Malpractice tail coverage/New contract

[RosieWasHere]

Hi all, I'm negotiating a contract for employment with a surgical group that is part of a giant corporation. I've been a PA for 10 years and was under the impression that malpractice tail coverage is a must when signing an employment agreement as a safeguard after leaving a job. There is nothing explicitly listed in this contract regarding tail coverage and when I asked if it was provided, this is the response I got back-

"I spoke with our Risk Manager who just informed me that you do not need to purchase tail coverage as [the company] and the supervising physicians are the parties named in any lawsuits not the PA. Thus, this is why nothing is mentioned in the employment agreement regarding tail coverage."

Is this Kosher?! Makes me uneasy. Has anyone worked for a surgeon (as a first assistant) and been named in a lawsuit? Should I push the issue and insist on tail coverage being provided and listed in the employment agreement?

Thanks all

[ohiovolffemtp]

I do EM and not surgery, but was named, along with my SP for the particular patient whose family sued, the hospital, the orthopod I consulted and his practice group when we all were sued.  Unless surgery is different, anyone who could be a source of money is likely to be a defendant.  Even nurses can included as defendants.

Yes, you should push for tail coverage (or occurrences coverage) as part of your contract.

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

 

I would also say check and make sure they aren’t providing occurrence. My contract says they will provide rail if I stay more than 2 years, but I have occurrence insurance so the point is moot for me.

[RosieWasHere]

So is claims made the way to go?@LT Oneal PAC. Thank you both for chiming in!

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

2 hours ago, RosieWasHere said:

So is claims made the way to go?@LT Oneal PAC. Thank you both for chiming in!

No, I always get occurrence,  but if you get claims made it must come with a tail.

[Mayamom]

PA are not mentioned in law suits?  Wow.  That is just unbelievable.  

[GetMeOuttaThisMess]

On 8/25/2020 at 5:29 PM, RosieWasHere said:

Hi all, I'm negotiating a contract for employment with a surgical group that is part of a giant corporation. I've been a PA for 10 years and was under the impression that malpractice tail coverage is a must when signing an employment agreement as a safeguard after leaving a job. There is nothing explicitly listed in this contract regarding tail coverage and when I asked if it was provided, this is the response I got back-

"I spoke with our Risk Manager who just informed me that you do not need to purchase tail coverage as [the company] and the supervising physicians are the parties named in any lawsuits not the PA. Thus, this is why nothing is mentioned in the employment agreement regarding tail coverage."

Is this Kosher?! Makes me uneasy. Has anyone worked for a surgeon (as a first assistant) and been named in a lawsuit? Should I push the issue and insist on tail coverage being provided and listed in the employment agreement?

Thanks all

Risk Manager is not good at their job, just like a former government employer RM wasn't good at theirs either since I had to explain the difference between occurrence based and claims-made policies.