New hires suck?

[LADoc00]

Is it just me or are new physicians blazin a trend of going into the community and either imploding or doing something crazy to try to screw over their group?

I just talked to a guy who hired what appeared to be a nice young lady, who over a few years made some questionable calls but I figured she was new etc. She then proceeded to have 2 kids and take epic amounts of maternity time all the while being paid of course. Then all the sudden bailed while trying to drag down the group. Crazy. And this is all in the span of just 3 years.

This is the 3rd such story Ive run into in the last 5 years. Most have had an "epic maternity leave" component to the tale. And all havent ended well for either the group or the departing hire..

Im not sure if this is due to young docs changing their priorities with new families or what, but this doesnt bode well for the next generation.

Is it common for people to get their life all shored up, have kids etc while an employee on someone's dime and then make a bolt for practice ownership once they have that out of the way? Seems crazy ill advised to burn down every bridge in sight a mere 3-5 years of training...

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Path or bust]

Is it just me or are new physicians blazin a trend of going into the community and either imploding or doing something crazy to try to screw over their group?

I just talked to a guy who hired what appeared to be a nice young lady, who over a few years made some questionable calls but I figured she was new etc. She then proceeded to have 2 kids and take epic amounts of maternity time all the while being paid of course. Then all the sudden bailed while trying to drag down the group. Crazy. And this is all in the span of just 3 years.

This is the 3rd such story Ive run into in the last 5 years. Most have had an "epic maternity leave" component to the tale. And all havent ended well for either the group or the departing hire..

Im not sure if this is due to young docs changing their priorities with new families or what, but this doesnt bode well for the next generation.

Is it common for people to get their life all shored up, have kids etc while an employee on someone's dime and then make a bolt for practice ownership once they have that out of the way? Seems crazy ill advised to burn down every bridge in sight a mere 3-5 years of training...

Yes we had a couple of these during residency with 2-3 "epic leaves" while the rest of us had to absorb their work, all of these planned of course.

 

[2121115]

Is maternity time not limited in scope by law? What could have been "epic" about it? They took more than 6 weeks (I have no idea how long the limit is)?

 

[icpshootyz]

Is maternity time not limited in scope by law? What could have been "epic" about it? They took more than 6 weeks (I have no idea how long the limit is)?

I believe it's 12 wks unpaid leave mandated by federal law. States then have their own individual laws that can alter that. But, say she has 12 wks unpaid, plus whatever vacation time she saved up. She could be out almost half a year depending on the vacation accrued.

 

[2121115]

I believe it's 12 wks unpaid leave mandated by federal law. States then have their own individual laws that can alter that. But, say she has 12 wks unpaid, plus whatever vacation time she saved up. She could be out almost half a year depending on the vacation accrued.

Oh, ok. But the OP said she got paid, so I assumed it was 6 weeks.

 

[Autopsy101]

Maternity leave is mandated by the federal government as 12 weeks unpaid. Many companies offer the 6 weeks paid maternity leave as a benefit. However, small businesses with less than 50 employees are NOT required by federal law to offer any maternity time - paid or unpaid. There may be some specific laws in states that I am not aware of that could alter this. But if you are a joining a private practice group of less than 50 employees, all maternity/paternity time is contractual - so make sure it is negotiated in your contract. Otherwise, vacation time might be all that you have.

 

[gbwillner]

Is it just me or are new physicians blazin a trend of going into the community and either imploding or doing something crazy to try to screw over their group?

I just talked to a guy who hired what appeared to be a nice young lady, who over a few years made some questionable calls but I figured she was new etc. She then proceeded to have 2 kids and take epic amounts of maternity time all the while being paid of course. Then all the sudden bailed while trying to drag down the group. Crazy. And this is all in the span of just 3 years.

This is the 3rd such story Ive run into in the last 5 years. Most have had an "epic maternity leave" component to the tale. And all havent ended well for either the group or the departing hire..

Im not sure if this is due to young docs changing their priorities with new families or what, but this doesnt bode well for the next generation.

Is it common for people to get their life all shored up, have kids etc while an employee on someone's dime and then make a bolt for practice ownership once they have that out of the way? Seems crazy ill advised to burn down every bridge in sight a mere 3-5 years of training...

Was this friend of yours running his practice like you claim to- where you hire new folks for pennies on the dollar and keep a majority of the PC for yourself since new pathologists are so abundant you can get them for nothing?

If so, are you complaining when these same underpaid employees take advantage of the writing within their own contract (that your friend also signed)? You've specifically mentioned that many of these young docs prefer lifestyle over salary. She seems to just be enjoying her 6 weeks or 12 weeks paid maternity leave. And then apparently she felt that she'd rather stay home, and felt no loyalty to the guy giving her 1/10th of what she was billing.

If this is the case, Boo-f$^&ing-hoo.

 

[mlw03]

Was this friend of yours running his practice like you claim to- where you hire new folks for pennies on the dollar and keep a majority of the PC for yourself since new pathologists are so abundant you can get them for nothing?

If so, are you complaining when these same underpaid employees take advantage of the writing within their own contract (that your friend also signed)? You've specifically mentioned that many of these young docs prefer lifestyle over salary. She seems to just be enjoying her 6 weeks or 12 weeks paid maternity leave. And then apparently she felt that she'd rather stay home, and felt no loyalty to the guy giving her 1/10th of what she was billing.

If this is the case, Boo-f$^&ing-hoo.

Nicely said. I'd like to know what LA is meaning by "epic maternity leave". Seems like most of us are looking out for #1, on both sides of the table.

 

[zao275]

I understand that having a co-resident/fellow or colleague out on maternity leave makes more work for others. But, honestly, when is a "good" time for a woman to have children that doesn't inconvenience others and/or make life impossible for her?

In undergrad, when she is very young and likely not married yet?
In med school, when there is an overwhelming amount of stress and little time for sleep?
In residency, when she is busy and gunning for a fellowship?
In fellowship, when she only has one year to learn everything about skin/breast/blood bank/etc and doesn't want to miss a large portion of her year of training?
In the early years of practice when she wants to look good so she can become partner or get promoted?
Or after she has "made it" and is 35-40+ years old and considered advanced maternal age?

Seems like everyone wants to impose a lot of rules on when women should or shouldn't have babies. Don't get me wrong: there are certainly ways that a woman preparing for maternity leave can help make the transition smoother for her colleagues. But, ultimately, I feel like women get a pretty unfair amount of pressure oftentimes regarding when they choose to have kids.

 

[LaBelleVN]

I understand that having a co-resident/fellow or colleague out on maternity leave makes more work for others. But, honestly, when is a "good" time for a woman to have children that doesn't inconvenience others and/or make life impossible for her?

In undergrad, when she is very young and likely not married yet?
In med school, when there is an overwhelming amount of stress and little time for sleep?
In residency, when she is busy and gunning for a fellowship?
In fellowship, when she only has one year to learn everything about skin/breast/blood bank/etc and doesn't want to miss a large portion of her year of training?
In the early years of practice when she wants to look good so she can become partner or get promoted?
Or after she has "made it" and is 35-40+ years old and considered advanced maternal age?

Seems like everyone wants to impose a lot of rules on when women should or shouldn't have babies. Don't get me wrong: there are certainly ways that a woman preparing for maternity leave can help make the transition smoother for her colleagues. But, ultimately, I feel like women get a pretty unfair amount of pressure oftentimes regarding when they choose to have kids.

Nicely written, Jerad. I've asked myself all those questions throughout the years. It's never a good time. Maternal guilt of "woulda, coulda, shoulda" have spent more time with the kids will follow me to the grave. I openly expressed to my group that I don't plan on getting on the partnership track because I would rather be spending time with my family rather than taking call, doing administrative work, etc. Yes, I will be paid less, but that's something that I am willing to accept. I actually asked my group to put in something about maternity leave in their contract since it was missing (never an issue before apparently). Now I just need to make sure I don't screw up this year, my first, so that they keep me around.

 

[2121115]

Nicely written, Jerad. I've asked myself all those questions throughout the years. It's never a good time. Maternal guilt of "woulda, coulda, shoulda" have spent more time with the kids will follow me to the grave. I openly expressed to my group that I don't plan on getting on the partnership track because I would rather be spending time with my family rather than taking call, doing administrative work, etc. Yes, I will be paid less, but that's something that I am willing to accept. I actually asked my group to put in something about maternity leave in their contract since it was missing (never an issue before apparently). Now I just need to make sure I don't screw up this year, my first, so that they keep me around.

Lean in.

 

[Silent Cool]

Lean in.

 

[caffeinegirl]

Is it common for people to get their life all shored up, have kids etc while an employee on someone's dime and then make a bolt for practice ownership once they have that out of the way? Seems crazy ill advised to burn down every bridge in sight a mere 3-5 years of training...

I think that there are a few issues to address here other than the "fairness" of maternity leave. There is no good time to have kids, when it comes to a woman with a career. It's just something that the group has to go through and bite the bullet. However, having a sound maternity leave policy in place can help ease the road.

My group established a maternity leave policy right before I joined, since I was the youngest female to join and since none of the other women had kids during their tenure in the group. The leave policy was based on borrowing vacation time from current and future years as well as foregoing days off (we have a four day work week). There was a clause stating that unpaid maternity leave can also be taken, but that no more than 6 months total unpaid+paid can be taken in the year. To be fair, I don't think that anybody would take that amount of time, because my group is full of level-headed people. I took 10 weeks off, worked full-time until the day before I popped, and came back while still dazed, sleep deprived and exhausted...but that's my work ethic. This was in contrast to other new mom's in in other professions who took 4 months off (combo of paid and unpaid).

But we all know of examples in which people take advantage of the system. I know of several in residency who basically didn't even do their fair share while pregnant, and then gamed the system for maternity leave. There will always be these types of people around...but I don't think these are the type of people who will "bolt for practice ownership once they have that out of the way." They're just too unmotivated to have that spark of entrepreneurship IMHO.

I do feel that it's these types of people who make it worse for the rest of us women and who basically spark these types of discussions as to whether maternity leave is "fair." I think it's fair because at the end of they day I didn't take any more time than allotted, and we all cover each other (including the older folks who take time off for joint replacements!).
The great thing is that my example has started the other gals in the group to also join in on having kids too.

 

[LADoc00]

Rule 1.) There is no sympathy for the Devil. Yes indeed as someone pointed ALWAYS look out for no1.

That said the practice I heard this from hired said person at nearly 100% of partnership salary at day 1, which I said was a disaster in the making.

Then let said person take their entire vacation alotment for like the first 2 years paid THEN had to give her the mandated 6 weeks paid maternity THEN the person left at first chance!

So, shame on them for being "weak minds" and allowing a 20s something year old noob to use Jedi mind tricks on them.

The strange thing is Im hearing stories like this more and more of where someone literally comes in with a plan to screw over a group or at least formulates it fairly quickly upon arrival.

Im not player hating but it seems Gen Y or whatever you call people in their 20s including many docs have a "Fifth Column" approach to employers now. I think there was an article somewhere I was glancing at that said 20% of young people arent just disatisfied with work, they are actively trying to sabotage their employer!

Once again Im not player hating, this is an obvious evolutionary arms race we are witnessing.

(Grabs the popcorn..)

 

[LADoc00]

But, ultimately, I feel like women get a pretty unfair amount of pressure oftentimes regarding when they choose to have kids.

Jared, interesting perspective. Where I am is there no "fair", fairness was a dream that died long ago probably on the lips of idealistic Lincoln Brigade sap at fall of Barcelona.

But in terms of having kids it seems the best bet are large institutional employeers like Kaiser or a University system. Right?

PS- Wasnt Univ of Ark where Bruce Smoller ended up in Dermpath? What happened to that guy? He just like vanished...

 

[yaah]

PS- Wasnt Univ of Ark where Bruce Smoller ended up in Dermpath? What happened to that guy? He just like vanished...

He didn't vanish...look at the first name on the list of officers on this page: http://uscap.org/home.htm

 

[yaah]

Is it common for people to get their life all shored up, have kids etc while an employee on someone's dime and then make a bolt for practice ownership once they have that out of the way? Seems crazy ill advised to burn down every bridge in sight a mere 3-5 years of training...

I'm confused - if she was essentially 100% partner salary at the outset how does this even fit in?

Physicians change jobs more than most think. I wonder what the average # jobs for physicians is these days. In my group I think the median is 2nd job, some are 3rd job, some are first. But our group is an end point, no one really ever leaves.

I don't think you are accurate when you say new physicians are imploding or burning bridges. There are obviously some who come out of training who it is clear are not that well suited for the career. They make themselves known pretty quick. They tend to bounce around from job to job (they still keep finding jobs and not necessarily bad ones either). And lots of others are very lifestyle oriented. But others are quite intense. I do think, in general, the whole "work-life balance" thing is MUCH more important to the younger generation than the older one. The other issue is that younger physicians seem to be more likely to be married to other MDs or similar minded professionals than the older generation, which causes other issues.

 

[Pathologee]

Rule 1.) There is no sympathy for the Devil. Yes indeed as someone pointed ALWAYS look out for no1.

That said the practice I heard this from hired said person at nearly 100% of partnership salary at day 1, which I said was a disaster in the making.

Then let said person take their entire vacation alotment for like the first 2 years paid THEN had to give her the mandated 6 weeks paid maternity THEN the person left at first chance!

So, shame on them for being "weak minds" and allowing a 20s something year old noob to use Jedi mind tricks on them.

The strange thing is Im hearing stories like this more and more of where someone literally comes in with a plan to screw over a group or at least formulates it fairly quickly upon arrival.

Im not player hating but it seems Gen Y or whatever you call people in their 20s including many docs have a "Fifth Column" approach to employers now. I think there was an article somewhere I was glancing at that said 20% of young people arent just disatisfied with work, they are actively trying to sabotage their employer!

Once again Im not player hating, this is an obvious evolutionary arms race we are witnessing.

(Grabs the popcorn..)

I don't see where she broke any rules. She maximized all benefits that were offered to her by your buddy. She was smart to take her vacation first, then have kids because she knew it would be paid.

You said wear dog collars so that we will be fed. At 100% salary right off the bat, this lady was probably working like a dog. She was just eating what was on her plate.

Lets simplify it. If this was Monopoly, she would own the whole second half of the board (with hotels), and all the railroads and utilities. She would have then sat in jail (twice) and collected while all the other players landed on her squares, without even trying to get out. After she finally got out of jail, she would have counted her money, and declared herself the winner. She would have then went and played Life, because the money is in larger denominations and there is less micromanaging so she could spend her time in between turns doing other things. She is the ultimate player. Why playa hate, when you can participate?

 

[member0007]

Is it just me or are new physicians blazin a trend of going into the community and either imploding or doing something crazy to try to screw over their group?

I just talked to a guy who hired what appeared to be a nice young lady, who over a few years made some questionable calls but I figured she was new etc. She then proceeded to have 2 kids and take epic amounts of maternity time all the while being paid of course. Then all the sudden bailed while trying to drag down the group. Crazy. And this is all in the span of just 3 years.

This is the 3rd such story Ive run into in the last 5 years. Most have had an "epic maternity leave" component to the tale. And all havent ended well for either the group or the departing hire..

Im not sure if this is due to young docs changing their priorities with new families or what, but this doesnt bode well for the next generation.

Is it common for people to get their life all shored up, have kids etc while an employee on someone's dime and then make a bolt for practice ownership once they have that out of the way? Seems crazy ill advised to burn down every bridge in sight a mere 3-5 years of training...

You should get over it. Stop with the slandering of women in medicine.

 

[Silent Cool]

Jared, interesting perspective. Where I am is there no "fair", fairness was a dream that died long ago probably on the lips of idealistic Lincoln Brigade sap at fall of Barcelona.

But in terms of having kids it seems the best bet are large institutional employeers like Kaiser or a University system. Right?

PS- Wasnt Univ of Ark where Bruce Smoller ended up in Dermpath? What happened to that guy? He just like vanished...

LADoc,

Having worked previously for a large company I would say yes. I knew several women there who took their maternity leave, then cashed out their vacation, and then left. Large Co.'s generally don't care much about that. Obviously, small, private groups do.

 

[LADoc00]

I don't see where she broke any rules. She maximized all benefits that were offered to her by your buddy. She was smart to take her vacation first, then have kids because she knew it would be paid.

You said wear dog collars so that we will be fed. At 100% salary right off the bat, this lady was probably working like a dog. She was just eating what was on her plate.

Lets simplify it. If this was Monopoly, she would own the whole second half of the board (with hotels), and all the railroads and utilities. She would have then sat in jail (twice) and collected while all the other players landed on her squares, without even trying to get out. After she finally got out of jail, she would have counted her money, and declared herself the winner. She would have then went and played Life, because the money is in larger denominations and there is less micromanaging so she could spend her time in between turns doing other things. She is the ultimate player. Why playa hate, when you can participate?

I agree she took the system for a ride in what I figured would have a been a sweet gig for someone baffling me tbh. I wanted to call her up and tell her to check out SDN and see how bad the job market was! haha

I would guess everyone who starts in any group is "working like a dog", Ive never seen it any other way. I joined a practice and pretty much did the entire practice's case load for like 3 months.

This brings me to my next point: you are a total FOOL unless you implement accrual based leave which I rarely see in Path groups, another sign of poor business skills. Most groups boast 6-8 weeks of vacation per year to applicants and leave it at that. That is a formula for disaster.

What you need to have is system that mirrors large employers like government agencies: 6 months to a year of "probation" where you accrue 1 day/month of vacation/education leave and 1 day/month of sick leave. Then after the probationary period have them accrue at 2 days/month + 1 day/mo sick leave. Then on top of that have a maximal accrual amount so someone cant store up 4 months+ of leave and blow town.

Someone takes 1-2 months off to globetrot around the world or hang with their "peeps" during the probationary period, then have a discussion with them. Not let them do it and hope for the best down the road.

All in all, it seems people will do what they can get away with which is a big reason Ive avoided growing and then having to deal with this crap. One day though I will have to hire people, perhaps several if a few of plans fall into place.

But it does bring up an increasingly tense issue of what to do with women who obviously are planning to start up a family asap after leaving training. In a small 2-4 man group perhaps with multiple locations there will be some careful landmines to dance around. Many groups I interviewed with way back in the day straight up told me they wouldnt hire women in their 20-30s and I would agree as a blanket policy this seemed very harsh at the time, but now that Im "knee deep" in the business of the whole thing of small almost boutique-style specialized healthcare Im seeing it from a different perspective.

From seeing some other small Path groups out there, Im not sure many could weather absences of 2ish months and my gut is telling me as reimbursements get drilled down even more in the next decade this could drive many groups to a tipping point over the issue. Dunno.

 

[2121115]

Actually, I was being serious.

 

[icpshootyz]

Sounds to me like the practice that hired the woman was the problem. Who gets hired at 100% partner pay right off the bat?? You're friend is an idiot. Seems like the woman just took full advantage of what was offered to her. She didn't "owe" them anything. Tell your friend to take some classes on contract writing.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

"What you need to have is system that mirrors large employers like government agencies: 6 months to a year of "probation" where you accrue 1 day/month of vacation/education leave and 1 day/month of sick leave. Then after the probationary period have them accrue at 2 days/month + 1 day/mo sick leave. Then on top of that have a maximal accrual amount so someone cant store up 4 months+ of leave and blow town."



Whoa, you need to change your avitar immediately after posting this.

 

[Euchromatin]

I understand that having a co-resident/fellow or colleague out on maternity leave makes more work for others. But, honestly, when is a "good" time for a woman to have children that doesn't inconvenience others and/or make life impossible for her?

In undergrad, when she is very young and likely not married yet?
In med school, when there is an overwhelming amount of stress and little time for sleep?
In residency, when she is busy and gunning for a fellowship?
In fellowship, when she only has one year to learn everything about skin/breast/blood bank/etc and doesn't want to miss a large portion of her year of training?
In the early years of practice when she wants to look good so she can become partner or get promoted?
Or after she has "made it" and is 35-40+ years old and considered advanced maternal age?

Seems like everyone wants to impose a lot of rules on when women should or shouldn't have babies. Don't get me wrong: there are certainly ways that a woman preparing for maternity leave can help make the transition smoother for her colleagues. But, ultimately, I feel like women get a pretty unfair amount of pressure oftentimes regarding when they choose to have kids.

I could not possibly agree more with this post. I'm hoping not to have any little Euchromatins until I've been in practice for at least a year or two (and not screwing over my colleagues while doing so if I've found a good gig), but there is definitely no "good" time to do it.

 

[pathdoc33]

It is a very real problem, why candycoat it? It's not "slander" of women. They take advantage of these allowances, and who wouldn't? Never mind the costs to the business or the unfairness to the coworkers. I don't blame the women as much as the system that encourages the conspicuous consumption of the cake as well as its possession -- having children is a choice, presumably a conscious one. If you choose to have a child, you choose all the gains and losses therein. I would not be as patently offended by the concept if it was extended to other walks of life. I buy a new Beemer in San Diego and want to enjoy it by driving it home to Milwaukee. My employer should owe me that time off paid, right? Maybe that analogy is a little OTT. How about a honeymoon? Also a significant, family-based life event, but also a choice.

 

[Kilgoretrout 65]

The job market must not be that bad if someone can screw over their group after being instantly made full partner.

 

[icpshootyz]

It is a very real problem, why candycoat it? It's not "slander" of women. They take advantage of these allowances, and who wouldn't? Never mind the costs to the business or the unfairness to the coworkers. I don't blame the women as much as the system that encourages the conspicuous consumption of the cake as well as its possession -- having children is a choice, presumably a conscious one. If you choose to have a child, you choose all the gains and losses therein. I would not be as patently offended by the concept if it was extended to other walks of life. I buy a new Beemer in San Diego and want to enjoy it by driving it home to Milwaukee. My employer should owe me that time off paid, right? Maybe that analogy is a little OTT. How about a honeymoon? Also a significant, family-based life event, but also a choice.

I think you're a little off in your comparisons. Maternity leave is a social good, actually mandated by the federal government. A honeymoon is a vacation that you simply use your vacation time for. And since the federal government only mandates unpaid leave for maternity leave, I don't see the big deal. Just don't pay her when she's not working if you're that upset about her reproducing. Jeez, paternity leave must really ruffle your feathers, huh?

 

[LADoc00]

I think you're a little off in your comparisons. Maternity leave is a social good, actually mandated by the federal government. A honeymoon is a vacation that you simply use your vacation time for. And since the federal government only mandates unpaid leave for maternity leave, I don't see the big deal. Just don't pay her when she's not working if you're that upset about her reproducing. Jeez, paternity leave must really ruffle your feathers, huh?

Im not disagreeing with you at all, in fact I agree, but claiming X is some type of social good and needs special treatment in the workplace is ABSURD.

What if a coworker claimed we had too many mouths to feed and global warming from everyone having kids and taking mass maternity leave is going to destroy NYC or some crap? Realize, thats what many democratic libtards sit around fantasize about...

There is no rational agrument for social good here so hanging your hat on that is recipe for fail.

I can almost guarantee at time near future the federally mandated maternity leave will vanish. You cant make a logical non-religious argument for that before a legal entity like SCOTUS.

The left claims the world has plenty of people we just need to throw open our borders and let them stampede in...

Im sure employers could rationalize that forcing an employee to abort by making their maternity leave unusable will save a carbon emission credit or some like that.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

Speaking of immigration.

Did you notice bio reference opened a hispanic laboratory called Buena Salud? Why didnt you think of that LADoc?

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...ll-service-hispanic-laboratory-173475241.html

http://www.laboratoriobuenasalud.com/catalogo-de-pruebas/

Better get ready for Bio coming to Cali if they are taking over Hunter labs as some are saying.

 

[smallcat]

Sounds to me like the practice that hired the woman was the problem. Who gets hired at 100% partner pay right off the bat?? You're friend is an idiot. Seems like the woman just took full advantage of what was offered to her. She didn't "owe" them anything. Tell your friend to take some classes on contract writing.

This. What kind of practice starts an employee at 100% partner salary, and then allows her to take 2 years of vacation time up front on top of 6 weeks of maternity leave? Yeah, she screwed her employer but they sure made it easy for her to do so!

 

[LADoc00]

This. What kind of practice starts an employee at 100% partner salary, and then allows her to take 2 years of vacation time up front on top of 6 weeks of maternity leave? Yeah, she screwed her employer but they sure made it easy for her to do so!

Folks..yes this is a no brainer. Obviously the practice which I only very tangiently know of via a few drinks at some conference in Palm Springs awhile back is about as savvy as a one-eyed churro chart vendor in East LA....

Lesson learned. First order of business would be to have no vacation allowed for like 6 months during the probationary period if you were to hire someone. Then after that, allow it on a accrual based system. Just said we have to resort to that.

Hence why Im far more prone to just having 1099 folks. Show up, get paid. Dont show up, dont get paid. Dont show for a long time, dont get called back. End of story. No hiring, no firing, no mess.

 

[KCShaw]

Eh, I'm of a mind that this is what the world breeds. Can't really complain when the legally abused turn into the legal abusers. I mean, you can, but it's a bit hollow. We spend our youth hearing about and seeing ThoseInPower quite unapologetically selling their souls and the souls of their employees for an extra dime, in or out of medicine, even real or not. I wouldn't really expect anything other than the peons eventually finding a way to turn the tables, even if it may appear short sighted. It's hard for a lot of people to see the big picture at the best of times, and in the days where CEO's rise and fall like waves even they have little motivation to look ahead. In overly broad strokes -- it doesn't really matter whether the problem applies to a specific practice.. those are merely more ripe for the pickin', just like employees who don't at least understand and prepare for the worst aspects of the "game". Given a choice, most would rather be doin' the screwin' rather than gettin' screwed, so to speak.

As for maternity issues, well, I think folks just want to feel like the situation is reasonably fair. Give maternity leave, give paternity leave -- at least most folks have an opportunity. But separate from that no-one wants to feel like they're getting screwed just because someone -else- gets a couple or so extra months "off" (no-one with kids would call that "off", but everyone else probably would). And there's really no reasonable way around that. Give all the other employees directly affected by an absence free leave after a co-worker gets back from mat/pat leave? Or make all mat/pat leave unpaid with maybe bonuses to the directly affected co-workers? Or leave all that person's work for when they get back? Those aren't likely to fly. What the grumpy generally see are people making a choice, getting pregnant, and having months off of work, while they have to cover and then scrape together enough vacation time to see grandma on the other coast, most of their time off in a car AAGGHH -- gonna be easy to blame a person other than themselves for that.

 

[member0007]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/01/health/american-way-of-birth-costliest-in-the-world.html?hp

Apparently, if women were not being paid well, they can't even afford to pay for their maternity care! There is definitely a MORAL imperative to increase women's pay to even higher rates than men because of these added costs.

Add to maternity medical cost, the mostly useless placental pathology, that's like a drop in the bucket to the costs of pregnancy care in this good old usa but how many times have you literally looked at the red meat pie tartare and wish it didn't end up in the path department to be diagnosed with mild acute chorioaminionitis.

 

[earthworm]

Well, at the risk of sounding politically incorrect, there is some social good that comes out of making it easier for highly educated professional women to procreate. It would likely lead to smart children who will likely succeed in the future workforce.

Man, women get judged for everything- having kids, not having kids, being a working mom, being a stay at home mom, not breastfeeding, taking maternity leave to establish breastfeeding, we just can't win.

About half of pregnancies are unplanned. About a third of deliveries are c-sections. About 17% of mothers exclusively breastfeed for 6 months, which is recommended by the WHO. For these reasons, i believe mandatory maternity leave is important and I don't think it's going anywhere.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

Well, at the risk of sounding politically incorrect, there is some social good that comes out of making it easier for highly educated professional women to procreate. It would likely lead to smart children who will likely succeed in the future workforce.

Man, women get judged for everything- having kids, not having kids, being a working mom, being a stay at home mom, not breastfeeding, taking maternity leave to establish breastfeeding, we just can't win.

About half of pregnancies are unplanned. About a third of deliveries are c-sections. About 17% of mothers exclusively breastfeed for 6 months, which is recommended by the WHO. For these reasons, i believe mandatory maternity leave is important and I don't think it's going anywhere.

OTHER WOMEN seem to be doing most of the judging. You are your own worst enemy.

 

[earthworm]

can't argue with that!

 

[Kunu]

Was this friend of yours running his practice like you claim to- where you hire new folks for pennies on the dollar and keep a majority of the PC for yourself since new pathologists are so abundant you can get them for nothing?

If so, are you complaining when these same underpaid employees take advantage of the writing within their own contract (that your friend also signed)? You've specifically mentioned that many of these young docs prefer lifestyle over salary. She seems to just be enjoying her 6 weeks or 12 weeks paid maternity leave. And then apparently she felt that she'd rather stay home, and felt no loyalty to the guy giving her 1/10th of what she was billing.

If this is the case, Boo-f$^&ing-hoo.

THIS +100000000000
I have numerous acquaintances and friends who have been hired by jackass self-entitiled, greedy, selfish "partners" who profit off of, use, slave and spit-out new trainees out the other end. The attitude of most PP pathologists towards new pathologists is pathetic, especially considering in my experience the majority of PP pathologists >10 years out of training are a Fing joke as far as skill, knowledge, and work ethic. Nevermind the septogenerian cohort who wont retire despite their brain is mush because they just cant let go of the moneytrain.

 

[LADoc00]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/01/health/american-way-of-birth-costliest-in-the-world.html?hp

Apparently, if women were not being paid well, they can't even afford to pay for their maternity care! There is definitely a MORAL imperative to increase women's pay to even higher rates than men because of these added costs.

Add to maternity medical cost, the mostly useless placental pathology, that's like a drop in the bucket to the costs of pregnancy care in this good old usa but how many times have you literally looked at the red meat pie tartare and wish it didn't end up in the path department to be diagnosed with mild acute chorioaminionitis.

There is no moral imperative for me to help someone pay for their kids...just like there is no moral imperative to block gay marriage or stop the NSA from spying on us etc.

Just stop posting MORAL imperative, you are using the phrase wrong!

Its a moral imperative to help someone who has fallen and dying on the sidewalk. That is the correct use of the term. Moral imperative doesnt imply everyone dropping everything and helping you with your crap. mkay?

 

[member0007]

There is no moral imperative for me to help someone pay for their kids...just like there is no moral imperative to block gay marriage or stop the NSA from spying on us etc.

Just stop posting MORAL imperative, you are using the phrase wrong!

Its a moral imperative to help someone who has fallen and dying on the sidewalk. That is the correct use of the term. Moral imperative doesnt imply everyone dropping everything and helping you with your crap. mkay?

There is a MORAL imperative to pay WOMEN more.

 

[LADoc00]

There is a MORAL imperative to pay WOMEN more.

GD! No there is no moral imperative to pay anyone anything, literally NONE.

It is common sense if you feel underpaid to ask for a raise but it is no employers' moral imperative to suddenly wake up and pay you more. It's also good sense to make sure you get paid parity before taking a job with other like skilled people.


GO AWAY! damn...

all this moral imperative crap makes you come off as Angelina Jolie begging for someone to help the trapped kids in Darfur. You are well within your right to go help the kids in Darfur OR pay all women more. But aside from pity guilting everyone, you fail. Go away.

 

[member0007]

GD! No there is no moral imperative to pay anyone anything, literally NONE.

It is common sense if you feel underpaid to ask for a raise but it is no employers' moral imperative to suddenly wake up and pay you more. It's also good sense to make sure you get paid parity before taking a job with other like skilled people.


GO AWAY! damn...

all this moral imperative crap makes you come off as Angelina Jolie begging for someone to help the trapped kids in Darfur. You are well within your right to go help the kids in Darfur OR pay all women more. But aside from pity guilting everyone, you fail. Go away.

The MORAL imperative is known as the Lilly Ledbetter Act. Check out the wikipedia article and note that there is a 180 day limit on filing a lawsuit on this cause of action which is reset with each paycheck that the scrooge tries to pocket away from the woman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly_Ledbetter_Fair_Pay_Act_of_2009

 

[LADoc00]

wth are you blathering about? What does that have to do at all with paying women MORE?

Go away. Case closed.

 

[KCShaw]

Evidently it's all in our heads anyway, so it's okay if one person's moral imperative != another's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_imperative

 

[2121115]

WTF is this thread even about anymore?

 

[twentyone]

WTF is this thread even about anymore?

It's a case study in why the U.S. has the same quality maternity leave as Papua New Guinea. You know, for all the working women who live there.

 

[twentyone]

I understand that having a co-resident/fellow or colleague out on maternity leave makes more work for others. But, honestly, when is a "good" time for a woman to have children that doesn't inconvenience others and/or make life impossible for her?

In undergrad, when she is very young and likely not married yet?
In med school, when there is an overwhelming amount of stress and little time for sleep?
In residency, when she is busy and gunning for a fellowship?
In fellowship, when she only has one year to learn everything about skin/breast/blood bank/etc and doesn't want to miss a large portion of her year of training?
In the early years of practice when she wants to look good so she can become partner or get promoted?
Or after she has "made it" and is 35-40+ years old and considered advanced maternal age?

Seems like everyone wants to impose a lot of rules on when women should or shouldn't have babies. Don't get me wrong: there are certainly ways that a woman preparing for maternity leave can help make the transition smoother for her colleagues. But, ultimately, I feel like women get a pretty unfair amount of pressure oftentimes regarding when they choose to have kids.

Why are you putting women on maternity leave on heavy service? Isn't this just setting her up for resentment from her colleagues? You should be putting the woman on some BS research rotation where there's no service and no call and then no one gets any more work than they would otherwise have!

 

[mlw03]

Why are you putting women on maternity leave on heavy service? Isn't this just setting her up for resentment from her colleagues? You should be putting the woman on some BS research rotation where there's no service and no call and then no one gets any more work than they would otherwise have!

Your reply shows you're not in academia. Scheduling is hard in ideal circumstances, and scheduling residency rotations around pregnancy is not easy. I'm a guy, but I get the difficulty for women trying to have a kid before their ovaries shrivel up and die. There isn't a good time, as the previous poster made clear, before darn near advanced maternal age. And as docs, we know the risk to mom and baby that come with that.

Americans have some messed up priorities when it comes to family-career balance. Canadians have much more reasonable attitudes that recognize that there are more important things than how much one can work.

 

[KCShaw]

Yeah, in residency there was usually someone who was at high risk of having to do an additional surg path or autopsy or other service rotation which they otherwise would not have had to do and did not want to do. But for the most part, especially if we had reasonable notice, we could flip around some of the junior residents who needed certain additional rotations anyway. Still, it's pretty dependent on luck of the schedules as far as what folks had or hadn't already done or still needed to do, and how many long leaves you have to work around in a given year or 4.

And that doesn't even get us to full time attending jobs, as employers may have to not only pay for leave but also pay for a locum to fill in in certain cases -- I mean, there's a reason that's a full time job. I don't envy would-be parents who want to build a family and not just a nest egg, don't get me wrong, I've been there, but I also don't envy employers who have to either include some big numbers in the budget ahead of time or make a lot of adjustments on the fly which are likely to tick off someone...those taking leave, those left behind to do the extra work, clients, and/or wallets.

 

[twentyone]

Your reply shows you're not in academia. Scheduling is hard in ideal circumstances, and scheduling residency rotations around pregnancy is not easy. I'm a guy, but I get the difficulty for women trying to have a kid before their ovaries shrivel up and die. There isn't a good time, as the previous poster made clear, before darn near advanced maternal age. And as docs, we know the risk to mom and baby that come with that.

Americans have some messed up priorities when it comes to family-career balance. Canadians have much more reasonable attitudes that recognize that there are more important things than how much one can work.

I am in an academic practice, and involved in making the schedule. When you are scheduling maternity leaves, there are a thousand ways to do it so you're not screwing anyone- call wise or service wise.. The inability (or disinclination) to do so makes me think that these unfortunately knocked up ladies in your programs (for those of you in academia) are being punished.