Statistics Canada Chief Privacy Officer Upholds Confidentiality of Physicians’ Tax Data Joint Response from Statscan & CRA

The Ontario Specialists Association (OSA) has received a joint response (link) from the Chief Privacy Officers of Statistics Canada and the Canada Revenue Agency stating they will not proceed with the OMA’s proposed project concerning the use of Ontario physicians’ confidential tax information.

The Chief Privacy Officer said that both Statscan and the CRA take the privacy of Canadians very seriously. Statscan indicated that any reversal of that position would require addressing the

concerns of members who objected to the release of their personal tax information. Based on the feedback of thousands of Family Practice physicians and a broad cross-section of specialists (beyond the OSA’s own member specialties), we do not foresee that occurring.

In mid-November 2020 the OSA notified Ontario doctors of the OMA’s request for individual physicians’ private tax data to be aggregately collected by specialty. The OSA provided colleagues with a means to advise the federal government of their objection to this unconsented collection of personal information. Thousands of doctors immediately objected to the proposed project.

The OMA has been notified by Statistics Canada of this decision and the federal government’s decision to not provide any personal tax information, aggregate or otherwise, to the OMA.

CRA-Statscan Privacy Update for Ontario Physicians

This weekend OMA Council will be meeting to discuss the CRA-Statscan physician overhead issue to ask OMA Council to support this proposal.  

All physicians should be aware that their personal and confidential tax records will be accessed in order to gather the overhead information and as a Statscan project, the results will become a matter of public record and accessible to all.

Actions You can Take

1.     Physicians need to remind their section and district OMA Council representatives that Council does not have the legal authority to make decisions regarding the release of personal tax information to the OMA. 

2.     See the attached letter sent by legal counsel to the OMA President seeking responses to several outstanding questions and concerns about this OMA initiative.

 3.     For those physicians attending the OMA Council, we have appended a list of questions you should raise at the OMA Council meeting when this is discussed.  We believe it will happen as part of the relativity committee section of the meeting on Saturday after the lunch break.

4.     We invite those physicians who are concerned to express their objection to the use and release of the personal tax information to the federal privacy directors at the CRA, Statscan and the federal privacy commissioner.  The Statscan federal privacy director has already put a halt to the OMA’s request while it investigates the concerns of thousands of Ontario doctors who are objecting to the OMA’s failure to obtain a full consent to authorise such an unprecedented use of personal information.

CRA Privacy Questions (Download)

1. What deficiencies has the OMA identified in CRA tax data regarding the total physician overhead versus what would be found in personal and PC tax filings?

2. When did the OMA start to communicate with the CRA, Statscan and federal Privacy Commissioner?  Which organisation was contacted first?

3. Why does the OMA need access to personal information about physician professional corporations? 

4. Has the OMA sought this type of personal information in the past through third parties? Has the OMA retained the information or destroyed it? Please provide full details of the OMA’s collection, use and disclosure of non-member professional corporations.

5. Is the OMA also seeking the personal tax information for those physicians who have indicated they do not want to be a paid OMA member and therefore do not meet the implied consent test used by the OMA?

6. Thousands of physicians are now objecting to the collection, use and disclosure of their personal information for this Study. Is the OMA going to formally advise the federal Privacy Commissioner that those physicians’ data must be removed from any overhead project results if the OMA continues this unprecedented activity? 

7. Lawyers who have reviewed the OMA’s own privacy policy are of the view that this request and activity is in violation of that policy as set out as follows: 

   o   “Purposes for Collecting, Using and Disclosing Your Personal Information

   o   As an OMA member, we collect, use, and disclose your personal information for the following purposes:

   • To register you as an OMA member;

   • To communicate with you for OMA membership products, services, and information;

   • To assess your needs as an OMA member to determine which OMA products and services are useful and relevant to you;

   • To manage our continuing relationship with you;

   • To conduct surveys and polls of OMA members;

   • To permit affiliated and other reputable third-party organizations, subsidiaries, and preferred suppliers to provide products, services, and information to you;

   • To facilitate communication and otherwise assist individuals or institutions during a public health or other emergency;

   • To meet any legal or regulatory requirements such as disclosures under the Corporations Act;

   • For other purposes consistent with the above.”

8. Where in the OMA’s own Privacy Policy does it indicate that members personal information will be used for statistical or scholarly studies, particularly broken down by individual specialty?

9.  Will the OMA admit that the Relativity statistical study is not a statistical or scholarly study and is in fact being conducted for commercial purposes?

10.  Why did the OMA think that members’ implied consent for general OMA membership activities would extend to this kind overhead study?

11.  How did the OMA determine that using personal information from members for a statistical study was a “purpose consistent with” other membership collection and uses?

12.  Why did the OMA think that members’ implied consent for general OMA membership activities would extend to this kind of Study? Why was the OMA afraid to openly disclose this unprecedented use of implied consent to access physicians’ personal tax information and seek an approval from members?

13. Has the OMA used members’ personal information to receive their professional corporate or partnership information in other circumstances? If so, can you please provide a list of the personal information disclosed, dates of disclosure and the list of third parties to which the personal information was provided?

14.  What steps has the OMA taken to monitor and limit internal access to the personal information that could be collected, used or disclosed for the Study? Which specific OMA divisions, groups or members will have access to it?

15.  What is the precise purpose of the Study? Is it to provide relativity tax data to OMA or to provide an analysis of physician overhead for government negotiations?

16.  Can you please confirm whether the OMA is intending to use the Study internally, or whether it plans on disclosing the Study results to others?

17.  What impact assessment has the OMA undertaken to date to gauge the potential impact this will have on the profession?  What will the OMA do if it finds that CRA data lowers current physician overhead assumptions?  Continue or terminate the project?

18. Will the results of the Study be confidential? Who will have access to the Study’s results? Will members receive a copy of the Study once it is completed?

19. Are the results of the Study going to stay in OMA’s possession, or does OMA intend to share them directly with the provincial government during negotiations?

20. Does the OMA have any other intended uses for the Study beyond negotiating with the provincial government? 

21. Has the OMA considered the need to terminate the request to CRA/Statscan in view of the widespread concerns raised by thousands of Ontario physicians? What other data mining is the OMA proposing to do with these overhead data? 

22. Has any other provincial medical association made a similar overhead request to CRA/Statscan?  If not, why is the OMA pursuing this while being unaware of the downsides to physicians like audits or the expected repeat that CRA data on physicians for several reasons is incomplete and will only provide flawed answers that do more harm to physicians with an MOH that has repeatedly tried to undermine doctors?

Statistics Canada Privacy Response to Physicians Objecting – Project Stopped Pending Investigation

Statistics Canada Response // Réponse de Statistique Canada

OSA’s Legal Letter Sent to the OMA leadership RE: Medical Services Payment Committee (“MSPC”)

OSA Legal Counsel Calls on OMA President to Stop Improper Fee Reduction to Specialists

Medical Services Payment Committee Action Lacks Consultation and Authority

Several specialist sections, mainly OSA members, recently received a last-minute OMA email communication (Oct 24) from Dr. Laurie Colman in his capacity as Co-Chair of the Medical Services Payment Committee (MSPC).  OSA specialists were to be available the same evening.  No agenda or indicated purpose of the meeting was provided until requested by some specialists.  

During the teleconference Dr. Colman rapidly presented 6 options considered by the MSPC.  Some options would have had no financial impact on OSA specialists. The selected option is the one with the greatest impact on OSA colleagues.  The proposal allows those sections that received funding from the arbitration process to increase their fees.  It also allowed those ‘funded’sections to increase fees also used by OSA specialists.  The impact is that those OSA specialists would have to reduce other fees within their Section at a comparable amount.  The impact on OSA specialties is inordinate and creates an internal fee reduction.  Requests to the OMA to obtain a copy of the options have been ignored.  No explanation has been given why OSA specialties were predominantly impacted when that was not necessary.

Contravenes Kaplan Arbitration Decision

This creates unwanted and disruptive fee changes within OSA sections and some others.  Creating a reduction in this manner is contrary to the Kaplan arbitration decision. 

OMA Tries to Railroad Affected Specialists

Without much time to respond, the OMA distributed an Excel sheet showing the impact on sections.  Among the significant impacts are Cardiology at $6.1M, Gastroenterology at $3.7M, Nephrology ~$2.5M, etc.  The imposed MSPC deadline to volunteer specialty cuts is tomorrow, (Nov 12).

OSA Actions to Protect Specialists

Last Thursday night and on the weekend the OSA Board met and unanimously agreed that a legal letter must be sent to the OMA President and OMA Board Chair for the purpose of halting this MSPC process.  This unprecedented MSPC manoeuvre contradicts the OMA Board’s solemn promise to turn a new leaf, create trust and ensure equitability among doctors and accountability towards its members.  It is difficult to see how the OMA leadership feels this meets that standard.

A copy of the OSA’s legal letter sent to the OMA leadership today.  A copy is attached. 

 OSA Call to Action

We would strongly recommend that you email the OMA President and Chair objecting to this proposed action. Their email addresses are below.

 Dr. Sohail Gandhi                            sohail.gandhi@oma.org

Dr. Tim Nicholas                               tim.nicholas@oma.org

Sincerely, 

OSA Board of Directors

78% of OSA physicians asked to replace their OMA Insurance

In our February survey, 78% of OSA physicians asked to replace their OMA Insurance with better quality coverage, cost savingsand insurance that you own and control. As a specialist you are represented by the OSA and can participate in this limited time offer to replace your OMA Insurance.

Specialists are replacing their OMA Insurance for 3 reasons.

1. Quality – RBC Insurance is owned and controlled by you. These are not group insurance plans and are not tied to the OSA separate representation from the OMA.
   

2. Cost – RBC rates and discounts are guaranteed for the life of the policy. In some cases, the cost for disability insurance may be slightly higher but policy provisions are better and the policy is convertible to long term care insurance. In the case of life insurance and critical illness insurance, rates are less with RBC (after OMA rebate).  
   

3. Benefits – Policy provisions are fully guaranteed.

Below are the highlights of the quality differences between OMA and RBC Insurance:

Disability insurance

The current OMA group disability plan terminates at age 70 unless you have opted for the 70+ extension. RBC coverage can be maintained to age 100. RBC offers a minimum inflation protector (not available with OMA Insurance), a recovery benefit (not available with OMA Insurance), 12-months protection in case of a reoccurring disability (not available with OMA Insurance) and a long-term care insurance conversion which provides lifetime coverage for home and facility care (OMA offers Encore 65 which provides a maximum of 3 years of home care).  In some cases, the RBC Insurance disability may be more expensive than the OMA, but RBC policy provisions and long-term care conversion option are guaranteed. 

Life insurance

OMA Insurance offers two life insurance products; Group term to 75 and Flex term 10/20 through New York Life. Most physicians with OMA life insurance have Group term to 75 where rates increase every 5 years, policies are not convertible to permanent insurance and up to $2,000,000 is available. At age 65, the OMA Group term 75 life insurance benefit decreases by 10% per year while the rate does not change. At age 75, up to 10% of the original coverage may be paid up. The Flex term 10/20 offers a 10 or 20-year term insurance policy that is convertible to permanent insurance. There is no premium rebate on the Flex term insurance. The RBC YourTermTM 10 is an individual life insurance policy, that is convertible to permanent insurance, rates are guaranteed. In most cases, rates are less than the OMA group term 75 insurance (even after OMA refund).

Critical illness insurance

The OMA Sun life plan offers coverage to age 70 whereas the RBC Insurance policy offers coverage to age 75. In most cases, there is a cost savings to age 70 with RBC Insurance. The RBC Insurance policy is convertible to long term care coverage, your policy provisions are guaranteed, and you own and control your insurance. With respect to the definitions, RBC covers early assist illness including prostate, breast, skin blood, intestinal and thyroid cancer as well as coronary angioplasty. None of these early assist illnesses are covered with an early assist benefit with Sun life OMA insurance. The payment of an early assist benefit does not reduce the critical illness benefit in the RBC policy. 

This limited time offer is available until May 2019.
Should you wish to apply, please complete the RBC Insurance application, scan and email these to info@osainsurance.com. Should you have any questions, call the OSA Insurance representatives at 416‐222‐1311, 1‐877‐314‐1311 or email at info@osainsurance.com.

OSA Statement Regarding Binding Arbitration Award

The Board of Directors of the Ontario Specialists Association (OSA) acknowledges the decision of the board of arbitration released earlier this week concerning phase one issues between the Ontario Medical Association and the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (Ministry).

The award validates the OSA’s position on several fundamental issues including the inherent unfairness of the across-the-board fee cuts imposed unilaterally by the previous government and the unreasonableness of the Ministry’s proposals to place a hard cap on the physician services budget and impose additional fee cuts on targeted specialists.

“The award is a reflection of the concerns that specialists have advanced for years, including most recently under the umbrella of the OSA,” said OSA Chair Dr. David Jacobs.  “While there is clearly more work to do, the award is a good start,” he continued.  

OSA Board member Dr. James Swan agreed.  “What is encouraging is that the provincial government is now willing to work collaboratively with physicians going forward to address issues and improve the health care system.  It is incumbent on organizations like ours, on behalf of all patients, to take it up on its offer.”

The OSA is particularly heartened by the arbitration board’s statement on the contentious issue of physician income relativity.  On page 20 of the decision, the board states regarding years 3 and 4 of the award, “…we believe it is appropriate for us to indicate that, at this time, we would not be inclined as a board of arbitration to direct that the fees or compensation paid to some groups should be reduced, in order to increase the fees or compensation paid to other groups, whether on relativity grounds or otherwise.”

The OSA formed in November 2018 and is composed of more than 3,000 leading medical and surgical specialists in Ontario providing leading edge care to the most acutely ill patients in the health care system.

For more information about the OSA, visit:  www.specialistsontario.com.

OSA’s OMA Insurance Replacement Program - Update

Last week you received a package on the OSA’s OMA Insurance Replacement Program. The OSA represents the interests and advocates on behalf of the Ontario Specialists. The OSA currently represents 8 specialty groups that voted to leave the OMA in November 2018. Below are some details on the OMA Insurance Replacement Program.

The OSA’s OMA Insurance Replacement Program allows OSA members to replace their OMA life, disability, critical illness and office overhead insurance with no medical and a simplified application with RBC Insurance. RBC Insurance will replace your (and your spouse/partner’s) OMA Insurance with identical insurance amounts and options where applicable.

• Life Insurance – Replace up to $5,000,000 of OMA life insurance.

• Disability Insurance – Replace up to $25,000 per month of OMA disability insurance.

• Critical Illness Insurance – Replace up to $350,000 of OMA critical illness insurance.

• Office Overhead Insurance – Replace up to $30,000 per month of OMA office overhead insurance.

• The insurer is RBC Life Insurance Company.

• Discounted rates for disability, office overhead and critical illness insurance.

• Rates for life insurance are less than OMA Group term 75 insurance (even after OMA rebate).

• NO medical tests (blood or urine) required.

• NO detailed medical questions.

• NO minimum number of participants required.

• Policies are individually owned and controlled by you.

• Guaranteed policy provisions.

 Offer expires Friday May 17, 2019.

Below are the most common questions we received last week…

Why did the OSA launch this program now?

Insurance has been a primary concern specifically, the insurance controlled by the Ontario Medical Association (OMA Insurance). The OMA has made it clear in their communications that they are attempting to hold OSA members hostage with their insurance. In February, we surveyed members. 72% have OMA Insurance and 78% want to replace their OMA insurance with better quality coverage, potential cost savings and physicians want to own and control their insurance.

Is my insurance tied to the OSA ratifying separate representation and de‐Randing?

NO. Once RBC issues a policy under our program, your OSA insurance cannot be cancelled or changed irrespective of the status of OSA ratification. The OSA recognised that there was a strong need to have an immediate and superior insurance portfolio of key products to what the OMA offers while it launched its discussions to obtain Ontario government recognition for OSA self‐determination. Your decision to move to the OSA insurance program, assuming it meets your needs, will be seen as further evidence that you no longer wish to be represented by the OMA. There is a deadline to the OSA insurance program that strongly suggests you should determine if it is more advantageous. If it is, your improved insurance coverage will be in place because the OSA negotiated an independent program that is not tied to any membership but rather driven by our commitment to provide value and remove obstacles that prevent you from leaving the OMA as so many of you have made clear.

When will I get my new insurance policy?

RBC has started underwriting policies and will be issuing insurance policies March 1, 2019.

Is my insurance guaranteed?

YES. Rates and policy provisions are fully guaranteed. Unlike the OMA Insurance, neither the insurance company (RBC Insurance) nor the Association (the OSA) can cancel or change your insurance. The offer to move coverage to RBC is available until May 17, 2019.

Will the OSA have a health and dental plan?

Yes. We plan on launching this in the late spring 2019 along with travel, office contents and cyber insurance.

The OSA insurance representative, Levine Financial Group will contact you to answer questions and help OSA members replace their OMA Insurance. Complete details are on the OSA Insurance website www.OSAInsurance.com. Should you wish to apply, please complete the RBC Insurance application, scan and email these to info@osainsurance.com. Should you have any questions, call the OSA Insurance representatives at 416‐222‐1311, 1‐877‐314‐1311 or email at info@osainsurance.com.

Sincerely,

OSA Board of Directors

Dr. David Jacobs, Dr. Joseph Noora, Dr. James Swan, Dr. Mark Prieditis, Dr. Baseer Khan, Dr. Michael Gould, Dr. Jordan Weinstein, Dr. Aditya Bharatha, Dr. Chritopher O’Brien

OSA Communique - 2019 - A Year OF Change For Ontario Physicians

 Summary of OSA Activities Occurring in December 2018

• OSA Board meets weekly in person and/or via teleconference discussing and deciding key matters of importance to OSA specialists

• Meeting being scheduled with Health Minister Christine Elliott re: OSA separate representation

• OSA Governance Sub-Committee struck to create a transparent organisation that represents OSA members equally and respects minority rights of small specialists

• Several OSA Board resolutions passed unanimously include: 

  • Ensuring each OSA specialty is represented on OSA Board

  • De-Randing for all OSA members

  • Approval of RBC’s OSA life/disability/critical illness insurance program to replace OMA’s

  • Releasing RFP for other ancillary insurance and financial services

  • Affirmation on key positions re BA, separate representation and de-Randing (below)

• Creation of OSA organisational structure to initiate engagement of senior legal negotiators, corporate lawyers, economic advisors/analysts and OSA CEO/staff, etc.

• Strategic alliance with Canada’s largest financial institution to meet critically needed insurance services

• February 1-2019 roll-out of the OSA RBC life/disability/critical illness/business overhead replacement program to facilitate specialists transferring from OMA programs on a competitive to significantly less expensive on a package basis avoiding rebates

• Individual physician ownership of your insurance plans without risk of losing important coverage irrespective of your membership status

• January 2019 RFP be issued to leading insurers seeking more competitively priced health, medical, travel, dental, wealth management, private banking, leasing and other commonly required financial services

• Pending review and approval of other RBC no medical life/disability/critical illness/long-term care insurance coverage for specialists, spouses, etc. beyond the Phase 1 OMA replacement program

• Review of other non-financial services needed by OSA members

• Deployment of government relations program introducing OSA to legislators and MOH officials

• Ongoing communications to keep OSA specialists and other Ontario specialists abreast of developments

• Maintaining a respectful relationship position with the OMA during and after the formation of the new OSA organisation to optimise the overall bargaining position and profile of all Ontario physicians with the request that it will be reciprocated (see position on interim OMA membership reminder in this communiqué).

• Affirmation that OSA will outsource for the best available expertise to avoid creation of an expensive bureaucracy and other overheads to control cost of voluntary OSA membership fees

OSA Positions on Binding Arbitration, Separate Representation and De-Randing

The formation of the Ontario Specialists Association is well under way.  There has been a tremendous amount of good will as OSA specialists firmly endorse it as their legitimate representative to negotiate on their behalf. Other supportive specialists have contacted the OSA about joining.

This kind of success entails change, and we all know change brings uncertainty and fear. The OSA change is no different with many comments and statements being made since the successful referendum.  While most comments are accurate, there have been some that have confused the purpose and position of the OSA.  An example is the unwillingness to recognise that the OSA now represents ~20% of Ontario’s specialists after only 3 months since its inception.

Why was the OSA formed?

1. There continues to be serious governance problems at the OMA and an intractability to appropriately and equitably represent minority interests.  Despite several efforts, the expected changes have not materialised following the overwhelming rejection of the OMA’s 2016 tPSA proposal.  These include the failure to ensure wide ranging OMA governance reform and the execution of an impartial forensic audit.

2. The OMA’s untested relativity model is widely recognised as being irretrievably flawed.  Instead of quickly fixing a recognised problem it has instead created the conditions that have set section against section to the benefit of the MOH.  The failure to manage this crisis has been worsened by a series of flip-flops.  Efforts to find a better way like the proven American RVU approach have been rebuffed without material explanation.

3. The needs of family physicians and specialists have changed significantly such that no one organisation can reasonably meet their different interests and requirements.  This is a fact of how medicine has evolved, and our organisational capability has not kept pace.  It was not a surprise that an OSA would emerge.  It is important now that both the OMA and the OSA mutually respect the existence of each other, as we have pledged, in order to meet the quite different needs of our respective physician members.

What is the purpose of the OSA?

1. To create an organisation that has a transparent, accountable and ethical governance structure that fairly and equitably represents the unique needs of specialist physicians irrespective of their size and area of medicine, while advancing the health care needs of their patients in a manner that has been overlooked far too long.

2. To negotiate with the Ontario government in a results-oriented and commonly aligned manner that is premised on ensuring meaningful change and improvement for our patients while ensuring respect for Ontario specialists.  To repair the damage that has occurred to specialists over the last decade in an environment of trust recognising that it will take time to accomplish what both sides seek.

3. To obtain separate representation now to ensure that the OSA is the sole representative of those member specialties in a separate negotiation.  This requires legislative change to the Representational Rights Act.  We do not seek to interfere with the rights of the OMA to represent those physicians who freely elect to remain with the OMA.

4. To end the application of mandatory OMA membership by ending the randing of doctors who are members of the OSA via a legislative change in the Ontario Medical Association Dues Act.  It is the business of other physicians who are members of the OMA to decide what they believe is best for them and the OMA with respect to Rand membership.

5. The OSA has written to both the Ontario Health Minister and the Arbitrator and specifically asked that the OSA’s involvement in the OMA binding arbitration process be paused until the legislative changes to the Rep Rights Act and the OMA Dues Act are amended in the Ontario legislature. We have not in any way abandoned BA rights for OSA members.  Likewise, we have not sought to interfere with the OMA’s involvement in the current binding arbitration process as has been incorrectly suggested.

6. Our priority it to secure legislative change to make the OSA the recognised negotiation entity for OSA specialists only and to ensure that separate negotiation representation, a separate binding arbitration process and de-randing rights be accorded to the OSA that recognises the uniqueness of our collective specialty care services to patients.

7. To negotiate a fair agreement with the Ontario government and to retain all of the other attributes and protections that have previously been negotiated for all doctors, including current and future OSA members. This includes binding arbitration rights as a cornerstone element to ensure fairness and equity between Ontario specialists and the Ontario government when needed.

 OSA Receives Reply Letter From Ontario Health Minister

 The OSA has received a response from the Health Minister this week recognising the emergence of the OSA and has committed to meeting in January to discuss our representation request and need for self-determination.  The important building block work of the OSA Board continues. 

Questions Re 2019 OMA Membership Renewal Notices

OSA specialists are receiving 2019 OMA membership renewal forms and have sought our advice regarding whether they should renew in view of the recent successful endorsement of self-determination by eight (8) specialist sections representing over 3,000 doctors. Our advice is that members should continue to protect their interests by renewing OMA membership on a monthly basis only.  This will permit OSA members to end OMA membership once separate representation and negotiation rights have been recognised by the Ontario government.  There may be other reasons why some specialists may need to maintain OMA membership.  The most notable reason is their OMA insurance if it is determined that their age or health status makes that a relevant factor. 

If you have further questions, please email them to the OSA at info@specialistsontario.com

OSA Positions on Binding Arbitration, Separate Representation and De-Randing

December 14, 2018

The formation of the Ontario Specialists Association is well under way.  There has been a tremendous amount of good will as OSA specialists firmly endorse it as their legitimate representative to negotiate on their behalf.  Other supportive specialists have contacted the OSA about joining.

This kind of success entails change, and we all know change brings uncertainty and concern. The OSA change is no different and many comments have been made since the successful referendum.  While most comments are accurate, there have been some that have confused the purpose and position of the OSA.  An example is the resistance to recognise that the OSA now represents ~20% of Ontario’s specialists after only 3 months since its inception.

Why was the OSA formed?

1. There continues to be serious governance problems at the OMA and an intractability to ensure appropriate and equitable represent minority interests.  Despite several efforts, the expected changes have not materialised following the overwhelming rejection of the 2016 tPSA.  These include the failure to ensure wide ranging OMA governance reform and the execution of an impartial forensic audit.

2. The OMA’s untested relativity model is widely recognised as being irretrievably flawed.  Instead of quickly fixing a recognised problem it has instead created the conditions that have set section against section to the benefit of the MOH.  The failure to manage this crisis has been worsened by a series of last-minute flip-flops.  Efforts to find a better way like the proven American RVU approach have been rebuffed without material explanation.

3. The needs of family physicians and specialists have changed significantly such that no one organisation can reasonably meet their different interests and requirements.  Medicine has evolved, but our provincial organisation has not kept pace.  It was no surprise that an OSA would eventually emerge.  Now that that has happened, it is important for both the OMA and the OSA to mutually respect the existence of each other, as we have pledged, in order to meet the quite different needs of our respective physician members.

What is the purpose of the OSA?

1. To create an organisation that has a transparent, accountable and ethical governance structure that fairly and equitably represents the unique needs of specialist physicians irrespective of their size and area of medicine, while advancing the health care needs of their patients.

2. To negotiate with the Ontario government in a results-oriented and commonly aligned manner that is premised on ensuring meaningful change and improvement for our patients while ensuring respect for Ontario specialists.  To repair the damage that has occurred to specialists over the last decade in an environment of trust recognising that it will take time to accomplish what both sides seek.

3. To obtain separate representation now to ensure that the OSA is the sole representative for the 8-member specialties and who can conduct separate negotiations with government.  This requires legislative change to the Representational Rights Act to obtain the above-noted requirement.  We do not seek to interfere with the rights of the OMA to represent those physicians who have freely elected to remain with the OMA.

4. To end the application of mandatory OMA membership by abolishing the Randing of doctors who are members of the OSA via a legislative change in the Ontario Medical Association Dues Act.  Other physicians who remain as OMA members can decide whether Randed or voluntary membership is best for them.

5. The OSA has written to both the Ontario Health Minister and the Arbitrator and specifically asked that the OSA’s involvement in the OMA binding arbitration process be paused until the legislative changes to the Rep Rights Act and the OMA Dues Act are amended in the Ontario legislature. We have not in any way abandoned BA rights for OSA members.  Likewise, we have not sought to interfere with the OMA’s involvement in the current binding arbitration process as has been incorrectly suggested.

6. To negotiate a fair agreement with the Ontario government and to retain all of the other attributes and protections that have previously been negotiated for all doctors, including current and future OSA members. This includes binding arbitration rights as a cornerstone element to ensure fairness and equity between Ontario specialists and the Ontario government when needed.

OSA Receives Reply Letter From Ontario Health Minister

The OSA has received a response from the Health Minister this week recognising the emergence of the OSA and has committed to an early meeting to discuss our representation request and need for self-determination.  The important building block work of the OSA Board continues.