Resident Unions Are Growing in Popularity in Otolaryngology

Effects on Institutions

Are practicing physicians worried about unionization at other institutions? Last summer at Loma Linda University Health in California, residents and fellows voted to unionize, but the university pushed back against these efforts, citing its status as a religious educational institution and filing a lawsuit against the National Labor Relations Board. A federal judge dismissed the case in April, and Loma Linda has appealed. Prior to the vote, they argued against unionization efforts, stating that residents and fellows are students rather than employees as defined by the National Labor Relations Act.

“I think the answer is yes,” said Dr. Pletcher. “Change often brings concern and anxiety, and I think the traditional sense of a union is that it creates antagonism between the workers and the employers.” From a program director to resident standpoint, however, this hasn’t been Dr. Pletcher’s experience; he believes the relationship between residents and faculty is the same as it was in the pre-unionization days at UCSF.

“I think the special thing is that otolaryngology residents overall are interested and invested in their training,” Dr. Pletcher said. “While they want to be able to afford rent, food, and all of the basics, they’re still very committed to their position as residents and the same clinical care partnership they currently have with their faculty mentors.”

Dr. Stanford-Moore considers her residency at UCSF to have been a very positive experience: She received a great education and valued her mentorship. “The union wasn’t an angry place,” she said. “There was a general sentiment that we were grateful for opportunities to learn, but any job needs to evolve with time. Residencies nationwide have been shown to be very slow to change and adapt. The union serves as a positive way to have representation on a university level.”     

Renée Bacher is a freelance medical writer based in Louisiana.