Federal Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Filed by Medical Residents Against National Resident Matching Program

U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman on Friday dismissed an antitrust lawsuit that claimed the National Resident Matching Program artificially keeps wages low and makes doctors work long hours, and he cited legislation signed in April by President Bush that "effectively exempted the program from antitrust claims," the AP/Las Vegas Sun reports (Baldor, AP/Las Vegas Sun, 8/13).

Under the NRMP match system, developed more than 50 years ago and updated in the 1990s, students visit teaching hospitals to decide at which facility they want to complete their residency. In February of each year, students and hospitals rank their preferences and the lists are sent to the match program, which then assigns medical students to hospitals.

Current and former residents in 2002 filed a lawsuit in Washington, D.C., federal court alleging that the system eliminates competition and encourages sharing salary information and that hospitals illegally collude to restrict opportunities for residents. In addition, the students say the system denies residents any freedom to negotiate wages and working conditions. Most first-year residents work more than 80 hours a week and are paid about $40,000 per year.

In April, Bush signed legislation that prevented the match system from being used as evidence to support an antitrust claim. The language of the bill makes the legislation retroactive (California Healthline, 4/13).

In his decision on Friday, Friedman rejected arguments by plaintiffs' attorneys that the legislation was passed "furtively" by being included as a provision in a pension bill. Friedman said that the court's duty is to interpret laws, and it cannot second-guess lawmakers' actions, according to the AP/Sun (AP/Las Vegas Sun, 8/13).

Friedman in February dismissed six of the defendants in the lawsuit but ruled that the suit could proceed against several organizations, including the NRMP; the NRMP subsequently appealed the decision and that case is still in appellate court.

Mona Signer, director of the NRMP, said, "It is very gratifying. We are anxious to turn our full attention back to our purpose." Attorney Sherman Marek, who is representing the plaintiffs, said the plaintiffs likely will appeal the ruling or file new claims in the case. He said that the plaintiffs will "certainly continue their fight for fair wages and safe work hours" (Robinson, New York Times, 8/14).