WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

488

(post is archived)

[–] 2 pts

This is absolutely not . The was one hospital system against another. The judge ruled that the hospital system which acquired the employed must make two employees available (one radiologist and one nurse I believe) on an on-call basis to the hospital that lost the employees. Hospitals regularly share employees for overload and mass casualties incidents, so there likely was a contract already in place for the two hospitals. I'm not sure what would happen if all the employees who switched said they would not work on call for their old hospital.

I'm not saying this is a good ruling. I'm just saying the interpretation of the ruling is flat out incorrect and fake news.