer to review their contract so it seemed pretty boiler plate. Anyone can read a contract (lawyer or not), just like any pathologist can read a brain biopsy (neuropath trained or not). It's just a matter if you want an "expert" to review it. But the margin of error and complexity is far less in the average physician job contract than a biopsy. And a contract can be adequately evaluated by any physician with common sense. Two of the main things that are typically contested in a contract is termination conditions and non-compete/restrictive covenant. I would review those carefully, but my guess is this will be less stringent at an academic institution vs PP.

At the end of the day, even if you don't have an attorney review it, you're going to earn the same amount of money, have the same vacation, perks, benefits, etc. even if you didn't. The devil is in the detail and there may be other things in academic pathology contracts that others can recommend to look out for. I would talk to other junior faculty member in the dept. whom you know or are at least acquainted with and ask them if their contract was legit without any hangups that they regret. This could give you a heads up and you may not need any changes at all. But, save your money and don't get an attorney.

 

[gbwillner]

It never hurts to get this kind of review. If it were for private practice or industry, I would say it is a must. But for academia, they will give you a standard, almost pre-printed contract that has been through dozens or hundreds of similar reviews, so there will be little in it that is objectionable. Furthermore, there will be little room for any reasonable negotiation beyond salary and on/off-service time- and you don't need a lawyer for that.

I would still read the contract with a magnifying glass. What special considerations would you have that may not apply to the standard staff member? For example, if you wanted to do research, and wanted to own part of any IP that may be generated from it, this will be your only opportunity to ensure that you would own any piece of that pie. Academic contracts are typically written that you would own nothing or a maximum of 100K. If this is an issue for you, you need to negotiate that or strike caps on revenue from the contract. Another major topic is the non-compete. Make sure you are OK with those terms.

 

[ramen]

Ok, thanks. This was my thinking as well. Everyone tells you to get a lawyer to review your contract, but at a big academic institution even if I found something objectionable I doubt I'd have enough negotiating power to get rid of it. And I'm not going to turn down the job so...

 

[LADoc00]

Holy crap those fees are high...where are you? I would shop around in a cheap part of your state as you can just email the contract there and then chat via phone with the counselor. Doesnt need to be face to face.

But I would always have an attorney look at a contract unless you have tons of business experience AND have actual coursework in contract law (which I got a local night school thing).

 

[mlw03]

If there's no real chance the contract could be changed, why bother? As an FP I work for a government entity, and that contract wasn't changing. Period. In academia, is there much room for negotiation or discussion? If so, perhaps it's worth the money, but if not, save your cash.

 

[gbwillner]

Holy crap those fees are high...where are you? I would shop around in a cheap part of your state as you can just email the contract there and then chat via phone with the counselor. Doesnt need to be face to face.

But I would always have an attorney look at a contract unless you have tons of business experience AND have actual coursework in contract law (which I got a local night school thing).

I also agree that this particular lawyer's fees are way too high. More than double what I've seen for this purpose. There are lawyers that specialize in Doctor contracts, and the ones I've known did not charge for a retainer. Total cost should be 1-4 hrs of time only, and under $1000. For academia probably on the lower side of this.

 

[BU Pathology]

I always suggest that new faculty hire an attorney to review their offer letters and contracts, but also advise them that virtually none of the elements are negotiable. In an academic setting the letters are pretty boilerplate, so there very little value to the review. University lawyers and HR have devoted significant amounts of time ensuring that the language is clear and fair to both parties.

 

[LoaLoa]

I am sure opinions will vary, but, in my experience, it isn't worth the money to have an attorney review the contract unless there is some question about the meaning of the wording. I have not found that most prospective employers are very willing to negotiate the terms of a contract much, except for the portions that are supposed to be negotiable, e.g. Salary.

Of course, if you are some kind of boss-man rainmaker worth megabucks to the group and not just a set of eyeballs being hired to sign out slides, perhaps you can dictate your own terms a little more.

 

[LADoc00]

I have negotiated and proactively changed contact terms with every employer I have ever worked for as Pathologist post fellowship. No exceptions I am aware of. YMMV.

 

[Euchromatin]

I would recommend getting your contract reviewed by a lawyer. First, it will ensure that you truly understand all the fine print (and see whether it agrees with what you were verbally told). This is great for your peace of mind, if nothing else. Second, assuming the lawyer has experience with physician contracts, he/she will be able to let you know how your contract terms compare with others they've seen. Third, they can help you decide which elements may be worth attempting to negotiate and what precise offers/counteroffers to make. As long as you don't make some absolutely ridiculous demand, I can't see how at least asking for a few minor adjustments could hurt. At worst, they say no and it might be worth it to them to give you a little more money (or vacation or protected research time or whatever you want) to keep you happy (especially if they weren't very thrilled with the other candidates they interviewed and/or you have/had offers elsewhere).

Having said that, I think the quote you received from that lawyer is outrageous. I had a lawyer who does a lot of work with physicians (contracts as well as malpractice and so on although not a lot of experience with pathologists specifically) review mine for way less (no retainer, just an hourly fee for the time it took for him to review the contract) and I was totally satisfied with the service. The entire process was done remotely via phone/email also, as I was in a different state at the time.

In case anyone is interested, the lawyer I used is Adil Daudi - [email protected]

Sent from my Nexus 6 using SDN mobile

 

[Torsed]

Get an attorney to review and then you at least can say you tried versus being defeated without trying.

Beware the no compete clauses.

 

[Path2009]

I would not. I spent $2000 for a high-priced Chicago attorney who added absolutely no value.