Judge prevents at-will hospital employees from quitting and working new jobs [resolved: they may quit/start new jobs]

[k9bfriender]

@Chefguy

True enough, but if the company paid decent wages and benefits to their employees, the problem wouldn’t exist, so laying blame on the employees just doesn’t wash for me.

Once again, do we know that the company can afford to pay more? It is an assertion that they are just evil greedy bastards that refuse to let go of a single cent, but it is simply not the case that just because someone signs the paycheck, they have infinite resources at their disposal.

@Chefguy

I was once poached from a decent job for twice the pay, then found myself job hunting six months later. I knew the risks and took them.

But, were you in a position where your absence would decrease the available care to patients?

@Chronos

If they can’t afford to pay their employees to do the work that they do, then there’s a problem somewhere.

Right, our entire medical and healthcare system.

@Chronos

But the solution is not to force their employees to work for less pay than other employers are offering.

As a permanent measure, no. As a temporary stopgap to ensure that there are no dead bodies at the end of the day, I’d say it’s not inappropriate.

Let’s take an extreme example. You are in the middle of open heart surgery, and you get a call from the hospital across town that says that if you drop what you are doing, and come in right now, they will give you twice the pay. Is it your current employer who is in the wrong when they can’t afford to match the offer, but still wants you to finish the surgery? Is that forcing you to work for less pay than other employers are offering?

@Chronos

An employer is someone who’s willing to pay employees to do something. There’s only one of those in this discussion, and nobody but you is hating on them.

See, you are hating on ThedaCare here, without knowing anything about their situation. They won’t match the offer, therefore, they are just greedy bastards.

Don’t you think that if they could match the offer, they would, rather than lose a majority of their stroke response staff?

@Chronos

And this injunction doesn’t protect any lives. It doesn’t do anything at all for ThedaCare patients

If the employees stay on until at the very least, the current patients can be transferred to other facilities, then that certainly does. If they don’t, then those patients are left without any care. I don’t know exactly that the result of that is, but it certainly is going to be a negative outcome for them.

@Chronos

it imperils the livelihood of the employees,

Not really. They still have a job that seems to pay pretty well. They just want more money.

@Chronos

and it endangers the lives of Ascension patients.

Nope, Ascension doesn’t actually have more patients than it has staff to deal with yet. That’s why they are poaching these employees, so they can take more patients.

@BigT

All people are doing is looking at the situation. Only one side is trying to get the courts involved rather than pay their workers more.

And if that side is looking out for the patients that will suffer and possibly die as a result of this, then that seems appropriate.

@BigT

And not because of some claim they don’t have the money,

What reason do you claim that they have for not paying more?

@BigT

But I question the irreparable harm that would have happened if the judge had just waited until Monday to decide.

Irreparable harm also comes to patients who die due to lack of staff to treat them.

Seems a good reason for a temporary injunction to me. Hit pause while things get worked out, and make sure that the decision made does not cause irreparable harm to the patients in their care.

@sitchensis

In 2020 their leadership team undertook a 40% pay cut. It was estimated to save ThedaCare 40 million dollars.

Okay, so sounds like they don’t have tons of money to throw around. Do you actually have a cite that I could look at that would actually show how those numbers you put out there look in context?

@Northern_Piper

How is Theda harmed by the competitor hiring, but not harmed by the employees just quitting? There’s no difference in the impact on Theda’s patients.

Presumably, the idea is that if they can’t work for the competition, they will continue to care for the patients at ThedaCare.

I get that the measure doesn’t force them to do so, but since you actually can’t do that, it was not an option, so I am baffled as to why people keep wondering why they didn’t.

@Wesley_Clark

The employees will be harmed because a form of leverage has been taken from them. Now ThedaCare can continue to mistreat and underpay workers without worrying they’ll all take off and collapse their business model.

Temporarily, like a few days, if that’s the case. And just because someone else comes in and offers more money and benefits, doesn’t mean that the current compensation and environment were underpaid and mistreated.

@Wesley_Clark

Being able to walk away as a group and collapse a business is the most important form of leverage an employee has.

It’s one thing when it means that customers won’t get their dinners. It’s another when it puts the lives of patients at risk.

@Moriarty

I can imagine a judge signing off on a temporary injunction with a skeptical eye toward the ultimate merits of the case.

That’s more or less my take on it as well. The hysteria that people are showing over hitting pause to ensure that patient well being is not adversely affected is pretty ridiculous. People just jump to the conclusion that ThedaCare must be some evil greedy entity that has no desire but to mistreat and underpay its workers without actually knowing all the facts.

This judge, unlike some posters, wants to know all the facts before any permanent and irreparable changes are made. If ThedaCare’s case is weak, then come Monday, the judge will lift the injunction, and give ThedaCare a stern talking to. If it is shown that ThedaCare is putting the welfare of its patients first, then maybe the injunction goes on a bit longer.

Ultimately, the result of this is going to be more expensive and less quality medical care for the community. They will lose their 24/7 stroke center, and what care they do have will be from a hospital that charges its patients more so that it can pay its employees more.

I am not hating on Ascension, they are being smart. By poaching the employees of their competition, they can make more money while providing fewer services. It’s a good business decision, and is in the best interests of everyone except for those in the community who need their medical services.

@UltraVires

they may find themselves bankrupt at the end of it with another company soon in its place.

More likely, with no other company in its place. Providing 24/7 care is expensive, and it involves having employees who can work 24/7. As one of the poached employees in the article said, (and I slightly paraphrase as I don’t want to look it up) “They offer a better work/life balance.” Well, of course they do, since you won’t be expected to come in to deal with a stroke victim at 3AM, instead, the stroke victim will have to wait for him to get to the office at 9.

@ASL_v2.0

As for people who have pondered over the implications for patients and potential violations of their rights… unfortunately, in this country, I don’t believe there is an established right to healthcare.

Now, you do have a point here. It’s entirely possible that patient well being should not be taken into account, and letting people die so that some employees can get a raise and Ascension can make a bunch more money is the legal thing to do. The law is not always about best outcomes to the community.

@HMS_Irruncible

if your employer happens to be the bank that holds your mortgage, and the foreclosure is contingent on you continuing to work there.

Okay, but that’s not even close to related to this case. Really no similarity at all.

@Mighty_Mouse

Could the judge order the employer to swap wage rates of the executive team with the workers they are seeking to involuntarily retain? What, you say? That would be unilaterally changing the terms of employment of the executives?

Could he? Judges have a decent amount of latitude in things. It would be interesting.

@Mighty_Mouse

My brother’s employer is using all kinds of legal tactics to force $13/hour workers to keep working under their contract, because it would hurt vital infrastructure if they quit.

If they signed a contract, then they would be beholden to the terms of the contract. The idea behind a contract is that your employer can’t fire you easily, but the flip side is that you can’t quit easily either.

@Mighty_Mouse

Yes, about 30 people have taken home more in bonuses than 2,000 employees earn in total.

I don’t know where your brother works, but that sounds about where most corporations are at these days.

[BeepKillBeep]

I bet if the judge ordered that than mysteriously and suddenly it would no longer be an issue and the employees would be free to go.

This being about patient health is a smoke screen. It is about keeping the executives and shareholders rich.

[k9bfriender]

@BeepKillBeep

It is about keeping the executives and shareholders rich.

Why do you think that Ascension poached these employees? They didn’t do it to provide better pay or a better work environment, they didn’t do it for patient care.

It’s about keeping Ascension’s executives and shareholders rich(er).

It’s a pissing contest between two companies, and people are all taking the side of the company that initiated the pissing match, and very few are taking the side of the patients and community that will be negatively affected.

[Zakalwe]

@k9bfriender

Once again, do we know that the company can afford to pay more? It is an assertion that they are just evil greedy bastards that refuse to let go of a single cent, but it is simply not the case that just because someone signs the paycheck, they have infinite resources at their disposal.

How about this?

@Jackmannii

ThedaCare operates 7 hospitals, has close to 3500 employees and annual revenues of around $1 billion. For a non-profit its expenses seem rather high (there are four executives making over $1 million a year).The pandemic doesn’t seem to have hurt it too badly.

I mean, I understand that those memos about employee morale aren’t going to write themselves, but it sure seems like the administrators are willing to pay THEMSELVES competitive wages.

@Jackmannii

“…ThedaCare’s leading inpatient market position with about 56% market share in a competitive market with the presence of two large multi-state systems, Ascension Health (AA+/Stable) and Advocate Aurora Health (AA/Stable) about 30% and 9% market share, respectively. The (ThedaCare) system’s market position is enhanced by a large and expansive outpatient clinic network, which makes up about 75% of system revenues.”

This is not a small rural hospital. It’s the LARGEST HEALTHCARE PROVIDER IN THE MARKET.

[Mighty_Mouse]

@k9bfriender

Why do you think that Ascension poached these employees? They didn’t do it to provide better pay or a better work environment, they didn’t do it for patient care.

It’s about keeping Ascension’s executives and shareholders rich(er).

It’s a pissing contest between two companies, and people are all taking the side of the company that initiated the pissing match, and very few are taking the side of the patients and community that will be negatively affected.

I provided a solution. I realize as an employer you don’t like this solution because it applies the same principle to you as it does to your employees.

[Northern_Piper]

@k9bfriender

Presumably, the idea is that if they can’t work for the competition, they will continue to care for the patients at ThedaCare.

I get that the measure doesn’t force them to do so, but since you actually can’t do that, it was not an option, so I am baffled as to why people keep wondering why they didn’t.

One legal maxim is that you can’t do indirectly what you can’t do directly. If the court can’t order the employees not to leave for another employer, it shouldn’t be able to give an order that has that effect, by restraining the potential other employer.

Plus, as others have stated, what is the legal basis for ordering another employer not to hire? It gets back to the fact that in Wisconsin, employees can leave at will. If the employees can leave at will, where is the legal harm if another employer offers them a job?

[UltraVires]

@k9bfriender

More likely, with no other company in its place. Providing 24/7 care is expensive, and it involves having employees who can work 24/7. As one of the poached employees in the article said, (and I slightly paraphrase as I don’t want to look it up) “They offer a better work/life balance.” Well, of course they do, since you won’t be expected to come in to deal with a stroke victim at 3AM, instead, the stroke victim will have to wait for him to get to the office at 9.

I don’t disagree, except to say that if the area wants 24/7 care, it must pay employees a prevailing market wage to incentivize them to work a 24/7 schedule. I’m generally supportive with the free market ideas, but I object to Thedacare being in a “poor us, we just can’t pay these high wages” but still occupying an essential position in the market where people will die if they fold. If they cannot pay market wages, they should not be in that position and any court remedy should take care of that, which as noted above, may be exactly the method to the judge’s madness here. Full stop, Thedacare owes those employees the difference in lost wages and compensation for time off.

This tortious interference argument is, IMHO, ridiculous. These employees have no contract. There is no business relationship to interfere with because both parties agreed to the “at will” arrangement.

[DeadTreasSecretaries]

@Northern_Piper

Plus, as others have stated, what is the legal basis for ordering another employer not to hire? It gets back to the fact that in Wisconsin, employees can leave at will. If the employees can leave at will, where is the legal harm if another employer offers them a job?

Yeah ISTM like if someone is employed at will it essentially means that their employer has no inherent claim to their labor and hasn’t actually legally lost anything by losing their labor. There was never any agreement to work a day into the future, so unless there was a non-compete or something an at-will employee taking a job at a competitor should be the exact same as someone who doesn’t have a job taking the same job with the competitor.

If there is a sector for the economy where that doesn’t work, there shouldn’t be at-will employment in that sector and there should be a system that gives reciprocal obligations to both sides to have acceptable reasons and possibly mandated delay periods to terminate the employment.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@k9bfriender

As a permanent measure, no. As a temporary stopgap to ensure that there are no dead bodies at the end of the day, I’d say it’s not inappropriate.

It is inappropriate for the workers. The workers are free to choose their employer under the law, yet that freedom is being taken from them by the judge at the behest of ThedaCare.

@k9bfriender

See, you are hating on ThedaCare here, without knowing anything about their situation. They won’t match the offer, therefore, they are just greedy bastards.

Don’t you think that if they could match the offer, they would, rather than lose a majority of their stroke response staff?

@k9bfriender

Not really. They still have a job that seems to pay pretty well. They just want more money.

Classic! You invoke the “benevolent boss” trope as well as the “greedy employee” stereotype.

But here’s where your mental gymnastics really destroys your own attempts at arguing this IMO (bolding mine):

@k9bfriender

That’s more or less my take on it as well. The hysteria that people are showing over hitting pause to ensure that patient well being is not adversely affected is pretty ridiculous. People just jump to the conclusion that ThedaCare must be some evil greedy entity that has no desire but to mistreat and underpay its workers without actually knowing all the facts.

This judge, unlike some posters, wants to know all the facts before any permanent and irreparable changes are made. If ThedaCare’s case is weak, then come Monday, the judge will lift the injunction, and give ThedaCare a stern talking to. If it is shown that ThedaCare is putting the welfare of its patients first, then maybe the injunction goes on a bit longer.

Ultimately, the result of this is going to be more expensive and less quality medical care for the community. They will lose their 24/7 stroke center, and what care they do have will be from a hospital that charges its patients more so that it can pay its employees more.

I am not hating on Ascension, they are being smart. By poaching the employees of their competition, they can make more money while providing fewer services. It’s a good business decision, and is in the best interests of everyone except for those in the community who need their medical services.

You say that “some posters” don’t want to know all the facts and then just four sentences later you indicate that you don’t need all the facts: you already know that Ascension “poached” the employees because of their greed.

[Saint_Cad]

I wonder if the same judge will order ThedaCare that they cannot fire anyone until the employee has a new job.
I don’t see how this doesn’t violate Wisconsin’s right-to-work laws.

[Chefguy]

That has to be the most massive derailment of a thread ever.

[Northern_Piper]

@k9bfriender

But, were you in a position where your absence would decrease the available care to patients?

…,

As a permanent measure, no. As a temporary stopgap to ensure that there are no dead bodies at the end of the day, I’d say it’s not inappropriate.

But again, employees in Wisconsin have the right to quit at any moment. Health care workers have that right. Setting aside the job offers from another health care provider, if five key health care employees all decide to quit at the same time for personal reasons, would you say Theda could go to court for an order that they are to keep working until Theda recruits and hires replacements?

[DrDeth]

So, is this slavery?

Let us compare:
Under chattel slavery the slave could be beaten or raped at will. Sold as property, and the children became property also. No wages, no benefits, hard backbreaking labor 12+ hours a day, seven days a week. No choices at all.

This case- The employees can go anywhere, do anything, they are getting paid and benefits. They can quit, move to another state, get another job. The only restriction is that the competing company can’t hire them for a period… a few days? 90 days?

Yeah, those are entirely comparable, of course.

[Saint_Cad]

Once again, do we know that the company can afford to pay more? It is an assertion that they are just evil greedy bastards that refuse to let go of a single cent,

Either way, in Wisconsin I have a right to take a job with better pay. Well, until this judge came into the picture.

[duality72]

@DrDeth

So, is this slavery?

Slavery:

1b the state of a person who is held in forced servitude
1c a situation or practice in which people are entrapped (as by debt) and exploited

Your hyperbolic comparison is not particularly helpful.

[Moriarty]

I really hope that we can eventually access the actual documents that underly this lawsuit, or the judge at least makes a thorough record that is extensively quoted by the press.

Because I can imagine lots of different ways this has gone down.

ThedaCare has said

*“We understand and respect that people have choices in the current highly competitive job market. The decision by Ascension Wisconsin to hire away such a significant portion of ThedaCare’s interventional radiology specialty support team all at once, and at the height of a pandemic surge, will disrupt access to critical care for the people in our region. While we have tried to work with Ascension Wisconsin for additional time to execute a plan for staffing coverage that will provide the longterm continuation of services that support trauma, stroke and other essential areas of care, Ascension Wisconsin was unwilling to collaborate with us. We are essentially asking the Court to grant the injunction to maintain the status quo until ThedaCare can hire replacement staff for this vital department in order to protect access to the critical care services supported by the team, which are considered community assets.”

(My emphasis)

Yes, I realIze this is self serving, and may be claptrap. And I hear that these employees did give lots of notice. But, what if this hospital is just saying, “you can all go. We get that. But we need another few months to replace the staff, so if you’d just help us with this transition, it won’t jeopardize our ability to serve as the only Level I trauma center in this area.”

Meaning, it’s not a greed issue, or a money issue; it’s just a timing issue.

(And this is why I’m so interested in the details. I’m sure that ThedaCare is saying something about losing their ability to offer 24/7 care if they lose these key people all at once, but I’m also sure that the judge wants to know why they can’t just replace these people. Have they sat on their hands, in denial the whole time? Or is there an onboarding process that simply can’t be completed in the time allotted?)

[DeadTreasSecretaries]

Judges shouldn’t be economists and if there is a genuine market failure wrt healthcare providers being able to provide essential healthcare, that’s the job of policymakers to find a solution, not judges to rewrite employment agreements.

[ASL_v2.0]

@k9bfriender

@ASL_v2.0

As for people who have pondered over the implications for patients and potential violations of their rights… unfortunately, in this country, I don’t believe there is an established right to healthcare.

Now, you do have a point here. It’s entirely possible that patient well being should not be taken into account, and letting people die so that some employees can get a raise and Ascension can make a bunch more money is the legal thing to do. The law is not always about best outcomes to the community.

Let’s just be clear: this situation is entirely of the making of corporations like ThedaCare and the politicians they have in their pocket (and this really is a “both sides” problem for once) who will insist that we rely on free market solutions to what should be a universally protected human right: the access to reasonable healthcare. But even within the system ThedaCare et al have curated for themselves, it’s not a dichotomy between either (a) people die due to staffing shortages or (b) employees get forced to stay on the job while ThedaCare makes a half-hearted attempt to find replacements who will work for less than what a competitor will pay (as evidenced by all these employees being ready to jump ship to the competitor). ThedaCare could just pay its employees a competitive wage. And if it can’t… free market, baby!

And, again, that’s even within the context of this broken system we have allowed ourselves to be saddled with.

[Moriarty]

@DeadTreasSecretaries

Judges shouldn’t be economists and if there is a genuine market failure wrt healthcare providers being able to provide essential healthcare, that’s the job of policymakers to find a solution, not judges to rewrite employment agreements.

And all I’m suggesting is that we need to wait until the judge makes a ruling to decide if the judge has done this. The judge on Monday could literally say “this is not the appropriate place to solve the healthcare crisis. These people have the right to quit a job when they want. This injunction is denied.”

[Odesio]

@k9bfriender

See, you are hating on ThedaCare here, without knowing anything about their situation. They won’t match the offer, therefore, they are just greedy bastards.

I don’t think anyone is hating on ThedaCare because they can’t or won’t match the offer. ThedaCare is getting a lot of hatred because they’re trying to use the courts to prevent employees from moving on to greener pastures.

@k9bfriender

Let’s take an extreme example. You are in the middle of open heart surgery, and you get a call from the hospital across town that says that if you drop what you are doing, and come in right now, they will give you twice the pay. Is it your current employer who is in the wrong when they can’t afford to match the offer, but still wants you to finish the surgery? Is that forcing you to work for less pay than other employers are offering?

I know you said it was an extreme example but it’s just plain ridiculous. A medical doctor is bound by his duty to protect the health of a patient under their care. A doctor walking away form his patient in the middle of open heart surgery is likely to suffer criminal charges, civil charges, and there’s a good chance they’ll lose their medical license.