Some things outside of financials that really should be in associate contracts (and often aren't):
- Full benefits (malpractice, medical, CME, 401k, etc.)
- Clear timeline to partnership
- Equal vote on practice matters after a certain amount of time (staffing, equipment, etc.)
- Description of the buy-in/out process, with the practice paying for an outside evaluation of the value
- Equal call schedule
- Equal payor mix guarantee
- Scope guarantee (partners don't hoard certain diagnoses, hard to put in a contract though)
The problem is way too many podiatry contracts lack most of these items.
Sometimes partnership is never on the table.
Across many industries you might say it is 1/3 overhead for an employe, 1/3 to cover salary and benefits and 1/3 profit for owner Is somewhat typical. I do not think most disagree here. If there were bases of 160 - 180 or more and GOOD benefits with a clear and fair short track to partnership, I doubt people would be complaining about a few percent difference in bonus structure beyond 3 times their collections. If they were making the good base and benefits they would be partner soon enough and enter a more eat what they kill situation beyond overhead in a couple years anyways. Young doctors are just trying to pay their bills and have something a little beyond a middle class lifestyle.
I am not denying the owners are taking a risk. They are and I am sure some have been burned before. The question is why are they not taking a larger risk and offering up a better base and better benefits. There is no simple answer but it is probably one of a few things.
1. There are scared there is not enough business to offer a higher base. Perhaps they were not really busy enough to hire an associate and pay them more than a nurses salary, They are constantly putting pressure on the associate to market and take unpaid call. Not that a little hustle is a bad thing, especially if one feels it is a longterm opportunity and they are not just building the practice for the owner and the next associate when they leave
2. History repeats itself. They are ether trying to make money of an associate like someone did on them or they just feel it is a rite of passage to offer a low base or eat what you kill structure even when real opportunity to do well financially is there. Unfortunately many will say the opportunity is there to far exceed their base or make a fortune on a straight percentage when hiring and the promised potential too often is not there. Podiatry is not like Ortho where an eat what you will kill contract most often results in more than 500,000. We have saturation, take too many poor insurers, perform too many low paying services that should be performed by nurses in the office and have to peddle too many products in the office as a profession. Some podiatrists practice much like an orthopedic surgeon, but for way too many it is more like a a chiropractor having to hustle, sell, and do scammy things.
Are there some podiatry groups that offer a fair situation and are really looking to add another partner? Certainly. They have no associates other than their newest and no turnover. The associate mill has many associates. Lots of these opportunities are also a solo podiatrist looking to add an associate. These could be great opportunities in theory, but often are not. Either the owner is not willing to give up control and ownership or risk their salary going down at all when hiring a new associate or they meant well but were not as busy as they thought. Either way is much more risky than working for a group with a clear history of adding partners but are the more common job opportunities available.
If an associate moved for a job that never really payed them enough to save anything....well they often have to move again for their next job also with no relocation assistance. You can not always find another job in the same city for podiatry unless it is a large metro and many metros are saturated and where associate mills are even more common.
There are also these supergroups. Not sure if they are a good thing or a bad thing for the profession longterm, but are better than many associate jobs as far as base, benefits and being busy enough to get surgical boards knocked out.
I feel saturation is the problem. There are more of the good jobs everyone wants than in the past for podiatry, but not nearly enough. For too many it is still the start out at a dead end and low paying associate job, build your CV and plan your next move, start your own practice (certainly not without a lot of risk) or remain an associate contemplating if staying in the profession is even worth it.