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.