Match, salaries, and other tidbits

[Aubrey]

The Journal of Graduate Medical Ed has some interesting articles from time to time.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2951775/

Read and discuss amongst yourselves!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[2121115]

The Journal of Graduate Medical Ed has some interesting articles from time to time.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2951775/

Read and discuss amongst yourselves!

I would file this study under the "no kidding" category.

 

[pathstudent]

I would file this study under the "no kidding" category.

Yeah no kidding.

They prove that the smartest people go into the specialties with the highest income and best lifestyle. That's why they are smart.

 

[Cleavername]

Yeah no kidding.

They prove that the smartest people go into the specialties with the highest income and best lifestyle. That's why they are smart.

i c wut u ded thar

 

[Aubrey]

I actually thought the salary data was the most interesting part, but I can see how other folks might be match-focused. How about this?

http://www.pathologyoutlines.com/management/vachette201012.html

 

[2121115]

I actually thought the salary data was the most interesting part, but I can see how other folks might be match-focused. How about this?

http://www.pathologyoutlines.com/management/vachette201012.html

QFT, my friend. BOOM!


This is 100% true in my experience. They are blatantly screwing pathologists professionally and there are still pathologists that will take these jobs. LOL at our profession. Seriously.

 

[Entgegen]

...and there are still pathologists that will take these jobs.

You say that as though alternatives abound...

 

[KCShaw]

I guess Vachette is looking for applicants? If they're paying around what the CEO claims is the industry norm, hell, I might switch subspecialty to join the dark side. Oh, nevermind.. they're into "practice management," apparently the most inherently naive group of individuals on the planet.

 

[2121115]

I guess Vachette is looking for applicants? If they're paying around what the CEO claims is the industry norm, hell, I might switch subspecialty to join the dark side. Oh, nevermind.. they're into "practice management," apparently the most inherently naive group of individuals on the planet.

Vachette is not a lab and they don't employ any pathologists. They are a billing and management consulting company. He knows what his consultant pathologists make because he consults on their billing issues, etc.

 

[pathstudent]

How can you charge 65% of medicare. I was under the impression that CMS wouldn't let you charge more for medicare patients than you do for other patients. How is that loopholed?

 

[2121115]

How can you charge 65% of medicare. I was under the impression that CMS wouldn't let you charge more for medicare patients than you do for other patients. How is that loopholed?

65% of medicare is less than medicare, not more.

 

[pathstudent]

65% of medicare is less than medicare, not more.

No what I am saying is that you can't charge non-medicare patients less than you change medicare patients and you don't negotiate with medicare. Medicare is medicare.

 

[2121115]

...you can't charge non-medicare patients less than you change medicare patients...

The way these arrangements work, the charges are all the same. The difference is who gets the $$. In this scenario, the patient is getting charged what they normally get charged and the third party payors (medicare, private insurance, whomever) are paying whatever amount they normally pay. It is just that the pathologists are only getting 65% of what they normally get from medicare because the other 35% is going to someone else (corporate lab, whomever).