- Joined
- Jul 18, 2006
- Messages
- 86
- Reaction score
- 54
- Points
- 4,571
- Location
- Southeast
- Attending Physician
Many new grads are taking jobs with AMCs for lack of alternatives and because private practice groups have either disappeared or they are offering ridiculous non partnership contracts worse than those offered by AMCs.If the job market is so tight in your area that you are looking at an AMC, I expect you being able to "negotiate" exactly two things about your contract: you take it or you leave it.
The big AMCs like Sheridan and mednax/American anesthesiology are self insured so they already cover your tail.Having worked for an AMC VERY briefly, if I could emphasize one thing it would be to insist in them providing full tail coverage from day 1. Non-negotiable. This can change the dynamic and forces them to give some thought to how they treat you even after they have you.
Many new grads are taking jobs with AMCs for lack of alternatives and because private practice groups have either disappeared or they are offering ridiculous non partnership contracts worse than those offered by AMCs.
Having worked for an AMC VERY briefly, if I could emphasize one thing it would be to insist in them providing full tail coverage from day 1. Non-negotiable. This can change the dynamic and forces them to give some thought to how they treat you even after they have you. It forces them to have some skin in the game besides "get paid today for today's work" or whatever garbage they spew. O/w they could always be looking to replace you if the next guy will do it cheaper.
I'm willing to travel. I'm looking at pretty much the whole southeast region. Jobs are pretty tight. Perhaps its because I'm looking for one a year in advance. My hope is that more will open up as I get closer to graduation.
Just talked to one of my friends. A private practice group just tried to offer him $230K (he's 10 years experience, board certified no lawsuit...clean) in suburban maryland. And that's taking call 4x a month. Just ridiculous. That's probably around 50 plus hours a week and one weekend a month also. With 6 weeks paid vacation and very little benefits.
Heck most CRNAs in suburban Maryland make 175K for 40 hours plus benefits (they usually work 3-4 days a week, no weekends and no call) a week with 6 weeks vacation.
At that pay, they will have a hard time getting someone to take the job. No wonder why they keep interviewing people. At $230K with overnight call and weekend responsible, they probably can't get a CRNA to work for $230K.
CRNAs aren't dumb. They calculate everything also.
I told my friend just to do locus and he can easily get more money since he's single and can move around.
So it's just not AMCs screwing MDs over. Private practice MDs screw people over just as well.
Point 1 - that's becoming the norm
Point 2 - they will fill that job easily. They probably have 15 applicants applying which is why they keep interviewing people.
Heck most CRNAs in suburban Maryland make 175K for 40 hours plus benefits (they usually work 3-4 days a week, no weekends and no call) a week with 6 weeks vacation.
At that pay, they will have a hard time getting someone to take the job. No wonder why they keep interviewing people. At $230K with overnight call and weekend responsible, they probably can't get a CRNA to work for $230K.
CRNAs aren't dumb. They calculate everything also.
So it's just not AMCs screwing MDs over. Private practice MDs screw people over just as well.
I suspect that the market will bear what it will bear.Regrettably, I suspect that there will be people who will take that job.
For those who think that the floor for doc salaries are CRNA salaries, I would beg to differ. Some exploitive, abusive practices might prefer CRNAs for the same money. Would you want a group of young hungry docs running around your practice hating your guts for exploiting them?
The next obvious question: why is that becoming the "norm"? I'll tell you why. Because people are willing to take these jobs! If everyone said "no" unless they were offered a partnership track it wouldn't happen.
The next obvious question: why is that becoming the "norm"? I'll tell you why. Because people are willing to take these jobs! If everyone said "no" unless they were offered a partnership track it wouldn't happen.
Because there are lots of people that happily take those jobs. So if one person has a moral high ground and turns it down, there are a bunch of others just waiting for the chance.
Within 10-20 years, the job choices will be either AMC or academic or a long partnership track at one of the few private gigs remaining.
How exactly will you organize "everyone" to do that?
230K is low but they'll find somebody. Do you know what Kaiser offers there?
The job market is so bad...I hope things gets better but I am not optimistic.
Please tell me how people several hundred thousands dollars in debt should turn down the only job offers they can find because they aren't good enough.
Not every person in the country can pick up and move anywhere.
It's up to employers to offer the lowest paycheck they can to fill the position adequately. It's up to employees to take the best deal they can get. In an employer's market, the employees will necessarily be forced to take jobs that don't pay as much. Economics 101. We aren't allowed to form unions.
I actually live in a completely different part of the country and the market here is pretty similar.
I agree with you that the market is better in many other places but I cannot live anywhere else due to family considerations. My parents are getting older and I need to be close by to help take care of them. Not everybody can just pick up and move.
I have been looking at gaswork in my Northeastern state, at there are only crappy jobs, unless you are cardiac- or pain-trained.
The next obvious question: why is that becoming the "norm"? I'll tell you why. Because people are willing to take these jobs! If everyone said "no" unless they were offered a partnership track it wouldn't happen.
Easy. It's called locums.
What should really happen is that all of the non-partners who've been there for a while should get together and start looking elsewhere. Then they should go to the partners and say "make us a partner or we're leaving".
You start by making sure graduating residents know that they should be geographically flexible or risk getting stuck in a miserable situation. Some jobs will be a complete waste of the last four years of their training. You tell them that working for an AMC or directly for a hospital owned practice is far better than working in a private practice group that's going to pay you a ****ty salary indefinitely with no promise or partnership.
Then you are f*cked. What else do you want me to say? If you won't move, then you'll have to take whatever you can get (until the FTC or the courts have the balls to put an end to this specific kind of monopoly). So, lube up. Take what you can get. Even if that means you gotta give the senior partners a handjob every morning. Don't forget to smile.
You can't invoke pure "capitalism" here. There's too many regulations in place stacked against the individual.
Then you are f*cked. What else do you want me to say? If you won't move, then you'll have to take whatever you can get (until the FTC or the courts have the balls to put an end to this specific kind of monopoly). So, lube up. Take what you can get. Even if that means you gotta give the senior partners a handjob every morning. Don't forget to smile.
Why is it illegal for anesthesia groups to control market share...aka the anti trust laws
"in 1996, the FTC issued a BusinessReviewLetterdescribingwhyit would likely challenge the joint venture combination of five Orange County, California anesthesia practices under the antitrust laws. See, FTC Business Review Letter, Orange Los Angeles Medical Group, Inc. (“ORLA”) (March 8, 1996.)."
http://www.anesthesiallc.com/component/content/article/335
But it's ok for big business like Mednax to control market share and extract higher payments from insurers.
Surprise the FTC hasn't looked into this. It may (and probably too late) by the time the FTC looks into this.
I'm not "invoking" capitalism. It is capitalism. It's an employer offering a job. It's an employee deciding whether to take it.
The antitrust environment is significantly different now with the consolidation of both medical groups and hospital systems. There have been several similar mergers in the area without FTC challenge since the case described. The difference between "competitive" and "non-competitive" has become a matter of semantics. Hospital medical staffs that are nominally open are de facto closed for anesthesia.
It's not a fair market. And, that is what capitalism is based on. This is not capitalism.
Practices have figured out that when they hold the cards they can do whatever they want. The result is that the little guy (in this case the single anesthesiologist trying to negotiate on his/her own in a captive market) gets screwed.
"Fair" is a four letter word. Depends on where you sit. A few years ago, surgeons and administrators were having apoplectic fits over anesthesiologists increasing income demands coupled with refusal to provide increased services. In their minds this has been a long time coming.
It's not a fair market. And, that is what capitalism is based on. This is not capitalism.
Practices have figured out that when they hold the cards they can do whatever they want. The result is that the little guy (in this case the single anesthesiologist trying to negotiate on his/her own in a captive market) gets screwed.
We do not work in a specialty where it is even possible to exist as an independent contractor in a large hospital system.
The next obvious question: why is that becoming the "norm"? I'll tell you why. Because people are willing to take these jobs! If everyone said "no" unless they were offered a partnership track it wouldn't happen. If a practice wants to fill itself with a bunch of spineless wimps who do nothing more than sign charts and let the CRNAs do all the clinical work (including blocks) then the surgeons and administrators shouldn't be surprised when the overall quality of care goes down. If you've got any kind of skills or ambition don't take this kind of job! You will be miserable.
Then you are f*cked. What else do you want me to say? If you won't move, then you'll have to take whatever you can get (until the FTC or the courts have the balls to put an end to this specific kind of monopoly). So, lube up. Take what you can get. Even if that means you gotta give the senior partners a handjob every morning. Don't forget to smile.
The next obvious question: why is that becoming the "norm"? I'll tell you why. Because people are willing to take these jobs! If everyone said "no" unless they were offered a partnership track it wouldn't happen. If a practice wants to fill itself with a bunch of spineless wimps who do nothing more than sign charts and let the CRNAs do all the clinical work (including blocks) then the surgeons and administrators shouldn't be surprised when the overall quality of care goes down. If you've got any kind of skills or ambition don't take this kind of job! You will be miserable.
Yeah, I know. And what you say is exactly what they told me when I quit where I was temporarily. No offense, but I saw the quality of some of those newer hires and there were more than a few that were foreign-trained, from crappy residency programs, and whose English was barely understandable. Again eventually the practice is only ****ing itself if they expect to stay in business for more than the next few years. Even some of the CRNAs were leaving because they couldn't stand it any longer. And the few quality people who were there were incredibly unhappy.
This is phenomenally shortsighted of practices if they expect to stay in business and keep the contracts. If you set your practice up to have high turnover and weak clinicians, you will get exactly what you bargained for in the end when everyone starts to complain, especially if surgeons have multiple choices about where to send their patients.