Actually, I don't think that is necessarily the case. It may be for employees that have worked there for a while, but it was made clear to me cases are assigned based on senority and niche areas. Therefore, I could potentially only get 4 cases my first year. But yes, I agree with your first statement.
I have a non compete with very specific wording about what is considered "competing" and it basically only restricts clinical activities with patients. I am currently teaching a class at one local university and serving as a research consultant at another, while occasionally doing paid presentations and writing a book. None of these are considered competing activities. I basically just can't do contract work for another hospital or PP.
Honestly, from everything you’ve posted about this position, it seems not at all worth it.Yes. This noncompete is similar in that it only restricts certain clinical work. Right now I am trying to decide if I should attempt to negotiate and, if so, where I would draw the line. I think a year would be my max.
Honestly, from everything you’ve posted about this position, it seems not at all worth it.
The general business model I am thinking of goes something like this:
Sign many large referral contracts
Higher cheap labor that may or may not be qualified to do the work
Reap $$$ as a middle man
Protect referral contracts from labor using restrictive contracts
Bonus: ruin local economy in that area of the field.
I've seen this with IME, VA C&P evals, SNF/LTC facilities, etc.
Without a guaranteed number of referrals, why sign such a restrictive covenant? Can't work elsewhere in the state for ~$1000, no thanks.
These are the same morons that get crappy offices, with crappy furniture, and then are surprised when they don't get high end patients.
There's much better ways to do business.
Obviously, I disagree. Having a single revenue source is ridiculously risky. Estranging your employees only means they’ll be competitors if you lose that revenue stream.I agree that there is a much better way to do business. However, I disagree that they are morons. The thing all these practices usually have in common is being the only option via a third party payor. When competition does come knocking via access to the payor source, they usually are in trouble. However, some can get so big that they control regional activity.
Obviously, I disagree. Having a single revenue source is ridiculously risky. Estranging your employees only means they’ll be competitors if you lose that revenue stream.