A former employee has filed a lawsuit against Pittsburgh-based UPMC, accusing the health system of anticompetitive conduct that harms skilled nursing staff, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported Jan. 19.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of the Western District of Pennsylvania on Jan. 18 and accessed by Becker's, alleges UPMC has prevented workers from exiting or improving their working conditions, suppressed workers' wages and benefits and increased their workloads.
"UPMC's mistreatment of its skilled healthcare workers is one part of an overarching anticompetitive scheme implemented by UPMC to acquire and exploit: 1) monopoly power over the provision of hospital output services and 2) monopsony power over the employment of hospital workers (including skilled healthcare workers)," the lawsuit states.
Victoria Ross, who, according to the complaint, previously worked as a nurse at UPMC Hamot in Erie, Pa., is listed as the plaintiff. Ms. Ross is seeking class-action status, which could include thousands of current or former UPMC workers such as registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, nurse assistants and orderlies. UPMC is a 40-hospital system with 95,000 staff members total.\
From 1996 to 2018, UPMC made approximately 28 acquisitions of competitor healthcare service providers, but the deals were done to expand the health system's market power and "at the same time that UPMC was acquiring these facilities, it was also reducing the availability of healthcare services within the relevant market," the lawsuit states.
It claims that from 1996 to 2019, UPMC closed four hospitals and downsized three others, eliminating 353 beds and 1,367 full-time and 433 part-time healthcare service jobs.
Additionally, the lawsuit claims UPMC used anticompetitive restraints such as noncompete clauses and "do-not-rehire blacklists" to keep workers from exiting; suppressing wages to sub-competitive levels while also reducing staffing and increasing workloads; and suppressing workers' labor law rights to keep them from unionizing.
"Each of these restraints alone is anticompetitive, but combined, their effects are magnified," the lawsuit states.
The complaint follows one filed by two unions in May with the Justice Department, alleging labor abuses and anti-competitive practices by UPMC.
Paul Wood, vice president and chief communications officer at UPMC, told the Tribune-Review at the time that there is no policy prohibiting an employee of the health system from being hired by another, and that staffing levels are based on the acuity and patient needs.
Regarding the complaint filed this month in federal court, Mr. Wood pointed to the health system's various benefits and support for the labor force. This includes raising the minimum wage to $18 per hour for its non-union workforce by 2025, the highest entry level of any healthcare provider in Pennsylvania, Mr. Wood said in a statement shared with Becker's.
He also pointed to UPMC being among the best places to work in all the regions it served throughout Pennsylvania, New York and Maryland "due to our wages and our above-industry employee benefits, which are designed to support our employees and their families."
Additionally, UPMC was the first health system in Pennsylvania to offer paid parental leave to employees who are new parents, Mr. Wood said, adding that the health system also offers assistance for child and old adult care services.
Another benefit he pointed to: Paid life insurance and paid disability benefits that he said "complement our affordable medical coverage. UPMC's employee health care premiums are often half what other health systems in the area charge."
Mr. Wood said UPMC also offers first-dollar healthcare coverage for employees making below $80,000, and it has "a robust, flexible paid time-off policy so our employees can buy and sell time-off benefits to fit their individual needs."
He also said UPMC provides careers that allow people to come to UPMC in entry-level roles, career ladders, support systems, and tuition assistance.
The complaint filed this month seeks damages and asks that UPMC be enjoined from continuing the alleged monopolies and unfair business practices.