RESIDENCY PROGRAMS
Jung v. Ass'n of Am. Med. Colleges,
No. Civ.A.02-0873 (D.D.C. Aug. 12, 2004)
A group of medical school graduates
sued the organizations that administer graduate medical education (such as
the Association of American Medical Colleges, National Resident Matching Program,
American Board of Medical Specialties, and Council of Medical Specialty Societies,
etc.) and many institutions that sponsor medical residency programs (including
hospitals, health systems, medical schools, foundations, etc.), alleging that
those organizations and institutions violated federal antitrust laws.
The graduates
claimed that the National Resident Matching Program eliminates a free and competitive
market for physicians seeking resident positions. In support of that claim,
they argued that residents are forced into the "Match" because
the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education makes graduation from
an accredited residency program a prerequisite for specialty certification.
The graduates further alleged that the organizations and institutions collect
and distribute information regarding resident compensation, allowing them to
fix resident salaries and benefits at anticompetitive levels. In sum, the graduates
alleged that the system for assigning residents to residency programs constitutes
a conspiracy to unreasonably restrain trade, which prevents resident physicians
from achieving enhanced salaries and/or better working conditions.
On February
11, 2004, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia held
that the graduates had adequately alleged that some of the organizations and
institutions engaged in a common agreement to displace competition in the recruitment,
hiring, employment, and compensation of residents. Accordingly, the court decided
to let the case proceed.
However, on April 10, 2004, President Bush signed
into law the Pension Funding Equity Act of 2004, which provides that it "shall
not be unlawful under the antitrust laws to sponsor, conduct, or participate
in a graduate medical education residency matching program, or to agree to
sponsor, conduct, or participate in such a program." In addition, the
statute disallows evidence of participation in a residency matching program
from being admitted in federal court to support any claim alleging a violation
of antitrust laws.
As a result of the new law, on August 12, the United States District Court
for the District of Columbia held that the graduates' complaint failed to state
a claim. Accordingly, the court dismissed the lawsuit.