Changes in median heme/onc salary

[bigboyonc]

About how much does the median heme/onc salary increase every year?
Like the only MGMA data I have is from 2021 and it was 481K. Anyone know what it was for 2020 or 2019? … or 2022 for that matter?

Additionally, if someone is signing a three or four year contract, is it reasonable to request increase in base salary (even though there is RVU bonus) with each successive year?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[gutonc]

About how much does the median heme/onc salary increase every year?
Like the only MGMA data I have is from 2021 and it was 481K. Anyone know what it was for 2020 or 2019? … or 2022 for that matter?

So...I actually ran into an issue with this with a PSA we run, which was kind of interesting. Because the 2021 data is actually from 2020 compensation, and because productivity took a massive s*** in 2020 but compensation remained essentially unchanged (since employers/groups/hospitals were trying to keep everybody on staff despite the loss of revenue), the $/wRVU skyrocketed. Our PSA contract allows the group to adjust the amount they get annually, and the used the 2020/2021 number to request a nearly 20% increase in the contract, based on the MGMA and AGMA #s from 2020/1 alone. It got approved, but once the checks started going out, somebody realized what a screwjob it was and got a consultant to re-do the numbers using 3y rolling data, which adjusted it to a 6% increase. So next year they get a 12% decrease and the year after that no adjustment at all, and THEN it will be reassessed.

(NOTE that the physicians have continued to get paid at 75th %ile of the combined MGMA/AGMA, the only people who will take the hit going forward the next 2 years are the rent seeking admins in the MSG that contracts with us.)

Additionally, if someone is signing a three or four year contract, is it reasonable to request increase in base salary (even though there is RVU bonus) with each successive year?

Most Base+ contracts are written such that if your productivity exceeds your base, your base is no longer relevant. So if your comp plan has a significant productivity component, you should focus on getting THAT part adjusted annually and ignore your base. A base salary looks good up front, a production based plan looks good in your bank account.

 

[bigboyonc]

Thank you for the response. Guess that is the trade off of being an employed physician.

Mine is 500k base and 100wRVU past 5000. Seemed pretty standard.
Avg in the group is 6500/year

How much increase in wRVU would you think is reasonable?

 

[gutonc]

Thank you for the response. Guess that is the trade off of being an employed physician.

Mine is 500k base and 100wRVU past 5000. Seemed pretty standard.
Avg in the group is 6500/year

How much increase in wRVU would you think is reasonable?

That's a pretty decent gig.

Taking the core of the pandemic out of it (2020-21), we've seen ~3% increase annually over the 5 years I've been paying attention.

The way our plan is set up, we adjust both the target and the comp annually based on prior data, so, last year for instance, wRVU targets actually decreased, as did the $/wRVU, but the former decreased more than the latter, so the average comp across the group actually increased.

 

[HemeOncHopeful19]

That's a pretty decent gig.

Taking the core of the pandemic out of it (2020-21), we've seen ~3% increase annually over the 5 years I've been paying attention.

The way our plan is set up, we adjust both the target and the comp annually based on prior data, so, last year for instance, wRVU targets actually decreased, as did the $/wRVU, but the former decreased more than the latter, so the average comp across the group actually increased.

So your system adjusts based on data, unless that data actually leads to a big upward adjustment… and in that case hires a consultant to “re-run the numbers” to bring the pay back down?

 

[gutonc]

So your system adjusts based on data, unless that data actually leads to a big upward adjustment… and in that case hires a consultant to “re-run the numbers” to bring the pay back down?

That wasn't us, and it's not the pay for the physicians. It's what we pay the group that has the PSA with us. They basically submitted for a 20% increase in what we pay for the PSA, but the physicians are all on production with them so their pay didn't really change much. It's complicated and stupid.

ETA:
1. The group we contract with is a physician owned MSG. They entered into this partnership and allowed us to take over their clinic/infusion unit because they were losing money on drugs/pharmacy and nurses in the absence of 340B pricing or a contract with somebody like McKesson (USOncology). There are 4 huge MSGs in this area and none of them do oncology for this reason.
2. Whoever signed this contract is a complete dumbf***. I'm not surprised, but just wondering why we bother to pay lawyers at all when dumb stuff like this gets through them. The MSG has complete transparency into all financial aspects of the E/M billing, clinical operations and pharmacy parts of the business. We, the PSA providers are contractually prohibited from even knowing what the physicians are being paid, other than their wRVU and the averaged %ile they're being paid for it. We do know the guarantees they offer, but nobody in that group needs their guarantee after 6-9 months.

In the end, I opened up a huge can of worms, when all I was really trying to point out was that if you're trying to trend compensation/production activity over the past 5 years, 2020-2022 is enough of an anomaly that it's hard to generalize that data to the next few years.