DOCTORS AND UNIONS

P. Staudohar, J. Dworkin
{"title":"DOCTORS AND UNIONS","authors":"P. Staudohar, J. Dworkin","doi":"10.2190/LPJT-JRV3-3DYK-HU2J","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This is a study of the unionization of physicians. This article will examine the factors that have affected the medical profession encouraging doctors to do something that was unheard of fifty years ago—to unionize. This article describes the societal changes that have encouraged doctor unionization, analyzes the legal overlay, examines the extent of doctor unionization, and makes a number of projections about the future. A half century ago doctors had nearly total control over the management of their profession. They typically worked in solo private practice. This involved either maintaining a separate office and staff or associating with a medical building for purposes of convenience and referral. Doctors had relationships with hospitals, to whom they sent patients. They also worked with private insurance companies for administration of patient claims. But doctors were essentially independent operators, working as general practitioners and, less often, as specialists. There was little regulation by government. The financial rewards and respect for the medical profession were at the highest levels. These were justified, as one practitioner put it, by the “. . . long years of training, hours of service, risk of exposure to disease, shortened earning life-span, attenuated freedom and family life, and devotion to professional self-advancement. . .” [1]. This situation no longer exists.","PeriodicalId":371129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Individual Employment Rights","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Individual Employment Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2190/LPJT-JRV3-3DYK-HU2J","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This is a study of the unionization of physicians. This article will examine the factors that have affected the medical profession encouraging doctors to do something that was unheard of fifty years ago—to unionize. This article describes the societal changes that have encouraged doctor unionization, analyzes the legal overlay, examines the extent of doctor unionization, and makes a number of projections about the future. A half century ago doctors had nearly total control over the management of their profession. They typically worked in solo private practice. This involved either maintaining a separate office and staff or associating with a medical building for purposes of convenience and referral. Doctors had relationships with hospitals, to whom they sent patients. They also worked with private insurance companies for administration of patient claims. But doctors were essentially independent operators, working as general practitioners and, less often, as specialists. There was little regulation by government. The financial rewards and respect for the medical profession were at the highest levels. These were justified, as one practitioner put it, by the “. . . long years of training, hours of service, risk of exposure to disease, shortened earning life-span, attenuated freedom and family life, and devotion to professional self-advancement. . .” [1]. This situation no longer exists.
医生和工会
这是一项关于医生工会化的研究。这篇文章将研究影响医疗行业的因素,鼓励医生做一些50年前闻所未闻的事情——成立工会。本文描述了鼓励医生工会化的社会变化,分析了法律覆盖,检查了医生工会化的程度,并对未来做出了一些预测。半个世纪以前,医生几乎完全控制着他们职业的管理。他们一般都是单独行医。这包括维持一个单独的办公室和工作人员,或者为了方便和转诊而与医疗大楼联系。医生与医院有关系,他们把病人送到医院。他们还与私人保险公司合作管理患者索赔。但医生本质上是独立的操作者,以全科医生的身份工作,很少以专家的身份工作。政府几乎没有监管。医疗行业的经济回报和受到的尊重是最高的。正如一位从业者所说,这些都是合理的,因为“……长时间的训练、长时间的服务、暴露于疾病的风险、缩短的赚钱寿命、减弱的自由和家庭生活,以及献身于职业自我提升的精神……”[1]。这种情况已不复存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信