Gailey Eye Clinic?

[midwesteye16]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Hi All,
Just wondering if anyone's heard good/bad about Gailey Eye in the central Illinois area? seems like they constantly have job postings up on the AAO website... wondering if anyone's heard anything about the group?

cheers!

 

[NPDR]

They are a large group that has a high turnover. From what I hear, they have had many (>4) associates come and go just in the past 5 years. It's a two-tier system where there are some partners but the rest are employed physicians without chance of making partner. If you're cool with being an employee for the rest of your life, then it may be a option for you. They don't have the best of rep when it comes to treating associate physicians.

 

[soonmd1]

I was also wondering about this practice, thanks for posting.
Also, is it just me, or are there more and more jobs being posted where partnership isnt being offered and the physician is just an employee of an LLC?
is practice management really that bad where physicians would consider not having to make any such decisions a big enough advantage to remain an employee?
Also from what I understand being on a W2 has many disadvantages when compared to a 1099

 

[Bgladney]

Not sure where you are seeing those position, but in general, 99% of opportunities are a partnership track. I do see a trend with large practices not offering ownership within the practice. Most times, this is because the actual cost of a buy-in would be so large, it would not make financial sense. In doing so, practices typically offer incomes that would equal a partner. Many have started to change into a more corporate structure with voting rights but without the ownership option.

Hope that makes sense.

 

[MstaKing10]

Why would the buy in be so large to not make financial sense? If the practice is strong and the buy in is fair then it makes perfect sense. If on the other hand the owning partners are over valuing the practice and thus overcharging then that may not make sense to the associate.

Being an employee has a few advantages but in general is inferior to becoming partner. If you are a clock in clock out type of person with no interest in operating the business end of a practice or are looking for a short term position then perhaps the employee route is best. An employees vote will undoubtedly carry less weight than a partners vote. You have more financial incentive as partner and will be more involved in the day to day operations of the business. Being more invested in the practice means you share in revenue streams and are not limited to your employee salary. This is the major disadvantage to employment status. Your salary is governed by the partners and although you may have productivity bonuses, ultimately the partners will siphon off some (sometimes a lot) of what you produce to share amongst the partners. Over the span of your career this adds up. Not to mention the benefits that come with self employment status vs W2 from a tax and other perspectives.

 

[LightBox]

Not sure where you are seeing those position, but in general, 99% of opportunities are a partnership track. I do see a trend with large practices not offering ownership within the practice. Most times, this is because the actual cost of a buy-in would be so large, it would not make financial sense. In doing so, practices typically offer incomes that would equal a partner. Many have started to change into a more corporate structure with voting rights but without the ownership option.

Hope that makes sense.

Hmmm, I'm not sure if "99% of opportunities are a partnership track". From my experience and the experience of many of my friends, I would say more on the order of <50%. Just my experience.

 

[docdoc2012]

I have also heard this about them. That physicians are treated as assembly line workers in exchange for having it 'easy'...and there is a LOT of driving between satellites