Defendants named in a class-action antitrust lawsuit filed on behalf of physician residents in May have responded with a rash of motions contesting the claim.
The suit, filed against the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP), a host of sponsoring organizations, and all of the nation’s teaching hospitals, claims the match program consistently underpays and overworks residents. It charges that the named groups have illegally contracted and collaborated to eliminate competition in the recruitment, hiring, compensation, and employment of resident physicians.
Plaintiffs, comprising some 200,000 resident physicians in the U.S., seek a jury trial, injunctive relief, and unspecified monetary damages.
Defendants filed responses with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Washington, DC, in September, said Michael Freed, a partner with Much Shelist Freed in Los Angeles, who serves as class counsel.
"We received multiple responses, " he said. "Many defendants answered the complaint, but some moved to dismiss it for failure to state a cause of action. Some moved to compel arbitration, and some contested jurisdiction."
Among those requesting dismissal is the American Medical Association of Chicago. The suit alleges that the AMA participated in a conspiracy to restrain competition in recruitment and compensation, based on its management of the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA), as well as its sponsorship of the NRMP. FREIDA is a public database that includes detailed, employer-specific compensation data about residency programs.
But according to the AMA, FREIDA promotes competition by providing information that helps students make residency choices, while encouraging residency programs to compete by offering the most attractive benefits and compensation packages.
In its court filing, the AMA said the complaint fails to meet standards set by federal antitrust laws. And it asks for a dismissal of claims against it that are due solely to its status as a sponsor of the match program.
"In any event, merely maintaining a database to which medical residency programs have access, as alleged in the complaint, does not restrain anyone," wrote attorney Jack Bierg, lead counsel for the AMA, in the motion filed September 9. "Therefore, it cannot constitute lawful restraint of trade."
The Chicago-based American Hospital Association, also a named defendant, has filed a similar motion, charging that the suit fails to state a specific claim against it. In its response to the suit, the NRMP asked that in the event that motions to dismiss the claims fail, the court should compel arbitration and not a jury trial. The AMA has also petitioned for arbitration.
The match program will continue uninterrupted despite the pending litigation, which could take years to resolve, according to the NRMP.
At a hearing scheduled for October 24, Judge Paul Friedman of the U.S. District Court will establish a timetable for the proceedings. Meanwhile, Freed said his team would develop the next set of responsive pleadings on behalf of plaintiffs, to be filed by December.
By Deborah R. DakinsAuntMinnie.com contributing writer
October 14, 2002
Related Reading
Murky outlook for resident training in wake of new work rules, August 20, 2002
AMA approves new resident work hour rules, June 21, 2002
ACGME cuts residents' hours in the name of safety, June 13, 2002
Residents file suit against U.S. matching program, May 8, 2002
Copyright © 2002 AuntMinnie.com
