Abstract: The Plastic Surgeon As Employee (Plastic Surgery The Meeting)

Saturday, September 24, 2016: 1:15 PM

Nirav B. Patel, MD, MS, JD , Division of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA

Mena Arsalai, JD , McGeorge School of Law, University of the Pacific, Sacramento, CA

Thomas R. Stevenson, MD , Division of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery (Ret.), University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA

Emily Whelan Parento, JD, LLM , McGeorge School of Law, University of the Pacific, Sacramento, CA

Lee L.Q. Pu, MD, PhD, FACS , Division of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA

Presentation PDF file

Introduction:

Plastic surgeons endure years of training yet remain poorly equipped to negotiate their first employment contracts^1-5. We sought to evaluate areas of concern in the typical plastic surgeon contract and identify standard elements that should be included to better preserve surgeons’ interests.

Methods:

A brief pilot survey was sent to California Society of Plastic Surgeons members to evaluate regional demographic data, which provided foundation for a follow up American Society of Plastic Surgeons survey. Responses were anonymous. For both surveys, we asked questions relating to specific contract elements and whether members sought legal counsel in their contract negotiations.

Results:

Over two-month periods, our CSPS survey generated 113 and our ASPS survey generated 404 responses. The in-state and national distributions of members were representative for both organizations.

41.4% and 32.9% of members reported having worked in a group practice consisting of 3 or more surgeons, 27.9% and 22.4% in partnership, and 23.4% and 23.4% in solo practice.

74.5% and 64.2% of members did not seek legal assistance.

For the CSPS, malpractice coverage varied from 51.6% with claims-made, to 21.7% with tail, to 33.0% with none at all. For the ASPS, 42.9% indicated claims-made, 17.2% with tail, 24.4% having unspecified type; 0.75% indicated having none.

63.9% of CSPS members had no disability policy offered by their employers. 26.0% of ASPS members reported employer purchased policies, whereas 64.8% purchased their own. For the ASPS, 72.9% indicated having “own occupation” coverage.

26.4% of CSPS and 22.3% of ASPS members reported annual income of < $100,000; 49.1% and 55.5% reported $101,000 - $200,000; 17.9% and 13.6% reported $201,000 - $300,000; 6.60% and 8.70% reported > $300,000.

Using a five-point scale, 7.69% of CSPS and 9.46% of ASPS members reported being “extremely dissatisfied” with their first contracts, while 24.0% and 24.1% were “perfectly happy".

82 CSPS and 311 ASPS members offered advice. Themes included seeking legal counsel; avoiding non-compete clauses; and going into solo practice.

Conclusion:

As U.S. health care evolves, more plastic surgeons may find themselves employed by institutions. Seeking an attorney may help protect financial and legal interests such as malpractice options and disability coverage. As the employee transitions to the employer, understanding essential contract elements may prove invaluable in recruitment and retention efforts for the next generation of plastic surgeons.

29051 The Plastic Surgeon As Employee