Yes, I believe that you are correct.
Which is why it will be interesting to see how this case ultimately concludes. I can see a facility scrambling to overcome the fact that it just had a bunch of key employees all walk out en masse when they just need a few more weeks to handle the huge turnover, and I can see a poorly run hospital whining because it is overworking and underpaying its staff. I freely acknowledge that I don’t know what is underlying this case.
Additionally, and as long as I’m speculating, I can imagine a judge signing off on a temporary injunction with a skeptical eye toward the ultimate merits of the case.
Judge: “I hear that you are telling me that patients might die if they have to fly hours away to another hospital, but how is that Ascension’s fault?”
Lawyer: “Your honor, we intend to show that they tortuously interfered with the employment status of these critical employees through a concerted solicitation effort, as evidenced by the fact that they all are changing jobs on the same date.”
“Counselor, this is an at will state. Do these people have employment contracts?”
“No, your honor. But judge, we will show that this was a coordinated campaign of solicitation with full knowledge that it would imperil the good standing of my client.”
“Here’s what I’m going to do. Since you are telling me that there are patients who might die, I’m going to sign this temporary. But you better bring me more than the fact that it is hurting your client’s accreditation, or that these people all decided to go to the same new job, if you want the final. People can work where they want.
In fact, I don’t want to sit on this. If I clear my calendar Monday, can everybody get in here to finish this? The law requires both sides to have a meaningful chance to be heard, so you’ve got the entire afternoon. But then I’m making my ruling.”