Veterinary interns, residents allege suppressed wages in antitrust lawsuit

By Mike Scarcella

April 3 (Reuters) - A lawsuit filed in Virginia federal court accuses a group of universities, animal hospitals and a trade association for veterinary clinics of conspiring to suppress wages and employment mobility of veterinarians who seek training through internship and residency programs.

The proposed class action, filed on Wednesday in Roanoke by two former veterinary interns, names as defendants the American Association of Veterinary Clinicians and others, including the University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine and the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University.

The trade association’s sponsorship of a “matching” program that links intern and residency applicants to programs was at the heart of the lawsuit.

The former interns said the American Association of Veterinary Clinicians and other defendants were violating antitrust law by sharing information with competitors about employment terms and conditions, including compensation.

A spokesperson for the association said it was reviewing the lawsuit and declined further comment. Tufts declined to comment, and the University of Pennsylvania did not immediately respond to a request for one.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs declined to comment.

Veterinary residencies typically last two to three years. The lawsuit said residency experience is often necessary for a veterinarian to become a board-certified specialist.

The placement program for interns and residents requires applicants to accept employment with the matched program. Applicants are barred from negotiating for a position before the release of the results of the match.

The average pay for veterinary interns was about $56,000 versus the $131,000 that a first-year veterinarian entering private practice can earn, according to the lawsuit.

The plaintiffs estimated that there are more than 5,000 class members in the lawsuit. Their complaint demanded unspecified monetary damages and a court order against future anticompetitive conduct.

The lawsuit resembled one filed last month accusing some major U.S. hospital systems and a professional association for pharmacists of conspiring to restrict recruitment, hiring and compensation for resident pharmacists seeking advanced training.

The case is Riley Amore and Carolina Parker v. American Association of Veterinary Clinicians et al, U.S. District Court, Western District of Virginia, No. 7:25-cv-00229-EKD-CKM.

For plaintiffs: Frank Hedin and Tyler Somes of Hedin LLP; Matthew Perez and Patrick McGahan of Scott + Scott; and Roman Lifson of Christian & Barton

For defendants: No appearances yet

Read more:

US House panel launches antitrust probe of medical residency system

Pharmacy residents accuse US hospitals of wage-fixing in new lawsuit