Anyone have experience being asked by a hospital group to sign a contract stating you would split pay from outside sources like speaking fees, consulting, testifying with the hospital? I can't imagine this is common and it caught me off guard
Contract question
- Thread starter brk81144
- Start date
I would not even consider signing that. Do they get a cut of any future businesses you decide to open as well?
Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
Never heard of it.
Wouldn't sign it (and I don't even get much outside money...)
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2007
- Messages
- 8,408
- Reaction score
- 14,815
Unheard of, and I'd walk away fast.
The issue of intellectual property in a professional's field of employment can be complicated. As a salaried employee, it is generally held that it belongs to the employer. An electrical engineer working for IBM, for example, can't claim that he only thought about his design for a new type of memory chip at home. The human brain does not work like that, and courts have consistently rejected that argument. However, if he wrote the "next Harry Potter", they would not be able to claim that IP because it is in no way related to his employment.
So it is not completely in left field that an employer can make a claim that if you are employed as an emergency medicine physician, then the employer owns any emergency medicine related IP that you create while working for them, even if you claim it is all done on your own time. It is typically an issue for universities, and I know it is usually part of the boilerplate for faculty contracts.
Now, I know just enough to be dangerous, and while an employer might be able to claim ownership of specialty related IP, that doesn't necessarily mean that they would. However, if you are a physician and plan to make a significant amount of money from consulting, publications, speaking fees, etc., then it is a very good idea to have an attorney review the contract. Because, if you are a salaried employee - I don't think it would apply to an IC, but I don't know enough to make that claim - there is a decent chance that they could make a claim on 100% of the income anyway. Back to the OP, the hospital group would probably claim they were being generous by allowing you to keep 50% of the outside income.
It is usually not an issue because the money is small and employers don't want to anger physicians over a tiny amount of money, but as I said, if you are planning on writing and selling a million dollar EM textbook, you want to make sure you have this nailed down.
So it is not completely in left field that an employer can make a claim that if you are employed as an emergency medicine physician, then the employer owns any emergency medicine related IP that you create while working for them, even if you claim it is all done on your own time. It is typically an issue for universities, and I know it is usually part of the boilerplate for faculty contracts.
Now, I know just enough to be dangerous, and while an employer might be able to claim ownership of specialty related IP, that doesn't necessarily mean that they would. However, if you are a physician and plan to make a significant amount of money from consulting, publications, speaking fees, etc., then it is a very good idea to have an attorney review the contract. Because, if you are a salaried employee - I don't think it would apply to an IC, but I don't know enough to make that claim - there is a decent chance that they could make a claim on 100% of the income anyway. Back to the OP, the hospital group would probably claim they were being generous by allowing you to keep 50% of the outside income.
It is usually not an issue because the money is small and employers don't want to anger physicians over a tiny amount of money, but as I said, if you are planning on writing and selling a million dollar EM textbook, you want to make sure you have this nailed down.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2006
- Messages
- 585
- Reaction score
- 459
You need to have a contract attorney review this agreement. Sounds like a bad contract, by the way.
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
- Messages
- 4,519
- Reaction score
- 7,394
Huh? This is like comparing apples to oranges.
My employer should have zero interest in whatever I do outside of the hospital. If I want to teach med students, write a book, do speaking tours then its mine. Nothing to do with my employer. Its not like they taught me how to take care of patients.
To OP, I would walk away from such a controlling group. It has nothing to do with them wanting a piece of your action as they know its very small. What they are doing is making sure they are aware of all of your outside activities.
I moonlight and this has nothing to do with my employer unless I go work across the street.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 7,704
- Reaction score
- 7,467
The reason they have these (EMP put one in our contract a few years ago) is that they don't want you using company/hospital resources to develop a product then market it and make millions of dollars. I can't see them actually going after you for speaking fees, teaching at another facility, or any work developed on your own time and unrelated to your primary place of employ.
"Should" and "the law" are two different things. Be aware that depending on a physician's specific employment situation, the employer may have legal claim to certain related outside income.
Whether an employer should be able to do that, or whether an employer would take such an action does not change the general legal principle in any way.
My pure guess would be that this would not apply to the vast majority of EM employment models, and even if it does, an employer is not interested in enforcing this right. But again, it is in the realm of possibility that the right does exist, and an employer might chose to enforce it. If you plan to do significant EM-related outside work, it is probably best to consult with an attorney - or read your contract - to make sure. But don't just assume if there is no mention of this in a contract that you are in the clear, the default condition might be that the employer has a claim to related outside income.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 3, 2004
- Messages
- 3,485
- Reaction score
- 4,138
Do not sign.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2002
- Messages
- 14,022
- Reaction score
- 4,686
I can see where they have legal ground to do this (Vadalia makes excellent points), but I personally would not sign this. If enough people reject these kinds of offers, then the hospitals would stop putting them in their contracts.
You definitely need to have a contract attorney review this if you're seriously considering their offer. If you have no plans to do a side business, speaking engagements, etc., then this probably isn't a big deal. However, if you have plans to do such things, then this could be very bad for any potential secondary income.
You definitely need to have a contract attorney review this if you're seriously considering their offer. If you have no plans to do a side business, speaking engagements, etc., then this probably isn't a big deal. However, if you have plans to do such things, then this could be very bad for any potential secondary income.
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2006
- Messages
- 585
- Reaction score
- 459
In my opinion a physician contract attorney is well worth the money. There are some things you cannot feasibly do yourself. This requires too much experience and training to totally know what you are doing. So to pay $1500 for something that may save you tens of thousands in the long run (if you change jobs abruptly you will lose $$$) it is worth it. And to those who have the approach that "Oh they'll never change anything anyway" that is simply not the case. My .02 but I have paid for this type of service more than once and will continue to do so.
