Match violation?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
P

PMRMD2B

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
82
Reaction score
16
Members do not see this ad.
So, what if you found out your PD guaranteed someone a spot in the match in return for a favor from another person. Consider, the person matching has not matched before and was actually not ranked by the program last time they interviewed.. and has no additional qualifications.
Would you report this? Or would you leave it alone, knowing you have a subpar match and someone who deserves that spot was screwed out of it?
 
PMRMD2B said:
So, what if you found out your PD guaranteed someone a spot in the match in return for a favor from another person. Consider, the person matching has not matched before and was actually not ranked by the program last time they interviewed.. and has no additional qualifications.
Would you report this? Or would you leave it alone, knowing you have a subpar match and someone who deserves that spot was screwed out of it?
Click to expand...

How is this a violation?
 
Well, without knowing every specific rule of the NRMP, I can't imagine it wouldn't violate the match... where an applicant only applies for one program and is told before the match they will be at the top of the match list to ensure they get a spot. This is completely unethical and goes against the spirit of the match, i.e., why it exists.
 
PMRMD2B said:
Well, without knowing every specific rule of the NRMP, I can't imagine it wouldn't violate the match... where an applicant only applies for one program and is told before the match they will be at the top of the match list to ensure they get a spot. This is completely unethical and goes against the spirit of the match, i.e., why it exists.
Click to expand...
again how is this a match violation...a program can tell an applicant anything it wants to...ie...we are going to rank you to match, will rank you #1, etc...an applicant can tell a program anything (s)he wants to as well...ie i am going to rank you # 1 or i am only going to rank your program...unless you have concrete evidence of a quid pro quo...not a match violation...what do you get out of being a whistleblower (you might want to look up what has happened to other such whistleblowers and is your conviction worth the consequences...sometimes it is...)/
 
PMRMD2B said:
Well, without knowing every specific rule of the NRMP, I can't imagine it wouldn't violate the match...
Click to expand...
Well, if you're going to accuse someone of breaking the rules, the first thing you should do is make sure a rule's actually been broken. Only then is there a debate to be had.
 
PMRMD2B said:
So, what if you found out your PD guaranteed someone a spot in the match in return for a favor from another person. Consider, the person matching has not matched before and was actually not ranked by the program last time they interviewed.. and has no additional qualifications.
Would you report this? Or would you leave it alone, knowing you have a subpar match and someone who deserves that spot was screwed out of it?
Click to expand...

I would argue that a lottt of spots in residency go to people who didn't truly deserve them

Good connections can trump anything else in an application.
 
So you are jealous and want revenge. Please tell me you didn't match to Mayo.
 
aProgDirector said:
Although you may not be happy about it, it's not a match violation. It's perfectly fine for me to offer to rank someone at the top of my list. Although it may be ethically suspect to "get" something for it, it's not a match violation.
Click to expand...
Well, if their was a quid pro quo -- i.e. $, sexual favors, etc for a spot, that would be a problem beyond just "ethically suspect". But if OP can't prove it it's just sour grapes.
 
Well, first I already have a match, so no jealousy at all. Secondly, I do have proof this back door deal was made. According to the NRMP, this is a violation, but the only way to have them take action, is to turn over the proof (this is from communication already initiated with them).. This, of course, would reveal the source of the info (which I don't care to out this person).

This question was to query, what I hoped to be other medical professionals, and see what their opinions were. The person who provided this information is considering turning the proof over, but does not want to ruin their career. So thanks for all the commentary and assumptions.
 
PMRMD2B said:
Well, first I already have a match, so no jealousy at all. Secondly, I do have proof this back door deal was made. According to the NRMP, this is a violation, but the only way to have them take action, is to turn over the proof (this is from communication already initiated with them).. This, of course, would reveal the source of the info (which I don't care to out this person).

This question was to query, what I hoped to be other medical professionals, and see what their opinions were. The person who provided this information is considering turning the proof over, but does not want to ruin their career. So thanks for all the commentary and assumptions.
Click to expand...
First, you can have "a match" and still be jealous. There are plenty of people posting on SDN today unhappy about their matches. Second, if you have proof you can't or are unwilling to turn over you don't really have proof-- seems a bit too convenient BTW, makes your story, and the impetus for your post extremely sketchy and trollish -- ie, there's a violation but I won't say what the quid pro quo was and I have proof but I can turn it over, but still want to hear what people think -- please. With no details and so much vaguery, YOU are the one creating assumptions, we aren't making them. If you were a newer poster I'd call troll post here.
 
Law2Doc said:
First, you can have "a match" and still be jealous. There are plenty of people posting on SDN today unhappy about their matches. Second, if you have proof you can't or are unwilling to turn over you don't really have proof-- seems a bit too convenient BTW, makes your story, and the impetus for your post extremely sketchy and trollish -- ie, there's a violation but I won't say what the quid pro quo was and I have proof but I can turn it over, but still want to hear what people think -- please. With no details and so much vaguery, YOU are the one creating assumptions, we aren't making them. If you were a newer poster I'd call troll post here.
Click to expand...

I guess you are right.. one can have jealousy, but it isn't me. This isn't a qui tam action, where I gain something for turning someone in. I personally feel it was unethical and the person who has first hand knowledge of this (in administration), is troubled by it.. but doesn't want to risk their job over this. My intent was to see if anyone else, knowing the basic facts, would have an opinion either way that may be different than my own (since I am clearly biased in this). Giving more details of this issue would potentially compromise the person I am trying to help. I apologize I wasn't able to provide you with affidavits and answers to interrogatories.
 
PMRMD2B said:
I guess you are right.. one can have jealousy, but it isn't me. This isn't a qui tam action, where I gain something for turning someone in. I personally feel it was unethical and the person who has first hand knowledge of this (in administration), is troubled by it.. but doesn't want to risk their job over this. My intent was to see if anyone else, knowing the basic facts, would have an opinion either way that may be different than my own (since I am clearly biased in this). Giving more details of this issue would potentially compromise the person I am trying to help. I apologize I wasn't able to provide you with affidavits and answers to interrogatories.
Click to expand...
Unless you tell us the nature of this "favor" and that there was some affirmative statement from the PD that this would result in a match I'd say you haven't provided us "the basic facts". You have provided innuendo and then accused us of making "assumptions". Which is trollish.
 
Law2Doc said:
Unless you tell us the nature of this "favor" and that there was some affirmative statement from the PD that this would result in a match I'd say you haven't provided us "the basic facts". You have provided innuendo and then accused us of making "assumptions". Which is trollish.
Click to expand...
Well, the PD wanted to hire a certain staff member, who's spouse had been unable to match. He made an under-the-table deal to give this person's spouse a match, if they took the job. This information will give anyone at this hospital a good idea of where this info leaked from, but your insults of me being trollish compelled me to disclose the info.. (that is a joke, since you don't seem to have a sense of humor).
 
Well, in communications with the NRMP, they are of the opinion it is. They want the evidence, but that would obviously expose the person turning it over, and therefore will most likely cost their job.
 
PMRMD2B said:
Well, the PD wanted to hire a certain staff member, who's spouse had been unable to match. He made an under-the-table deal to give this person's spouse a match, if they took the job. This information will give anyone at this hospital a good idea of where this info leaked from, but your insults of me being trollish compelled me to disclose the info.. (that is a joke, since you don't seem to have a sense of humor).
Click to expand...
good god that happens ALL the time...when i was an intern, one of my co-intern's husband was looking for an attending job and part of the deal at the new hospital was that his wife got a residency spot...another place that was pretty much all AMG with the exception of 1-2 IMG/DO per class year pre-matched a person in my class because her husband was senior resident that they wanted to keep as an attending...its called negotiating for a job...
 
rokshana said:
well in all fairness, he does seem to be a bit hesitant, even if its because his friend would get hurt...and probably would be mad at the OP...
Click to expand...

He apparently went to talk to the NRMP about it. If his balls weren't gonna be exposed in the process, he'd do it in a heart beat. What a snitch. Snitches get stitches.
 
PMRMD2B said:
Well, the PD wanted to hire a certain staff member, who's spouse had been unable to match. He made an under-the-table deal to give this person's spouse a match, if they took the job. This information will give anyone at this hospital a good idea of where this info leaked from, but your insults of me being trollish compelled me to disclose the info.. (that is a joke, since you don't seem to have a sense of humor).
Click to expand...
This is perfectly normal behavior. Happens all the time, in programs all across the country.
 
Sorry OP, going to add that it does happen and I too am also aware of a similar situation... staff needed to hire a new attending, their spouse matched in one of our spots.

It happens.
 
As everyone above stated, in academics, finding a position for the spouse is often how they recruit a person. You also cannot assume the spouse is a "lesser candidate"; this may or may not be true. Figure it's similar to students who are doing the couples match---if one PD REALLY wants one person badly enough, s/he may talk to the other one's potential PD to try to ensure a favorable match. That's not illegal. This happens outside of medicine as well.
 
If the NRMP is telling the OP it's a match violation, it's a match violation.

With that said, based on what the OP has said, my understanding would be it's only a match violation the other way around--telling the applicant "we'll only rank you or we'll rank you to match if your spouse takes a job with us." Similar to how a program can tell you how high they ranked you, but they can't require you to tell them how high you ranked them.

In the OP's scenario the applicant isn't being pressured at all--it's their spouse (who is not a participant in the match) who is being "pressured," (or incentivized in this case, as it doesn't sound like the PD said "we'll only hire you if your spouse ranks us number one." The applicant was under no pressure to actually rank the program 1.

Still, if a program participates in the match, PD's aren't allowed to offer positions outside the match (unless they didn't fill in the SOAP), so if they had direct contact with the applicant and offered them a position, that would be a match violation. (But still not that abnormal, per others' reports above). Who the PD spoke with, when they spoke with them, and what they said specifically are all critical to determining if it's an actual violation.

I agree with the others it's probably best to let it go--if this is your own program you definitely don't want to screw over your PD and your program. And if it isn't your program then I would keep quiet unless you really know all the details about the quality of the applicant, how badly the position the spouse was given needed to be filled, etc. For all you know the PD has been trying to fill that spot for years. I would avoid passing judgement unless you know all the details.

I'm also not sure how you'd get proof of this--usually that sort of thing is a verbal agreement between parties, so unless it's included in the spouse's contract and someone at the office snooped in on it and copied it, it seems like it would be hard to provide proof.
 
This 2/1 activity occurs at the level of Faculty job hires all the time. My post-doc advisor got his position this way.

PMRMD2B said:
Well, the PD wanted to hire a certain staff member, who's spouse had been unable to match. He made an under-the-table deal to give this person's spouse a match, if they took the job. This information will give anyone at this hospital a good idea of where this info leaked from, but your insults of me being trollish compelled me to disclose the info.. (that is a joke, since you don't seem to have a sense of humor).
Click to expand...
 
upload_2016-3-22_11-21-4.png
 
Last edited:
@OP:
You have to learn to pick your battles. There are times to fight and there are times to let it be.

It doesn't matter if you have rock solid evidence that a violation occurred. There is no way that you have ALL of the facts related to this case.

Option 1: You report this. If a violation actually occurred then those responsible will be reprimanded. If no violation occurred then you have opened Pandora's box for no reason. Either way, word will get around. Some people may approve and think you did the right thing. Others, however will see you as a snitch or traitor. The latter is more likely to get around and follow you for a long time (even if you are right). Whether you are right or wrong..you will lose. People (regardless if they think you are a snitch or an epic hero for exposing a potential match violation) will watch what they say and do around you more than they would otherwise.

Option 2: You let it go. You don't have to explain yourself for the rest of your life. You don't look like a sore loser. You develop strong professional relationships in residency that help propel you to the next step.

If someone had gotten hurt in this process, I'd say report it to the NRMP, New York Times, whomever you want. No patient was injured, nobody was assaulted, everybody got a residency spot. It worked out for everyone.

Wisdom is not having the power to do something, it is knowing when to use that power. Discretion is the better part of valor here.
 
knowing you have a subpar match
Click to expand...

Who care's about your match? Are you trying to project on this other person or PD? You say that you aren't jealous...but I'm calling BS. Otherwise, why would you complain about your subpar match? This is the distressing part of your post. I really hope that you didn't match to PM&R...and I really really hope that the PD and pier you are out to get are not PM&R. I would strongly recommend that you keep your mouth shut. If you are outed as a snitch (in part because of your bitterness of your own match outcome)...you are going to be a black sheep in our community. I wouldn't trust you as a fellow resident and I have a hard time seeing any PD recommend you for either a job or fellowship. Who wants to work with the vindictive, jealous resident?
 
PMRMD2B said:
Well, the PD wanted to hire a certain staff member, who's spouse had been unable to match. He made an under-the-table deal to give this person's spouse a match, if they took the job. This information will give anyone at this hospital a good idea of where this info leaked from, but your insults of me being trollish compelled me to disclose the info.. (that is a joke, since you don't seem to have a sense of humor).
Click to expand...

I think the details and nuances of this are important in determining whether this is unethical and or an NRMP match violation. If a university medical center is recruiting a new attending then they will often look at his/her family as part of a package deal. I think you can try to help make the recruited spouse feel like this position/this community is a good fit not only for them but their family without doing anything unethical. I think most people presume that the decision for which position is best is not made in a vacuum when the physician candidate has a spouse and or children.

My husband is a great doctor but he had an interview where once they realized he had a physician spouse who happened to be board certified in a field they were having trouble recruiting for he said he could see the hospital CEO actually salivate. I had been supposed to meet him for lunch with one of the physicians from his potential department and their spouse. At the last minute two other physicians from another department (and one I could potentially work for) were added and the conversation was more interview based discussion of my career trajectory and goals than the small talk and selling the community chatter I had anticipated. My husband never promised them anything (and he ended up not accepting their offer ultimately) but I can believe they rushed their offer and perhaps made their salary offer a bit higher than they might have if he was a single guy. I can also believe that there may have been other candidates that some at this medical center may have considered better candidates than my husband. Obviously, as we were both attendings at the time this happened, NRMP was not involved but I also wouldn't consider the actions of the search committee inappropriate if they chose the candidate who they felt was better for the medical center overall.
 
RuralMedicine said:
I think the details and nuances of this are important in determining whether this is unethical and or an NRMP match violation. If a university medical center is recruiting a new attending then they will often look at his/her family as part of a package deal. I think you can try to help make the recruited spouse feel like this position/this community is a good fit not only for them but their family without doing anything unethical. I think most people presume that the decision for which position is best is not made in a vacuum when the physician candidate has a spouse and or children.

My husband is a great doctor but he had an interview where once they realized he had a physician spouse who happened to be board certified in a field they were having trouble recruiting for he said he could see the hospital CEO actually salivate. I had been supposed to meet him for lunch with one of the physicians from his potential department and their spouse. At the last minute two other physicians from another department (and one I could potentially work for) were added and the conversation was more interview based discussion of my career trajectory and goals than the small talk and selling the community chatter I had anticipated. My husband never promised them anything (and he ended up not accepting their offer ultimately) but I can believe they rushed their offer and perhaps made their salary offer a bit higher than they might have if he was a single guy. I can also believe that there may have been other candidates that some at this medical center may have considered better candidates than my husband. Obviously, as we were both attendings at the time this happened, NRMP was not involved but I also wouldn't consider the actions of the search committee inappropriate if they chose the candidate who they felt was better for the medical center overall.
Click to expand...
It's not at all uncommon for one spouse to get a desired position or a sweeter deal on the coat tails of his/her spouse. It's a huge win for the hospital if they can get someone they really want by also merely hiring someone they sort of want. This is true for full time faculty, and true in couple matching at the residency level and I'm not exactly clear how we are getting to a match violation here, but here's my guess. It may be pretty transparent that a hospital will have the chance to hire someone they want only if they let their spouse match, to the point that the match is pretty conditional to the deal. But how things are worded is going to be everything here.
 
Law2Doc said:
It's not at all uncommon for one spouse to get a desired position or a sweeter deal on the coat tails of his/her spouse. It's a huge win for the hospital if they can get someone they really want by also merely hiring someone they sort of want. This is true for full time faculty, and true in couple matching at the residency level and I'm not exactly clear how we are getting to a match violation here, but here's my guess. It may be pretty transparent that a hospital will have the chance to hire someone they want only if they let their spouse match, to the point that the match is pretty conditional to the deal. But how things are worded is going to be everything here.
Click to expand...

That was basically my point.
 
PMRMD2B said:
Well, in communications with the NRMP, they are of the opinion it is. They want the evidence, but that would obviously expose the person turning it over, and therefore will most likely cost their job.
Click to expand...

Be careful interpreting what they told you, off the record, over the phone. I get requests to consider people for open PGY-1/PGY-2 spots all the time that I have absolutely no intention of considering. Yet, I tell them all that I will "keep their application on file in case an opening presents itself". The NRMP would review the evidence and situation, and quite possibly come to the decision that no violation occurred. As long as the match applicant didn't feel pressured into ranking the program highly, there may not be a violation at all.
 
So, first of all, this person has no bearing on my position, I am already in this program. My original question was, again, to ask other medical "professionals" what their opinion was on this. The coordinator of the program was privy to all these conversations and has emails detailing the conversations, details on it most likely being a match violation, the regional GME director knowing about it and questioning it, and the hospital CEO being brought into this because of the potential violation of corporate HR policies. The coordinator decided to resign over this, and other ethical issues from the PD, and is going to one of our sister hospitals, so now she is more likely to report this. I do think this was unethical, and the match does think this is a violation, but I also don't believe it is my place to report it.. hence why I wanted to get other opinions. I do understand things like this happen all the time, that still doesn't make it right.
 
PMRMD2B said:
So, first of all, this person has no bearing on my position, I am already in this program. My original question was, again, to ask other medical "professionals" what their opinion was on this. The coordinator of the program was privy to all these conversations and has emails detailing the conversations, details on it most likely being a match violation, the regional GME director knowing about it and questioning it, and the hospital CEO being brought into this because of the potential violation of corporate HR policies. The coordinator decided to resign over this, and other ethical issues from the PD, and is going to one of our sister hospitals, so now she is more likely to report this. I do think this was unethical, and the match does think this is a violation, but I also don't believe it is my place to report it.. hence why I wanted to get other opinions. I do understand things like this happen all the time, that still doesn't make it right.
Click to expand...
well if that was your point, then you got it...many have said they don't think this is a match violation ...yet now you don't seem to like our opinion...so what is your point now?
 
rokshana said:
well if that was your point, then you got it...many have said they don't think this is a match violation ...yet now you don't seem to like our opinion...so what is your point now?
Click to expand...
That he's right and we're wrong.

Honestly, it sounds like something a resident shouldn't even bother being involved with. If the PD effed up, what does it matter to him that he's actively trying to get his nose involved? I can't stand ppl like him.
 
As you can probably tell, not the best forum to ask this question.

Make a decision yourself. No one else has is going to live your life for you.
 
Lets assume, for the sake of discussion, that it is a match violation. In that case, the question is: what outcome do you want from reporting it? The only point of reporting it is to create some change in the future.

The student who matched will not face any problems -- the NRMP would see them as an innocent pawn in a someone else's game.

The program might get booted from the match. This would be a catastrophe for the program, and indirectly for the student in the program.

The PD might get fired. Sacrifice the queen as an endgame gambit.

Those are the only outcomes (other than "no change", which is always a possibilty) that I see.

What do you get out of this? Options I see are:

1. SJW win -- fixing the wrongs of the universe, one at a time.
2. Revenge. You're mad they didn't take you, you punish them.
3. Sadistic pleasure. You enjoy watching other people's careers implode.

Only you can decide whether it's "worth it" to proceed. Although you might try to remain anonymous, you should assume that your identity will become public, as that often happens in situations like this.
 
I never said I don't agree with the opinion.. the majority opinion is don't get involved or report it. OK, thanks for the "expert" opinion. No skin off my back, I'm done in 3 months. As stated, I don't think it is ethical and I believe it is against the spirit of the match. However, this is not personal enough to me to report. My involvement was out of respect and friendship of the coordinator, who I have known since a student, and I was hoping to help her with some guidance and couldn't speak about this with other people at my program. Thanks for being an objective medical community.
 
PMRMD2B said:
I never said I don't agree with the opinion.. the majority opinion is don't get involved or report it. OK, thanks for the "expert" opinion. No skin off my back, I'm done in 3 months. As stated, I don't think it is ethical and I believe it is against the spirit of the match. However, this is not personal enough to me to report. My involvement was out of respect and friendship of the coordinator, who I have known since a student, and I was hoping to help her with some guidance and couldn't speak about this with other people at my program. Thanks for being an objective medical community.
Click to expand...

That's helpful. I think I missed the thrust in your other emails. In that case, take my last post and replace "you" with "her". The question now is what does she want to get out of reporting it. Her answer might be very different from yours. And it adds one more option to the list at the bottom -- she has extensive experience with this person, and knows if this is a "one time bad event" or just one of a long string. That changes option #1, (or adds an option #4), if this PD is a real cancer in the system, someone needs to stand up to them.
 
PMRMD2B said:
other medical "professionals"
Click to expand...
PMRMD2B said:
thanks for the "expert" opinion
Click to expand...
You chose to come to this forum to ask for advice. With this attitude, I'm guessing you didn't like the advice? Which would imply you were really just looking for people to tell you what you already thought. Or maybe I'm reading too much into this.
 
I think the OP actually had a fairly reasonable question and it sounds like they are just trying to help out someone they care about but his/her slow-revealing of facts (including that they already had a position and are soon to graduate) have upset people and caused them to jump to assumptions. It would certainly bother me if my program did the same thing and we also ended up with a "subpar match," as I care about my program and my co-residents, and a crappy (if they really are subpar) resident will create more work for everyone.

I'm not sure why people take so much issue when someone brings up what they think is an ethical dilemma. And quite frankly, if the PD promised a position to the applicant himself directly outside the match, that is a pretty flagrant match violation. Common practice or not in the real world, we're talking about the Match here, which has pretty specific rules about what you can and cannot do, and there are good reasons for this. If the PD promised the position to the spouse, then it gets fuzzier as the applicant isn't being pressured into taking the spot, but I still agree with the OP it's certainly against the spirit of the match.

Whether or not it's actually a Match violation depends on all the details, of which there are more than what we've heard, and really depends on what the NRMP says--not what a bunch of people on an anonymous forum say.

OP--I think aProgDirector has given you the best advice. Ultimately the decision is up to you and the coordinator if you're going to pursue anything, but as aProgDirector points out, if the end-game is to get revenge, it actually will hurt the residents more than the PD (if it is a match violation) as the program won't be able to participate in the match for some time. But if the PD really is a cancer on the program, perhaps it'd actually be better for the PC to talk with the PD's superior about her concerns. I know our GME director would take things pretty seriously if he heard a PD was doing all sorts of ethically questionable stuff (and unless the other job the PC took is actually better, I assume it must be a fair amount of questionable stuff for her to quit over it)

I'd still personally keep quiet unless the PD had a continuous habit of ethical issues, in which case I'd discuss it with his/her boss and not the NRMP. (Well, I'd actually encourage the PC to do it--she's really the one in the place to bring up the concerns at the OP points out).
 
PMRMD2B said:
I guess you are right.. one can have jealousy, but it isn't me. This isn't a qui tam action, where I gain something for turning someone in. I personally feel it was unethical and the person who has first hand knowledge of this (in administration), is troubled by it.. but doesn't want to risk their job over this. My intent was to see if anyone else, knowing the basic facts, would have an opinion either way that may be different than my own (since I am clearly biased in this). Giving more details of this issue would potentially compromise the person I am trying to help. I apologize I wasn't able to provide you with affidavits and answers to interrogatories.
Click to expand...
Sometimes making waves just isn't worth it. Keep your head low if you want to keep it attached.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Possible HIPAA violation and consequences?
Replies
19
Views
4K
RangerBob
RangerBob
WildWing
House Investigating the Match
Replies
11
Views
3K
abc123412
A
lizardsuck
Switching residencies after successful match
Replies
12
Views
3K
Pharaoh787
P
N
Which is the hardest to match?
Replies
8
Views
3K
irwarrior
I
Mr.Smile12
Understanding the Ranking and Matching Behaviors During the 2023 and 2024 General Surgery Match Cycles: A Program Signaling Approach
Replies
0
Views
686
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
Top