thatslife

Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Feb 9, 2006
88
0
Status
Medical Student
I heard in passing from a friend that a Brown Med student is sueing AAMC/ERAS as an uncompetitive process because you can only match at one institution. I tired searching for it to get more details, but came up empty. Does anyone know more about this?
 

8744

Guest
15+ Year Member
Dec 7, 2001
9,322
171
Status
Non-Student
Oh, its competative all right as you will find out if you try to match either into a competative specialty or a competative program.

Why would you want to match at more than one institution? I don't think you understand how the match works. Please visit my humble (and neglected for the time being) blog for a detailed explanation.

In a nutshell, during the match you are competing with every other person who wants a spot at programs where you want a spot. To the victors go the spoils so you can't get more competative than that. The match also favors the applicant over the program.

I suspect a lot of the complaints about the match are from people who are non-competative for their desired specialty and program, fail to match, and try to blame the system.

P. Bear, MD
PGY-1 Emergency Medicine
Beaten Once by the Match but Kicked Its Ass on the Second Go-around
 

Law2Doc

5K+ Member
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Dec 20, 2004
30,981
9,891
Status
Attending Physician
Panda Bear said:
Oh, its competative all right as you will find out if you try to match either into a competative specialty or a competative program.

Why would you want to match at more than one institution? I don't think you understand how the match works. Please visit my humble (and neglected for the time being) blog for a detailed explanation.

In a nutshell, during the match you are competing with every other person who wants a spot at programs where you want a spot. To the victors go the spoils so you can't get more competative than that. The match also favors the applicant over the program.

I suspect a lot of the complaints about the match are from people who are non-competative for their desired specialty and program, fail to match, and try to blame the system.

P. Bear, MD
PGY-1 Emergency Medicine
Beaten Once by the Match but Kicked Its Ass on the Second Go-around

There have been numerous lawsuits and law journal articles in the past decade suggesting that the match violates the terms of the Sherman Antitrust Act. In 2004 the US congress granted the match an exemption from that act. You can do a google search of residency match and antitrust suit and you will find numerous links. I don't foresee any additional litigation going anywhere, and think the match is here to stay (but admit I am not up on the issue).
 

jocg27

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
May 23, 2006
470
7
Status
Medical Student
Panda Bear said:
Oh, its competative all right as you will find out if you try to match either into a competative specialty or a competative program.

Why would you want to match at more than one institution? I don't think you understand how the match works. Please visit my humble (and neglected for the time being) blog for a detailed explanation.

In a nutshell, during the match you are competing with every other person who wants a spot at programs where you want a spot. To the victors go the spoils so you can't get more competative than that. The match also favors the applicant over the program.

I suspect a lot of the complaints about the match are from people who are non-competative for their desired specialty and program, fail to match, and try to blame the system.

P. Bear, MD
PGY-1 Emergency Medicine
Beaten Once by the Match but Kicked Its Ass on the Second Go-around
I think you are using "cometitive" differently than the original poster here. Clearly the match is competitive for us, as students, trying to secure a spot. These kinds of lawsuits are saying that the match is uncompetitive in the sense that it restricts the ability to freely and independently search for a job and negotiate its benefits. When you look for other jobs you can negotiate a contract and have the final say over whether or not you work there or somewhere else. Although we have input into the match via ranking, the idea is that we all must go through it, it is our only option of finding a job, and its results are binding, therefore the match is in a sense a monopoly and according to these suits, illegal. Its not uncompetitive because we can have any spot we want, its uncompetitive because the match, as a whole, is our only option, and we're stuck with its decision. (Contrast to before the match when, as I understand it, finding postgrad spots was like finding any job, ultracompetitive, with everyone scrambling around on their own, promising applicants being recruited and offered jobs early in med school etc. If everyone is on their own and a program really wants you, they have to shell out, compete with other programs and recruit with salary, whatever...Now you have to go where you match regardless of benefits - no competition )

I don't know enough about the law to decide how valid this argument is, but this is their charge as I understand it. Am I on the mark?
 
OP
T

thatslife

Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Feb 9, 2006
88
0
Status
Medical Student
Panda -- while I enjoy your humor on sdn, i definitely meant uncompetitive in the anti-trust, price fixing sense

Law2Doc -- Thank you for the search suggestions. After reading various sites it seems that a rider on the Pension Funding Equity Act of 2004 basically exempted the Match (retroactively) from the anti-trust law. And this is where the law suit died. Nothing has come up since the suit was dismissed.

Interestingly Sen. Clinton and Sen. Edward Kennedy (one of my favorite senators) introduced the rider in 2004.
 

Dr. Weebs

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Oct 13, 2004
218
3
38
Portland, OR
Status
jocg27 said:
I think you are using "cometitive" differently than the original poster here. Clearly the match is competitive for us, as students, trying to secure a spot. These kinds of lawsuits are saying that the match is uncompetitive in the sense that it restricts the ability to freely and independently search for a job and negotiate its benefits. When you look for other jobs you can negotiate a contract and have the final say over whether or not you work there or somewhere else. Although we have input into the match via ranking, the idea is that we all must go through it, it is our only option of finding a job, and its results are binding, therefore the match is in a sense a monopoly and according to these suits, illegal. Its not uncompetitive because we can have any spot we want, its uncompetitive because the match, as a whole, is our only option, and we're stuck with its decision. (Contrast to before the match when, as I understand it, finding postgrad spots was like finding any job, ultracompetitive, with everyone scrambling around on their own, promising applicants being recruited and offered jobs early in med school etc. If everyone is on their own and a program really wants you, they have to shell out, compete with other programs and recruit with salary, whatever...Now you have to go where you match regardless of benefits - no competition )

I don't know enough about the law to decide how valid this argument is, but this is their charge as I understand it. Am I on the mark?
I think you nailed it.

Two words: Wage fixing.

Hospitals don't want to have to pay residents a fair wage (which I think should be at least 60k/year, instead they pay from $39-45k in my area). The payscale for residents is also an antiquated "I had to go through it so you do too" type of thing. I'm sorry, but any resident has to feel severely under-compensated, regardless of whether they are still learning on the job, when a 22yr old RN straight out of school is making twice as much as they do (A new-grad RN on nights can make over $30/hr at my hospital, and they make $63/hr working overtime). If you calculated out the average resident's per hour pay, it's around $10/hr. I make $13.40/hr as a Nurses ASSISTANT right now, and I get over $20/hr if I work overtime. I think it's ridiculous that I make more per hour than the residents at my hospital. I feel bad everytime I see them all stressed out on hour 16 of their shift, after working nights practically by themselves. I think to myself... They have WAY more responsibility than I do, and I'm making more money than they are right now... how unfair. It's just not right.
 

LO281OK

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Jul 26, 2004
286
2
Status
jocg27 said:
I think you are using "cometitive" differently than the original poster here. Clearly the match is competitive for us, as students, trying to secure a spot. These kinds of lawsuits are saying that the match is uncompetitive in the sense that it restricts the ability to freely and independently search for a job and negotiate its benefits. Am I on the mark?
That's how I see the argument. :thumbup: