Proof that the job market sucks.

[wild0ne]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

You misunderstand my post. I am actually asserting that the job market is not the greatest. That is why some people are tacking on fellowship after fellowship to increase one's competitiveness in this job market. Oh, and by the way, I actually agree with exPCM and yaah (and others you fail to mention) eye to eye on many points.

I never asserted that completing a fellowship does not favor landing a good job...are you insane? That's a bit counterintuitive

My assertion is that, in this job market, people do complete fellowships to try to get their feet in the door when it comes to good jobs. Community private practice jobs who DO seek generalist-minded folks who are BE/BC in AP and CP are asking for more than just basic training; instead, more and more, they are now dictating matters by asking for fellowship training as well. This is because there is an increased supply of graduates.

People seem to do fellowships not because they want to but because they feel they have to. This mentality leads some to pursue "competitive fellowships" outside one's interest area. For instance, I knew someone who was interested in gyne-path but felt that because gyne-path was not marketable, decided that derm-path was the way to go. And she hated looking at skin because of job issues. I felt bad for her because she is going to be less happy going down this road.

Hence, my assertion is that if the job market is GREAT, one should be able to land a good job easily with AP + CP + 0 fellowships (i.e., 4 yrs of training, not 5 or 6). Of course, this is a bit of a hyperbole (as was my last post) but I am trying to make a point with a little bit of shock value 🙂

The other point was responded to by 2121115 and I have nothing to add because I am in agreement with him/her. Especially point #2...

You make a lot of assertions in your post(s), but few that are coherent or concise. I'm not sure if this intentional anymore. Perhaps adding a little less "shock" and more "value" to your posts would allow them to taken more seriously.

The key part of your previous post that was objectionable included the "need" for fellowships "in this job market": My assertion is that, in this job market, people do complete fellowships to try to get their feet in the door when it comes to good jobs.

Do you find it often that in most job markets, advanced training does not favor landing "good jobs", or even better jobs? Again, the reference to keep in mind is this supposed terrible "job market".

If your complaint is about the deterioration of autonomy and respect amongst pathologists, well ... welcome to the party, you're not exactly alone among physicians.

If you seek autonomy, respect, and to take home the full profit of your work, you're more than welcome to compete and open your own lab/practice and market it without the MBAs. If not, again, welcome to the party. Consolidation and corporatization are forces many professions deal (and have dealt) with.

I'm on no particular side here. It's just frustrating to come on this board and read about a few legitimate arguments unique to pathology (oversupply, suboptimal job-market), and a large number that aren't.

We have arguably, one of the best gigs in medicine: opportunities for challenging/interesting work, relatively great hours and pay (again, depends on your perspective; mine is humble), less fears from mid-level encroachment, etc. Put it in perspective.

 

[rockit]

You make a lot of assertions in your post(s), but few that are coherent or concise. I'm not sure if this intentional anymore. Perhaps adding a little less "shock" and more "value" to your posts would allow them to taken more seriously.

The key part of your previous post that was objectionable included the "need" for fellowships "in this job market": My assertion is that, in this job market, people do complete fellowships to try to get their feet in the door when it comes to good jobs.

Do you find it often that in most job markets, advanced training does not favor landing "good jobs", or even better jobs? Again, the reference to keep in mind is this supposed terrible "job market".

If your complaint is about the deterioration of autonomy and respect amongst pathologists, well ... welcome to the party, you're not exactly alone among physicians.

If you seek autonomy, respect, and to take home the full profit of your work, you're more than welcome to compete and open your own lab/practice and market it without the MBAs. If not, again, welcome to the party. Consolidation and corporatization are forces many professions deal (and have dealt) with.

I'm on no particular side here. It's just frustrating to come on this board and read about a few legitimate arguments unique to pathology (oversupply, suboptimal job-market), and a large number that aren't.

We have arguably, one of the best gigs in medicine: opportunities for challenging/interesting work, relatively great hours and pay (again, depends on your perspective; mine is humble), less fears from mid-level encroachment, etc. Put it in perspective.

Nice self-martyrdom Dr. Humble. Maybe instead of being "humble" you should realize that it's in the interest of doctors to be independent from large corporate interests. It's not humble to sit aside while other people take YOUR pay, it's idiotic. You're not humble, you're passive.

 

[yaah]

Nice self-martyrdom Dr. Humble. Maybe instead of being "humble" you should realize that it's in the interest of doctors to be independent from large corporate interests.

That's becoming next to impossible. The best you can hope for now is being "relatively" independent. Most hospitals seem to be part of mega-conglomerates or systems, and you have to negotiate with them for business. And in many specialties, being autonomous requires heavy investment in technology and material that can often not be done without help from someone else (like a corporate interest). Take gastroenterologists, for example. To be independent they like to own their own equipment - but that equipment is difficult to purchase when they are starting out. So they get a discount from a mega corporation on purchase or lease and in return they send lab business to the same mega corporation. Are they independent? Are doctors who work for "physician owned" hospitals more independent? Medicine is so techno-heavy these days that being independent is quite hard.

 

[2121115]

That's becoming next to impossible. The best you can hope for now is being "relatively" independent. Most hospitals seem to be part of mega-conglomerates or systems, and you have to negotiate with them for business. And in many specialties, being autonomous requires heavy investment in technology and material that can often not be done without help from someone else (like a corporate interest). Take gastroenterologists, for example. To be independent they like to own their own equipment - but that equipment is difficult to purchase when they are starting out. So they get a discount from a mega corporation on purchase or lease and in return they send lab business to the same mega corporation. Are they independent? Are doctors who work for "physician owned" hospitals more independent? Medicine is so techno-heavy these days that being independent is quite hard.

Agree on those points. However, those are a different category of issues than a pathologist working as an employee of a gastroenterologist or urologist. In one of our recent CAP management conferences for residents this arrangement was presented as a legitimate work scenario for pathologists in a "ho-hum" sort of manner. I was appalled. These are the sort of autonomy issues that pathologists deal with which aren't really an issue for other fields. It is professionally insulting.

 

[pathstudent]

Out of curiosity,

What percentage of private groups of sold their practices to larger corporations (ameripath, quest, etc..)? Have most or just a few? That is another way where pathology salaries have degraded. I am sure it provides a huge windfall for senior partners at the ends of their careers but it means that all future young associates will forever be salaried employees making less than if they were part of an independent group.

 

[rockit]

Agree on those points. However, those are a different category of issues than a pathologist working as an employee of a gastroenterologist or urologist. In one of our recent CAP management conferences for residents this arrangement was presented as a legitimate work scenario for pathologists in a "ho-hum" sort of manner. I was appalled. These are the sort of autonomy issues that pathologists deal with which aren't really an issue for other fields. It is professionally insulting.

Exactly, in addition, there are not (as far as I know) multi-state mega-groups in GI or Cards or even Rads. A large portion of pathology services on the East Coast are provided by companies that employ pathologists rather than being run by pathologists.

 

[pathstudent]

I interviewed at Oregon University for ****s and giggles. The PD there told me that he was formerly in private practice and took over trans med there because all of private practice in Portland had been sold out to reference labs. He said it pretty much sucked so he went into academics when he saw in open job.

Let's face it. Pathology is a great field but it has been gang raped by MBAs. If you love pathology but want to make $$$, go into surgical subspecialties, rads, derm, cards or GI.

If you love pathology and don't care about $$$, then go academics.

 

[cookypuss3]

Agree on those points. However, those are a different category of issues than a pathologist working as an employee of a gastroenterologist or urologist. In one of our recent CAP management conferences for residents this arrangement was presented as a legitimate work scenario for pathologists in a "ho-hum" sort of manner. I was appalled. These are the sort of autonomy issues that pathologists deal with which aren't really an issue for other fields. It is professionally insulting.

Is it? As others have suggested, it's virtually impossible to simply hang a shingle on the side of your office now and start some self-made, self-managed practice from scratch. We do need, to some extent, to collaborate with others to practice. I don't mind if evil Nick Necktie has a piece of the pie if he's the one that set it up and keeps it going. It's rather implausible to suggest that the almighty pathologist has the fortitude (not to mention the hours in a day) to keep a successful practice/business afloat and growing.

While the pathologist-as-employee scenario does represent one extreme end of the spectrum, it doesn't surprise me that it's as prevalent as it is. The level of apathy amongst my peers is discouraging. They don't want to have to be bothered to do anything besides show up at 8:30, lift the slides with their neatly manicured fingers, look at cases only in their area of interest, and go home at 4:30 (or maybe only work three days a week, if they are parents, which is also a growing subpopulation of pathologists -- working moms). As long as there are people like this who just want to clock in and out, there will be urologists and GIs hiring them.

 

[yaah]

I am sure it provides a huge windfall for senior partners at the ends of their careers but it means that all future young associates will forever be salaried employees making less than if they were part of an independent group.

It's not just young associates - there are some groups set up so that only a couple of the pathologists are the true shareholders, such that a buyout enriches only a couple of the members. There are lots of groups who treat partnership like skull and bones. It's pathetic. I am not sure which is worse for the profession - these groups or the pod labs.

 

[LADoc00]

It's not just young associates - there are some groups set up so that only a couple of the pathologists are the true shareholders, such that a buyout enriches only a couple of the members. There are lots of groups who treat partnership like skull and bones. It's pathetic. I am not sure which is worse for the profession - these groups or the pod labs.

Mmm yep...I completely agree but now seeing the landscape through a different set of glasses, I can totally see why these senior docs do it. There is literally NO REASON to work hard to retain pathology talent due to oversupply.

I went to a recent local "skull and bones" meeting of higher end practice owners and it was quite apparent none of the employer-types really cared whether their junior employees stayed or left. They didnt even have names, just monikers like "The dermpath dude at BFE station 1".

At the end of the day, senior pathologists look out for themselves and their pocketbook. If they can bag another 100-200K/year per associate, why the heck not? The current system offers no incentive to share the pirate booty. There is no way a junior guy is going to leave with any business. The junior guy/girl isnt even a brand, they are a nameless stack of path skills working the meat and readily replaceable.

None of this will change unless training programs are radically reduced.

Yaah, you are looking at the EFFECTS of oversupply (poor treatment of newbies, PODs etc) and not the CAUSE🙂

 

[BrainPathology]

Back on topic though, is there anyone on this board currently who is looking for a job to start in July (or soon thereafter) 2010? We have a lot of people who know this guy who heard from a kid who's going with this girl who had trouble finding a job a couple years ago, but anyone currently? Or having success? I haven't talked much to too many current job applicants. The only two I have talked to, one already has a job and the other is going on two interviews this month. One of the interviews sounded like a mediocre job. I also have a facebook friend who should be looking but hasn't started yet.

This isn't me personally but the other person who graduated from my "small community program" last year just signed a contract. It's in the midwest (where this person hoped to go) 2 years to partnership track, 200k+ to start, 3rd month of heme fellowship. This person is close to where family, friends and where they grew up. Not sure but I know that not too many interviews were involved to land the job they wanted.

I'm looking for work myself but a lot more slowly. I have an extra year built in because of my fellowship. I have had initial discussions with a couple places that seem like good leads so far.

 

[pathstudent]

Mmm yep...I completely agree but now seeing the landscape through a different set of glasses, I can totally see why these senior docs do it. There is literally NO REASON to work hard to retain pathology talent due to oversupply.

I went to a recent local "skull and bones" meeting of higher end practice owners and it was quite apparent none of the employer-types really cared whether their junior employees stayed or left. They didnt even have names, just monikers like "The dermpath dude at BFE station 1".

At the end of the day, senior pathologists look out for themselves and their pocketbook. If they can bag another 100-200K/year per associate, why the heck not? The current system offers no incentive to share the pirate booty. There is no way a junior guy is going to leave with any business. The junior guy/girl isnt even a brand, they are a nameless stack of path skills working the meat and readily replaceable.

None of this will change unless training programs are radically reduced.

Yaah, you are looking at the EFFECTS of oversupply (poor treatment of newbies, PODs etc) and not the CAUSE🙂

How lovely. It almost makes me want to call Obama and demand the complete socialization of medicine.

 

[LADoc00]

How lovely. It almost makes me want to call Obama and demand the complete socialization of medicine.

Would not change a thing you realize...Even under a single payor model all that would happen would be associate pathologists would be paid LESS.

The best you could hope for would be all pathologists/physicians in general to merely be govt employees which I can pretty much guarantee will never happen.

This is "I have a solution but I have no f'ing clue what Im doing and my solution will make matters worse" type of idea.

Comprende?

 

[pathstudent]

Would not change a thing you realize...Even under a single payor model all that would happen would be associate pathologists would be paid LESS.

The best you could hope for would be all pathologists/physicians in general to merely be govt employees which I can pretty much guarantee will never happen.

This is "I have a solution but I have no f'ing clue what Im doing and my solution will make matters worse" type of idea.

Comprende?

Yeah that's what I hope is that they make us all GOVT employees and our checks come straight from DC, yours and your employees. All for the same amount.

It will be worse for you and better for your employees, because you won't be able to F them in the Ass anymore.

 

[LADoc00]

Yeah that's what I hope is that they make us all GOVT employees and our checks come straight from DC, yours and your employees. All for the same amount.

It will be worse for you and better for your employees, because you won't be able to F them in the Ass anymore.

OMG, this maybe a classic post.

I hope you find it pathstudent, I hope you find it:

...May cherry gumdrops rain down from the sky, the roads be paved with twizzlers and the buildings made of twix bars for you too!

 

[2121115]

Yeah that's what I hope is that they make us all GOVT employees and our checks come straight from DC, yours and your employees. All for the same amount.

It will be worse for you and better for your employees, because you won't be able to F them in the Ass anymore.

LOL! First post in a while that has made me laugh around here. Good one. 👍

 

[BrainPathology]

Mmm yep...I completely agree but now seeing the landscape through a different set of glasses, I can totally see why these senior docs do it. There is literally NO REASON to work hard to retain pathology talent due to oversupply.

I went to a recent local "skull and bones" meeting of higher end practice owners and it was quite apparent none of the employer-types really cared whether their junior employees stayed or left. They didnt even have names, just monikers like "The dermpath dude at BFE station 1".

At the end of the day, senior pathologists look out for themselves and their pocketbook. If they can bag another 100-200K/year per associate, why the heck not? The current system offers no incentive to share the pirate booty. There is no way a junior guy is going to leave with any business. The junior guy/girl isnt even a brand, they are a nameless stack of path skills working the meat and readily replaceable.

None of this will change unless training programs are radically reduced.

Yaah, you are looking at the EFFECTS of oversupply (poor treatment of newbies, PODs etc) and not the CAUSE🙂

In being around here the last 5 years most people's posts about oversupply base it on the (supposed) fact that programs are taking advantage of free money and labor by training too many people - because they are evil.
You and all of your high end practice owner colleagues are then forced by the economic realities of the evil programs (who by many arguments here, have no incentive to reduce training spots because they get cheap labor and subsidization for training slots) to take advantage of free money and labor by the oversupply of pathologists.<O😛</O😛
<O😛</O😛

Because evil programs are training so many pathologists through measured, strategized, conspiracies to leech money from the gov't and get free labor from residents, practice owners who otherwise are reflexively compassionate, fair, and collegial are forced, through no fault of your own, through economic realities caused by evil training programs, to treat all new pathologists as nameless commodities, easily replaceable, "working the meat" and simply a way to make an extra 100 - 200k a year for yourselves?

<O😛</O😛I'm not sure who should be burned at the stake first for this perceived situation, but I'm pretty sure that none of the attendings in my evil program are lavishing in Dom Perignon, weekends at the Half Moon Bay Ritz-Carlton and the rides in the GranCabrio Maserati.

 

[LADoc00]

but I'm pretty sure that none of the attendings in my evil program are lavishing in Dom Perignon, weekends at the Half Moon Bay Ritz-Carlton and the rides in the GranCabrio Maserati.

Nice hyperbole?...it has nothing to do with evil.

The current situation has been caused by overtraining, its that simple. All the stuff people bitch about is a product of that. Taking away the mass excess of trainees and things, over a long enough time horizon, WILL revert back to normal balance.

Obviously all attendings are not leading the glorious lifestyle, far from it, but enough are making ridiculous wages (especially in dermpath...) that they will do almost anything to perpetuate the system.

I honestly dont care if trainees believe me or blow me off, Im merely trying to shed some light on the situation.

Go back to head-in-sand Brain.

 

[lipomas]

He brings up a good point though - the moneyed (monied?) interests have a huge advantage if the status quo is maintained. They like oversupply because they can leverage that. They have far more at stake than attendings at academic programs who are going to continue to draw their salary + benefits + annual raise no matter what. While there are overpaid academics, there are even more overpaid non-academics.

It may not have much to do with evil but it sure as hell as very little to do with morality either. Groups should not continue to pay retired partners, but they do (at the expense of those doing the work). This may be reality but it doesn't make it right. And to pass it off as somehow being all the fault of academics who want to maintain cheap labor is hugely disingenuous.

 

[BrainPathology]

Nice hyperbole?...it has nothing to do with evil.

The current situation has been caused by overtraining, its that simple. All the stuff people bitch about is a product of that. Taking away the mass excess of trainees and things, over a long enough time horizon, WILL revert back to normal balance.

Obviously all attendings are not leading the glorious lifestyle, far from it, but enough are making ridiculous wages (especially in dermpath...) that they will do almost anything to perpetuate the system.

I honestly dont care if trainees believe me or blow me off, Im merely trying to shed some light on the situation.

Go back to head-in-sand Brain.

Of course you don't care, that's why you've been on here as long as I can remember giving out advice to everyone about how everything is disintegrating. And also of course I was using hyperbole, it's hard to avoid when people on this board claim that the pathology world has in fact already ended. I don't think you or other colleagues who own practices are evil (I may be wrong). I also don't think people in your position are any less responsible for the situation that you say you hate so much than any of the training programs.

I don't disagree that there are too many pathologists. But it's a problem of programs not firing pathologists who are incompetent. Or they have no accountability when they promote ones that shouldn't be. I think reducing the number of times you can sit for boards would help, and punish programs who graduate idiots: Fail once and your home program pays for your 2nd sitting. Fail that and your home program is forced to take you back for an extra year of training at their expense (without any subsidy) and at the expense of a 1st year slot for that year. 3<SUP>rd</SUP> fail = you're not board eligible for that exam ever again.
I've seen at least 9 people in my home program that shouldn't have graduated (on paper 7 were competitive.. these weren't 'slacker' med students getting bottom of the barrel jobs) I was able to help get 3 of them fired. One is now internal medicine's problem. The other got a job at a large famous academic institution to finish 3rd and 4th year in ap/cp. 2 are still in training. 1 is in 2<SUP>nd</SUP> fellowship. The other 3 now have jobs in pvt practice, even though one hasn't passed either ap or cp at last word.

<O😛I've seen colleagues do things (sexual harassment, physically threatening upper level residents when they don't like what they are asked to do, leaving work for hours at a time, then coming in at 3am to cut) that would get them fired and/or arrested on the spot in anything but medicine. For some unfathomable reason having an MD, especially in the south, means never getting fired unless you are actually put into jail and can't come into work. It's insane and cutting training spots isn't going to get rid of people who come into the specialty and either aren't right for pathology or shouldn't be in any type of medicine at all.

You can say my head is in the sand all you want but the fact is I'm trying to see all sides of an argument that quite frankly I've only ever seen on the internet here (and at a couple meetings when people from here look like shrieking *****s trying to move this debate off of the internet). Eveyone I ask in person is just fine with the job market.

 

[gbwillner]

I've seen at least 9 people in my home program that shouldn't have graduated (on paper 7 were competitive.. these weren't 'slacker' med students getting bottom of the barrel jobs) I was able to help get 3 of them fired. One is now internal medicine's problem. The other got a job at a large famous academic institution to finish 3rd and 4th year in ap/cp. 2 are still in training. 1 is in 2<SUP>nd</SUP> fellowship. The other 3 now have jobs in pvt practice, even though one hasn't passed either ap or cp at last word.

I would LOVE to know what institution you are talking about...

 

[BrainPathology]

I would LOVE to know what institution you are talking about...

There is no way in hell I would talk so frankly about my program if I intended to say what program it is. But if by the question you're hoping that it's unique - it's not. I've seen the same types of residents in every program I've been to. Either through residents rotating through or visiting or moving for fellowship training, or through seeing attendings come from every manner of famous or unknown programs and still not having a clue.

 

[lipomas]

There is no way in hell I would talk so frankly about my program if I intended to say what program it is. But if by the question you're hoping that it's unique - it's not. I've seen the same types of residents in every program I've been to. Either through residents rotating through or visiting or moving for fellowship training, or through seeing attendings come from every manner of famous or unknown programs and still not having a clue.

You make some interesting points - I have seen some people post on here that "anything less than 100% employment among pathologists is unacceptable" as if that is even theoretically possible. 100% employment is impossible, because there will always be outliers who abuse drugs, perform illegal activities, etc, not to mention those that are simply incompetent.

Should everyone admitted to med school be guaranteed to finish, even if they demonstrate poor performance? No, but they basically are unless they can't pass Step I. Should everyone entering pathology residency be guaranteed a job even if they prove to be poor pathologists? I think not. Others apparently disagree. But I sure as hell do not want to be working with this people as my colleague. Have others met these people? It's frightening. Programs bear a huge amount of responsibility for this problem. The pathologists themselves also do, of course, since many consider anything resembling hard work to be an abomination, yet they still want a high paying job. To me, the boards does a reasonable job of weeding people out, but they could do better. It is programs that need to sack up and start not letting bad residents graduate. Programs look at it as though once the resident is gone from their program, it is no longer their fault or their problem.

 

[LADoc00]

hrm..I dont know if I would post you "helped get 3 fellow residents fired". That's really loco, even for the internet.

You're digging a hole and losing credibility fast:

This is a pointless argument with you as you are: A.) trainee, yet to work a single day outside academia B.) WAAC-type of resident enough to get 3 colleagues bounced C.) from your handle, chose neuropath

 

[BrainPathology]

hrm..I dont know if I would post you "helped get 3 fellow residents fired". That's really loco, even for the internet.

You're digging a hole and losing credibility fast:

This is a pointless argument with you as you are: A.) trainee, yet to work a single day outside academia B.) WAAC-type of resident enough to get 3 colleagues bounced C.) from your handle, chose neuropath

A. is wrong
B. if trying to get people who kill patients out of medicine is something that loses credibility in pathology then by all means bring on the end of the specialty.
C. I did chose neuro.. not sure why that means I can't argue with you. Please explain this - at least 2nd instance - you will dismiss a collegue in pathology over something that I'm sure you'll claim isn't your fault.

 

[LADoc00]

if there were 3 residents "killing patients" in your training program then:
A.) you are in the worst training program on Earth, period.

B.) you are actually an actor in the sequel to Pathology: The Movie.

C.) you are exaggerating on level that would make Baron Münchhausen beam with pride.

 

[igottaquestion]

Nice hyperbole?...it has nothing to do with evil.

The current situation has been caused by overtraining, its that simple. All the stuff people bitch about is a product of that. Taking away the mass excess of trainees and things, over a long enough time horizon, WILL revert back to normal balance.

use professional power to interfere with a free labor market? i thought that in the conservative world markets were supposed to self-correct . . .

 

[2121115]

I don't disagree that there are too many pathologists. But it's a problem of programs not firing pathologists who are incompetent. Or they have no accountability when they promote ones that shouldn't be... I've seen at least 9 people in my home program that shouldn't have graduated (on paper 7 were competitive.. these weren't 'slacker' med students getting bottom of the barrel jobs) I was able to help get 3 of them fired.... I've seen colleagues do things (sexual harassment, physically threatening upper level residents when they don't like what they are asked to do, leaving work for hours at a time, then coming in at 3am to cut) that would get them fired and/or arrested on the spot in anything but medicine....Everyone I ask in person is just fine with the job market.

1. Programs not firing incompetent residents may contribute to a small degree, but this by no means accounts for the full oversupply. The sort of things you are describing are uncommon.

2. 9 people at you program are like that? Geez. Wow.

3. You helped get them fired? Geez. Wow.

4. To play devil's advocate, most people, when asked face to face by someone they know, are going to say they are fine with the job market, mainly to avoid the embarrassment of having to admit failure and say they didn't get a job they wanted. Pride is a bitch.

 

[BrainPathology]

1. Programs not firing incompetent residents may contribute to a small degree, but this by no means accounts for the full oversupply. The sort of things you are describing are uncommon.

2. 9 people at you program are like that? Geez. Wow.

3. You helped get them fired? Geez. Wow.

4. To play devil's advocate, most people, when asked face to face by someone they know, are going to say they are fine with the job market, mainly to avoid the embarrassment of having to admit failure and say they didn't get a job they wanted. Pride is a bitch.

1. I'm not trying to solve the 'oversupply' problem by pointing this out. I'm saying there are doctors out there that should have been trained more stringently or asked to find another career.

2. 9 people out of the 50 pathologists I was either trained by or trained with yes. 10% is not that high but 10% less incompetent pathologists would go a long way toward solving the “oversupply” problem.

3. If I was the only resident trying to get these people fired do you honestly think it would have happened? The 3 that were bounced were continually warned until they were fired or quit on their own. Additionally, I'm not entirely sure why treating pathologists as disposable meat while you bag 100-200k a year off them is nobler than working to insure that the people around you are competent. I didn't say I enjoyed or relished getting rid of incompetent residents. I didn’t say I looked forward to setting other people's career goals back several years. I didn't say I sought them out to target. I didn't say that my goal in any program would be to start curving the performance and getting rid of 10% of everyone I see. I said I see a problem where residents, and more importantly programs, are not held accountable - at all - for what kind of doctors they produce.

<O😛4. You've got a point about pride. It's definitely possible that some of the people I've asked are pretending to like their situation. But, would pride not also push someone who is very successful to advocate that the job market is dismal to make his success be all the more impressive? (or to justify raping his colleagues to earn more for himself and other partners) Anyway, unless my friends are lying to me, they are getting contracts that they are, and that I would be, happy with. I have no doubt that some people here would say that their jobs are bad - in location, length to partner, call, salary, or whatever else they want to quibble with. And that's fine. <O😛

 

[BrainPathology]

if there were 3 residents "killing patients" in your training program then:

They were continually making bad diagnoses, bad cutting decisions, bad attendance decisions etc. Eventually that leads to patients dying sooner or suffering more than they otherwise would have. I didn't say and I think you know I didn't mean they were actively killing patients. I'm sure that without the supervision they receive in residency, patients would be in jeapardy.

If you actually watched that movie (Pathology) beyond the first 10 minutes you have serious serious taste issues. I do to though because I watched the entire movie.. worst...movie...ever.

 

[yaah]

4. To play devil's advocate, most people, when asked face to face by someone they know, are going to say they are fine with the job market, mainly to avoid the embarrassment of having to admit failure and say they didn't get a job they wanted. Pride is a bitch.

Not sure I agree with that - people often underplay their struggles but they don't ignore or dismiss them. There is something to be said for changing expectations, however.

 

[JPR22]

Has anyone seen/heard of residents leaving a program, simply based on the job market? What are people switching into?

 

[yaah]

Has anyone seen/heard of residents leaving a program, simply based on the job market? What are people switching into?

I have not heard of anyone doing this. I have heard of people leaving path residency because they didn't like pathology or because they couldn't cut it.