Economics: Today and Tomorrow © 2008

"Save the Match"

Introduction
Each year thousands of students graduate from medical schools across the country, hoping to land the perfect position in a teaching hospital to fulfill their residency requirements. These students rely on a program that matches their skills to the needs of a specific hospital. The MATCH program answers the question of supply and demand, meeting the needs of both the students and the hospitals. In 2002, three residents filed suit against the National Resident Matching Program, its sponsors, and 29 teaching hospitals. The residents claimed that the program violated antitrust laws and stifled a competitive market for medical residents. Investigate the economics behind the lawsuit and the antitrust claims by visiting the “Save the Match” Web site.

Destination Title: Save the Match

Note: Clicking on the link above will launch a new browser window.
Need help using your browser for this activity? Click here for tips.

Directions
Start at the “Save the Match” Web site.

• Click on the “Lawsuit” link at the top of the page.
• Select “What are the Antitrust Claims in the Lawsuit?” from the menu on the right.
• Scroll to bottom of page and click on link to read the actual lawsuit. Read the
• Once you’ve read through the antitrust information, hit your browser’s back button to return to the home page.
• Read the economists’ study of the Match program. (A PDF will open when you select “click here”.)

1			According to the Web site, what did the defendant’s claim was the impact of the program’s “anticompetitive restraints?” (depressed wages, slowed compensation increases (raises), and increased working hours to a dangerous level)
2			Reread the third paragraph of the lawsuit (page 6 of the PDF document). According to the plaintiffs, how did the defendants specifically violate antitrust laws? (exchanging competitively sensitive information about compensation and employment terms; eliminating competition through the Match program; establishing and complying with anticompetitive accreditation standards)
3			According to the economists’ study, how do we know that the match program does not determine wages? (the internal medicine subspecialties do not offer different salaries to those not involved in the specialty matching program; the mean compensation for those involved in the program was actually higher than those who were not involved in the program)
4			According to the table within the study, what was the average starting salary for an oncology resident in 2001? (mean=average, mean salary = $41,150)
5			On January 8, 2007 the U.S. Supreme Court handed down the final ruling in Paul Jung, M.D., et al. v. Association of American Medical Colleges, et al. The court dismissed the case, ruling in favor of the NRMP. Imagine you are a medical resident who has just learned of the ruling. Write a letter to the editor of a journal, expressing your opinions. (answers will vary)