Competition Authority have paid the IMO a visit, What kept them?

S

Sumatra

Registered User
Messages
581
Delighted to hear the Competition Authority visited the IMO but what took them so long?
 
Re: IMO and Price Fixing

Sumatra said:
Delighted to hear the Competition Authority visited the IMO but what took them so long?
Click to expand...
Had you reported your suspicions or provided them with evidence some time ago?
 
Re: IMO and Price Fixing

I find you are domineering at the best of times, obnoxious at the worst and nearly always frivolous. Not at all like the rainyday in company having a pint?
 
Re: IMO and Price Fixing

I'll try to be more obnoxious when having a pint so, to live down to your expectations - but seriously, I find this kind of whinging at the institutions of the state to be fairly obnoxious. If they do nothing, we whinge. If they take action, we whinge that they should have done it long ago. Give us a break....
 
Re: IMO and Price Fixing

I appreciate you sometimes have to antagonise in the expectation that such action may achieve balance but when it is repeated too often it becomes intimidating. One shouldn't make the presumption that statements made are simply of a querulous nature for instance how familiar are you with the issues regarding IMO instructions to their members regarding fees payable for insurance medicals?
 
Re: IMO and Price Fixing

Sumatra, I couldn't agree with you more. Hopefully this will help to sort out the whole sorry mess.
 
Re: IMO and Price Fixing

On mature reflection, I can see that my original post on this thread could have been seen as intimidating or aggressive. This wan't my intention and & I apologise.

I know little or nothing about the IMO, and less about the specific issue you mention regarding pricing of medicals. My point was that if you (or anyone else) had information on this that wasn't in the public domain, it is important to get this information to the Competition Authority.
 
Is is possible that the CA thought, oh look they all charge the same fee so there must be collusion, where in fact it may be that the insurance companies actually set the price paid to GP's under a national agreement?



Think the CA could have chosen a better fight to fight. I think the IMO might win this one.



QP
 
I had a medical done some years ago, for an insurance policy. When I asked the doc did I owe him anything, he said no, the insurance company pays him a set fee for his report. On that basis, I doubt if the arrangements between the medics and the insurers were in any way secretive or underhand. Time will tell whether the Competition Authority's dawn raid was justified.
 
According to yesterday's Irish Times, such reports are considered "lucrative" costing €130 for reports which are required by insurance or lending companies. I wouldn't have thought such a charge excessive compared to other professional charges where a scale for fees usually exists. I'm not aware of there being competition in fees charged by, for example, the legal profession.

Presumably the IMO set out a standard fee for such reports to ensure payment. I can't see where competition enters into the provision of a medical report. Would that mean shopping around to find the cheapest service?
 
Where the insurance company is paying for such reports, this would be a great opportunity to get a lower overall fee by putting the business out to tender. No individual would have significant purchasing power, but an insurance company putting their block of business for couple of years to a medical group would have considerable leverage to get the lowest price (while maintaining quality of course).
 
In that case they would have to tender every doctor in the country! It's hard to see how a doctor who knew nothing about a patient's history could provide a medical report that that would meet the requirements of an insurance or lending company. Accuracy and correct information is in the interest of both the insured and the insurer.
 
Fair point - I have heard of cases of medicals being done by doctors who had no prior history of the patient (i.e. pre-employment medicals in the case of my last two employers). Couldn't the insurance companies do something similar? Perhaps they could put out a contract to have a doctor in each city ready to provide the service?
 
Thank you for your considerate response Rainyday.

Regarding fees charged. A PMA is a medical report from a persons own GP. It is normally requested where an applicant for life assurance or mortgage protection has disclosed an adverse medical history or where the sum proposed is over certain limits. Copy from one insurer, Hibernian follows -

"The background to the dispute stems from a demand by the IMO to increase fees for PMA reports from EUR57 to EUR77, up 35% at a time when inflation is running at approx 2.5%. In addition the IMO has instructed its members to charge EUR120 for a medical, a 48% increase on the current fee of EUR81.

In an effort to make progress, Hibernian has changed its payment for a PMA report to EUR65 up 14%. We also increased our fee for medicals to EUR88 a rise of 8.5%.....However the IMO has again instructed members not to complete reports and not to accede to requests from customers, even when they offer to pay the balance..."

Leaving arguments of anticompetitive practices aside, what is the situation where an applicant for life assurance or mortgage protection dies whilst report is caught up in this brawl.
 
What would happen if the medics said OK lads this work is of no interest to us. We don't believe that it is breach of our Hippocratic oath as it is not a medical requirment and if you don’t want to pay €130 that’s fine and dandy by us?

If they can command €130 per hour as thay no doubt do, why should they bother taking on two hours work for €88 or whatever?
 
Queenspawn said:
What would happen if the medics said OK lads this work is of no interest to us.
Click to expand...
Any individual doctor is entitled to make this decision (afaik). If the entire population of doctors were to make this decision orchestrated by their professional body, this would almost certainly be in breach of Competition legislation.
 
Rainday said "If the entire population of doctors were to make this decision orchestrated by their professional body, this would almost certainly be in breach of Competition legislation."

This is interesting, the IMO is a Trade Union. This could be characterised as a trade dispute. As a trade union the IMO is perfectly entitled to negotiate rates of pay for work carried out. Also the IMO is perfectly entitled to orchestrate a withdrawal of labour or a work to rule.

ajapale
 
Ajapale said "the IMO is a Trade Union...... perfectly entitled to orchestrate a withdrawal of labour or a work to rule"

As such a withdrawal would not breach medical ethics (as per Queenspawn), it would seem reasonable for a trade union to act on behalf of their members and potentially arrange a withdrawal of labour. However, withdrawal of the work in question would not result in an increased wait at Accident and Emergency Departments, or patients spending several days on trollies in hospital corridors. In the absence of such emotive consequences of industrial action you have to wonder if the IMO would actually be in a position to force negotiation. Can you really see anyone being bothered enough to take notice of a few insurance docs wanting a pay rise?

ESY
 
This is getting interesting, and I'd love to hear from someone with detailed knowledge of Competitions legislation. I'd imagine there is one key difference - in the case, the insurance company is not an employer, but is a contracting party. Does this impact the IMO's ability to negotiate?
 
I also think this is extremely interesting. I can't shed too much light on the subject myself but I have always been puzzled as to how self-employed taxi drivers can negotiate charging structures etc with local authorities while calling themselves a trade union while solicitors, medics etc would probably be breaking the law if they did likewise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register