Takeaway: A hospital defended against claims of unequal pay and sex discrimination on the grounds that physician compensation depended on differing productivity targets and that the male physicians had better credentials and higher salaries before being hired. Under the Equal Pay Act, however, these arguments did not satisfy the hospital's burden of showing legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for the pay disparities.
A federal district court ruled that a female doctor who earned less than male doctors at her hospital—including a new hire—could take her unequal pay claims to trial.
The plaintiff was a licensed, board-certified physician specializing in rheumatology. Until 2014, the plaintiff and her partner, a male physician, owned and operated a successful rheumatology practice. In 2014, the NYU Langone Health System and associated entities (NYU) recruited her and her partner to join NYU's Faculty Practice Group (FGP).
At the plaintiff's first meeting with NYU management, the managing physicians expressed surprise that she was a woman. When she joined the FGP, NYU negotiated her salary and her production requirements, measured in work relative value units (wRVUs). NYU's offer at least in part depended upon financial and productivity data received about her former private practice.
The plaintiff was employed as a staff physician and appointed as a clinical assistant professor at NYU but did not have an administrative title. Early in her employment, the practice moved...
During August 2026, a series of misleading, fabricated and falsely contextualised claims circulated across social media platforms and media accounts in Bharat. The claims covered electoral rolls, ...