Ahad v. Bd. of Trs. of S. Ill. Univ., 15-cv-3308
| Decision Date | 28 March 2019 |
| Docket Number | No. 15-cv-3308,15-cv-3308 |
| Parties | SAJIDA AHAD, MD, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY and SIU PHYSICIANS & SURGEONS, INC., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Central District of Illinois |
Plaintiff Sajida Ahad, M.D., ("Ahad") has sued the Board of Trustees of Southern Illinois University and SIU Physicians & Surgeons, Inc., alleging gender-based pay discrimination. On September 29, 2017, the Court conditionally certified the case as a collective action. Three individuals have opted into the class: Drs. Jan Rakinic ("Rakinic"), Christina Vassileva ("Vassileva"), and Erica Rotondo ("Rotondo") (collectively with Ahad, "Plaintiffs"). Before the Court is Defendants' motion seeking to decertify the collective action. Because the balance of the factors that the Court must consider at this stage in the litigation favors decertifying the collective action, Defendants' motion is granted.
Plaintiff Sajida Ahad, M.D., brings this suit alleging gender-based pay discrimination on behalf of herself and a purported class of female physicians against the Board of Trustees of Southern Illinois University and SIU Physicians & Surgeons, Inc. The Board of Trustees of Southern Illinois University acts for the SIU School of Medicine ("SIU SOM") and SIU Physicians & Surgeons, Inc. ("SIU P&S") does business as SIU Healthcare. SIU SOM and SIU P&S (collectively "Defendants") employed the physicians that comprise the conditionally certified class.
Plaintiff alleges that Defendants paid Plaintiff and other female physicians substantially lower compensation than male physicians for the same or similar work. Plaintiff brings her claims pursuant to the Federal Equal Pay Act, Illinois Equal Pay Act (EPA), Title VII, and the Illinois Civil Rights Act. Defendants deny these allegations.
Defendant SIU Board of Trustees is the employer of all SIU SOM employees, many of whom provide patient care throughDefendant SIU P&S, a university-affiliated organization also known as SIU Healthcare. Plaintiff, a female physician, worked for Defendants from July 28, 2008 to March 21, 2014. Cox-Largent Decl. ¶ 23.
Defendants' physician faculty hold one of three tenure-eligible academic ranks: Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor. Pls.' Opp'n to Defs.' Mot. to Decertify Collective Action 5 ("Opp'n"). All physician faculty are expected to perform certain minimum duties in three categories: research, teaching, and service (including clinical service). Id. at 9.
Defendants employ physicians in different School of Medicine Departments. Id. at 3. Ahad and opt-in plaintiffs Rakinic and Vassileva all worked in the Department of Surgery. Id. Opt-in plaintiff Rotondo worked in the Department of Family and Community Medicine. Id. Each Department is headed by a Department Chair responsible for supervision of the Department, including recruitment and hiring. Cox-Largent Decl. ¶ 11. In each department, faculty physicians are further classified by divisions. Id. The divisions are based on geographical location orspecialization. Id. Each division is headed by a Division Chairperson. Id.
A Master Agreement between SIU SOM and SIU P&S requires SIU SOM employees to provide services for SIU P&S. Opp'n 5. The Master Agreement also requires that all physician members of SIU P&S and SIU SOM be compensated pursuant to the "Compensation Plan." Id. at 6. The Compensation Plan "serve[s] as the governing document for compensation," and it aims to provide for compensation that "is market based and represents fair and reasonable compensation for the efforts of faculty members." Compensation Plan, *4 (d/e 62). The inclusion of relative value units ("RVUs") as a basis for incentive compensation in the Compensation Plan is intended to reward physician effort "without regard to the payor for a particular patient or the patient's ability to pay." Id. On its face, the Compensation Plan is undoubtedly gender neutral.
The Dean of SIU SOM and the CEO of SIU P&S are responsible for the administration of the Compensation Plan. Opp'n 6. Since 2016, the Dean and Provost of SIU SOM has been Dr. Jerry Kruse.Id. at 5. Since at least 2010, all of SIU P&S' CEOs have been men. Id. at 5-6.
Under the Compensation Plan, Defendants' physician faculty members can receive three types of compensation, all of which must be paid in accordance with the Compensation Plan: (1) an academic base salary paid by SIU SOM; (2) a clinical base salary paid by SIU P&S and (3) a clinical incentive income paid by SIU P&S. Id. at 6. Academic base salary compensates physician faculty for their academic and administrative duties and is a fixed, monthly amount. Id.
The clinical base and clinical incentive income make up the clinical compensation. Id. Clinical compensation is calculated using a formula that assigns RVUs to the services the physician provided. Defs.' Mot. to Decertify Collective Action 8 (d/e 86) ("Mot. to Decertify"). Individual RVUs are based on the current Medicare RVU fee schedule and are uniform across medical specialties and geographic locations. Compensation Plan, *11; Mot. to Decertify 8. Clinical compensation is calculated by multiplying the physician's earned RVUs by a conversion factor. Mot. to Decertify 8. The conversion factor is different in each division and is recalculatedperiodically. Id. The RVUs and, therefore, the clinical compensation, are determined by each individual physician's time devoted to clinical practice, types and amount of procedures performed, specialty, and participation in call schedules. New clinical faculty are guaranteed a fixed clinical income during initial employment to allow them to build a practice, but those who generate more RVUs than anticipated can terminate the guarantee and be paid for all of their accrued RVUs. Mot. to Decertify 8. The clinical compensation is also subject to caps.
Hiring decisions and compensation recommendations are standardized to some extent but are also based on a number of individualized factors, including, but not limited to, need, salary survey data, the source of funding, and the physician's background and qualifications, as well as market factors. Defs.' Mem. Law Supp. Mot. to Decertify 17 (d/e 86-1) ("Mem."). To determine the initial academic base salary, the Department Chair may consider specific fellowship training, salary surveys compiled by the American Association of Medical Colleges, specific job responsibilities, level of education and prior experience, competing job offers, and availability of third-party financial support for theposition. Opp'n 7. This recommendation is reviewed again by the Human Resources Department, SIU's Affirmative Action office, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Dean. Id.
After a physician accepts employment with Defendants, they execute a Member Practice Agreement which identifies the physician's duties and responsibilities and all compensation and fringe benefits. Id. at 8. New physicians also execute an Annual Compensation Agreement that reflects the agreed academic base salary and the anticipated clinical compensation for the coming year. Id.
Going forward, physicians' compensation is reviewed annually. As with initial compensation, Department Chairs recommend compensation adjustments for physicians in their departments. Those recommendations are subject to review and approval by the Dean. Id. at 7. SIU P&S' Compensation Committee also reviews physicians' compensation. Id. at 8.
Plaintiff alleges that this process has resulted in discriminatory pay practices whereby female physicians are paid significantly less than similarly situated male physicians.Defendants argue that the process of determining compensation is highly individualized.
This Court conditionally certified a collective action under the FLSA on September 29, 2017. Shortly thereafter Plaintiff moved for class certification of her Illinois Equal Pay Act, Title VII, and Illinois Civil Rights Act claims pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1 Finding that Plaintiff had not met her burden to show commonality or typicality, the Court denied Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification in an Opinion and Order dated September 12, 2018. Defendants now move to decertify the collective action previously conditionally certified by the Court under Section 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). See 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).
Pursuant to Section 216(b) of the FLSA, a plaintiff may bring a collective action on behalf of themselves "and other employees similarly situated." 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). A prospective member of the collective action may "opt-in" by filing a written consent form in the court where the action is brought; a person who does not opt-inis not part of the FLSA collective action and is not bound by the court's decision. Gambo v. Lucent Techs., Inc., No. 05 C 3701, 2005 WL 3542485, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 22, 2005).
The FLSA does not detail the process a court should employ to determine whether potential class members are "similarly situated." See Smallwood v. Ill. Bell Tel. Co., 710 F. Supp. 2d 746, 750 (N.D. Ill. 2010) (citing Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc. v. Sperling, 493 U.S. 165, 170-174 (1989)). Nor has the Seventh Circuit done so. Id. A majority of courts, including courts in this District, have adopted a two-step method to determine whether a plaintiff is "similarly situated" to putative class members. See, e.g., North v. Bd. of Trs. of Ill. State Univ., 676 F. Supp. 2d 690, 694 (C.D. Ill. 2009); Jirak v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc., 566 F. Supp. 2d 845, 847 (N.D. Ill. 2008) (collecting cases).
At Step 1, the court decides if a class should be "conditionally" certified. See Russell v. Ill. Bell Tel. Co., 575 F. Supp. 2d 930, 933 (N.D. Ill. 2008). At the first step, plaintiffs need only make "a modest factual...
To continue reading
Request your trial