- 13 -
Consortium Agreement, however, states that the Consortium, not
petitioners, determines resident compensation levels.
Petitioners contend that they assist in the provision of
professional liability insurance for residents, as required by
the accreditation standards. The Consolidation Contract,
however, states that the member hospitals, not petitioners,
provide such insurance. Petitioners contend that they assist in
the provision of adequate financial support to residents, as
required by the accreditation standards. The Consolidation
Contract, however, states that the Schools and hospitals, not
petitioners, provide all funding of resident salaries and
benefits. Indeed, the Consortium Agreement states that it is the
Consortium, not petitioners, that generally has responsibility
for ensuring compliance with the accreditation standards.
Consequently, we conclude that petitioners provide the Schools
and hospitals minimal, if any, assistance in meeting these
standards.
Second, petitioners argue that they advance education by
working with the Schools and hospitals to manage program-related
activities. Petitioners, however, do not manage any educational
programs. Petitioners emphasize that they have the right to hire
and fire residents. The Schools and hospitals, however, have an
effective veto over petitioners’ hiring decisions because the
Schools and hospitals have the right to refuse to allow a
resident to perform his or her duties. In addition, the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011