• Blog
  • About
  • Contact

Just Another Update

4/13/2018

30 Comments

 
"Once again, for those new to this blog site, at present there are 50 posts on the blog and each has its own set of comments. To read the comments you have to hit the word "Comments" at the beginning or end of the post. Somewhat confusing is that when you bring up the comments for a specific post it eliminates the other posts from the screen. To bring the other posts back up simply go back to the top of the page and click on Blog. Feel free to comment should you wish. No email address is required to make a comment so anonymity is strong. Due to some previous abuse of this right to anonymously comment, I have had to include an approval option, but I try to approve constructive comments within 24 hours. One last point of note, to read the earliest posts you have to click on the word "​<<Previous" at the very bottom of the posts available. Finally, for those just looking for a good summary of the Dr. Kearney case, simply scroll down to the previous 12/10/2016 post. For social media developments on the Dr. Kearney situation I would encourage you to visit the excellent "Save Dr. Kearney Facebook Page": 
https://www.facebook.com/Save-Dr-Kearney-1039697039481791/

While we wait I just thought I would update this blog post with respect to where we are  with regards to the University’s attempts to get the Dr. Kearney lawsuit dismissed, and then maybe just revisit some other stuff simply to keep the fires burning.
 
There appears to be a misconception by some out there with respect to this recusal of Judge Reynolds in the Dr. Kearney case. In the comment section of the previous post Glum appeared to infer that the recusal of Judge Reynolds in the University’s "3rd attempt" to get the case dismissed is some legal ploy by Dr. Kearney’s attorney to prolong this whole thing. In actuality, Judge Reynolds heard the entire University motion for dismissal of the case on Tuesday, March 20. Rather than rule on the motion at the end of oral arguments, “Judge Reynolds” announced that he had a conflict of interest because his wife worked at the Gill Heart Institute. In other words “he recused himself”. The plaintiff’s motion for his removal from the bench on this case is “mandated by Kentucky Statute”. 
 
The case now has a new judge. The honorable Ernesto Scorsone has been assigned to the bench. Further court proceedings will be delayed until Judge Scorsone has familiarized himself with the case. It is perhaps no surprise that Judge Scorsone received both his bachelor’s degree and his law degree from the University of Kentucky (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernesto_Scorsone), but I suspect it is almost impossible to find a circuit court judge in Fayette County who isn’t in some way associated with the University. Having said that, Judge Scorsone’s resume does present him as a liberal thinker and a defender of civil rights, so I like his history with respect to what we are dealing with here.
 
With regard to the other stuff, I believe I included this in my earlier summary of the Dr. Kearney case, but thought this letter from Dr. Kearney’s attorney, Mr. Pafunda, to the Hospital attorney, Mr. Cliff Iler, might be worth revisiting.  This letter, submitted by Dr. Kearney’s attorney Mr. Pafunda and delivered to the Hospital attorney Mr. Iler on November 3, 2014, was written in response to the University’s threat to ‘take the deal or we will destroy you’re your career’.  This threat was made to Dr. Kearney by the University’s General Council, Mr. Thro, in the presence of both Mr. Iler and Mr. Pafunda. The letter nicely states the concerns that Dr. Kearney’s attorney had with respect to not only the treatment Dr. Kearney was receiving, but perhaps more importantly, the timing of this treatment and its relationship to the retaliation issues.

  
November 3, 2014
Mr. Clifton Iler Hospital Counsel
 
Re:   Paul A. Kearney, MD, D.Sci, MS, FACS
         Professor of Surgery
         University of Kentucky College of Medicine
 
I write to advise that Dr. Kearney rejects your recent offer. I also write to advise that the offer merits no “in kind” reply. Rather, it is obvious that the most recent complaints regarding Dr. Kearney, upon which this “action” is grounded, not only lack basis in fact but constitute a contrived effort to maliciously document Dr. Kearney’s personnel file with allegations of wrongful conduct, unsupported by the University’s own investigation(s) for the sole purpose of removing Dr. Kearney (a senior member of the Faculty Council and Chairman of the Department of Surgery Practice Plan Committee) from his position in “retaliation” for his public disclosure of Dr. Karpf’s impropriety i.e. attempting to gain control of KMSF practice plan funding contrary to University regulations. 
 
Also disturbing is the timing of the September 4th and 5th complaints, solicited and fabricated by the University, to cover its retaliation against Dr. Kearney, for publically disclosing Dr. Karpf’s purposeful disregard for University regulations in an effort to secure control of the KMSF funds.
 
The following is undisputed:
 
1.       During a faculty council meeting Dr. Karpf threatened to terminate Dr. Kearney after he disclosed to the counsel Dr. Karpf’s lawless effort to misappropriate KMSF funds in direct violation of University regulations. The “threat” was made in the presence of the faculty council members and Bill Thro, University General Counsel.
 
2.       Shortly thereafter a student is alleged to complain that Dr. Kearney included a discriminatory remark during a lecture. A review of the circumstance revealed that no other student complained. Rather, those in attendance rewarded Dr. Kearney’s lecture with a vigorous ovation at its conclusion. Review of the lecture recording confirmed that the “complaint” was unfounded. This current “action” is in part grounded on that “meritless” claim.
 
3.       On September 5, 2014 a patient, James Wilson, complained about Dr. Kearney.  The complaint did not involve patient care or treatment but rather Dr. Kearney’s abrasive remarks made in course of inserting a feeding tube in a severely injured hepatitis B and C positive young man when the patient attempted to bite a resident physician who was assisting Dr. Kearney. The patient was safely and successfully treated. This current action is in part grounded on that “meritless” claim.
 
4.       Dr. Kearney by agreement was placed on administrative leave to permit an investigation of the James Wilson event to proceed. Dr. Kearney agreed to the temporary administrative leave to insure independence of the investigation and to protect the University from potential criticism from the patient that the findings might be influenced by Dr. Kearney’s presence in the department. The investigation is concluded. No disciplinary action or charge has followed.
 
5.       A “few” days later Dr. Karpf contacted Greg Goodman and tells Mr. Goodman that Dr. Kearney struck a nurse. Dr. Kearney’s personnel file confirms that there was an allegation lodged at one time. However, that the University’s investigation determined the allegation was unfounded and that no disciplinary action followed. The more disturbing aspect of this event is Dr. Karpf’s conduct in sharing the contents of Dr. Kearney’s confidential personnel file with someone outside the University - “particularly” because the shared information was unsubstantiated.
 
6.       The University’s recent effort to manufacture a “fictitious” paper trail comprised of solicited claims and allegations of improper behavior lacking factual validity is nothing more than a “veiled” effort by the University to cover its retaliation against Dr. Kearney because of his disclosure of Dr. Karpf’s attempt to assume control of KMSF funds in violation of University regulations.  
 
In reply we demand that Dr. Kearney be immediately returned to work without change of job status, title or compensation, that his personnel file be purged of any record of false and misleading contents, and that the University be restrained from further action designed to damage, alter or impact Dr. Kearney’s employment relationship with the University and/or his reputation.

 
I post this letter because I think it presents some of the foundation material for Dr. Kearney’s retaliation claim as well as a valid basis for allowing these court proceedings to continue. Beyond what was covered in the letter we have also seen the many attempts by the University to either hinder the investigations into these matters (e.g. open records lawsuits, missing recordings of the MSEC trial, confiscation of Dr. Kearney’s personal items, monitoring of Dr. Kearney’s emails, banning Dr. Kearney from the University campus, etc.) as well as the clear denial of due process in administering this injustice (e.g. denial of representation in the MSEC trails, the use of KMSF employees in the conduction of the MSEC trials, the use of unsigned and possibly fabricated data in the development of this case against Dr. Kearney, etc.). Cumulatively these support the contention that the hospital and the University administration are willing to spend an exorbitant amount of time and money to discredit this highly respected trauma surgeon. Finally, keep in mind the justification for all of these expensive and extreme disciplinary actions taken by the University and hospital administrators is a claim of a behavior problem that they have not only "endorsed" but also "rewarded" for over 25 years. If this doesn’t give you pause to question the real motivations behind this vendetta, than I can only guess you either hate Dr. Kearney or you work for the administration.
30 Comments
Fred Jones
4/15/2018 08:56:14 am

Interesting new judge..I hope Kearney's litany of abusive comments doesn't include any documented disparaging statements about gay people...

Anyway, the most recent debacle is that he 2018 US News and World Report Rankings of medical colleges has come out and guess what UK is unranked!

https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/search?program=top-medical-schools&name=kentucky

Apparently this is because someone in the dean's office failed to provide the necessary information to US news although more skeptical readers might wonder if this is actually because with the steady stream of departures the college isn't doing as well as the leadership would like people to think.

Surely this will hurt efforts to recruit new faculty for the various open chairs and to fill up the new research building?

You have to wonder how this could have happened when we already have 37 dean level administrators in the college or if anyone is going to take responsibility for this oversight or be held responsible for it?

Embarrassing.

Reply
Dan Noonan
4/16/2018 02:26:02 am

Thanks for your comment Fred Jones. To begin with, this case has nothing to do with lifestyle choice, but I suspect in Dr. Kearney’s notable career as a trauma surgeon those that have had the privilege to work with him would gladly attest to the fact that he does not discriminate with respect to whose life he happens to be saving. Furthermore, I suspect the same could be said about Judge Scorsone’s professional career. Having said that, I might also add that this case does have a layer of discrimination in it. As we have noted many times, the University and hospital administration and their lawyers have thrown due process out of the window in their effort to destroy Dr. Kearney’s career.

Moving on, I suspect you are correct with respect to this US News and World Report ranking. Our former Dean was probably too busy at Keeneland or the Iroquois Hunt Club schmoozing and raising those big donations to bother with this trivial matter of US rankings. Hopefully the new Dean will figure this out.

Reply
Mojo
4/16/2018 09:00:21 am

I would be willing to bet that if Kearney's personnel file contains any claims of disparaging remarks about gay people they can be found as some unsigned document planted in that fictitious 2 inch folder of Zwishes that he claimed under oath was given to deBeer but that deBeer claimed under oath that he knows nothing about. But come to think of it, if there were any documentation for disparaging remarks about gay people in Kearney's private personnel file Mike Karpf would have mentioned it to Greg Goodman.

Reply
Dan Noonan
4/16/2018 09:40:57 am

Thank you Mojo for the comment. Again, I do not think this issue has any relevance or bearing on the court case being considered here. As I see it, this is simply the University's 3rd and last ditch effort to keep this from going to a jury trial. But as this case and history has taught us, desperation can make people resort to desperate measures.

Fred Jones
4/16/2018 01:29:28 pm

The judge may be sensitive to the concept that behaviors that were tolerated in the past are not acceptable now and he may also be on board with the idea that behaviors that make people uncomfortable should not ever be tolerated, even if some people don’t mind them. I’m also not sure about the theory that Kearney’s good deeds somehow protect him from the consequences of his bad deeds- I wonder if the same applies to Bill Cosby?

Dan Noonan
4/17/2018 02:13:56 am

Thanks for the comment Fred Jones. You may be right but we will just have to wait and see. Personally, I can't envision a judge endorsing the idea that this sudden change of posture after 25 years of rewarding it, was caused by nothing more than an incident that: a) couldn't be validated upon interviewing those present and b) previous legal attempts to capitalize on it failed. Furthermore, I would hope that any judge would recognize and question the true intent behind the extreme lack of due process involved in the mediation of these disciplinary proceedings. This alone one would hope would be enough to simply say, let's take this before a jury trial.

Will
4/16/2018 04:24:48 am

Let’s see now, a gay judge versus sanctimonious evangelicals that compose the group of lawyers attempting to mask the mismanagement of hospital and university revenue. Side me with the gay judge. I would much rather stand with a civil rights advocate than a hypocrite.

Reply
Mole Ester
4/16/2018 04:35:03 am

Here's another success story from UK. Joe Berger MD, Professor of Medicine and Neurology and former UK Chairman of Neurology just received the distinguished alumni award from his Alma Mater, Jefferson Medical College. A great honor not lightly awarded by JMC. As many may recall Joe was removed as Chairman of Neurology by Dean Fred de Beer and EVPHA Michael Karpf. They just did not like him. Leaving UK, Joe landed on his feet becoming Chief of Movement Disorders in the Department of Neurology at the University of Pennsylvania. So let me get this straight. Not good enough to be Chairman at the University of Kentucky but excellent enough to be hired at the University of Pennsylvania. Hmmm? And they are still having trouble figuring out why we did so poorly in the Press-Ganey survey.

Reply
Felix Leiter
4/16/2018 03:58:40 pm

Uh, last I checked being chair of a neurology department is a higher position than head of movement disorders. Sure, Penn is a more prestigious institution, but don't act like both positions are comparable. Nice try, Mole Ester.

Reply
Dan Noonan
4/17/2018 09:05:52 am

Thanks for your comment Felix. I agree, and hopefully Dr. Berger is doing well at Penn and feeling appreciated. As noted by The Real Mole below, it looks like an adequate replacement has been found. Of course the down side of this is that recruitment can be both time consuming and expensive, so I feel certain that filling this vacancy didn’t come cheap. Unfortunately the College and hospital have been spending a lot of money recently attempting to fill executive, physician, faculty and staff positions.

Dan Noonan
4/16/2018 07:14:56 am

Thanks for your comments Will and Mole Ester. That's the great thing about being in the United States Will, there is a defined separation of church and state. Who we choose as a partner in life is not mandated by some religious tenet.

Good news about Dr. Berger Mole Ester. As we have touched on previously in the blog, controversial issues like this Dr. Kearney vendetta really do impact employee retention, or as someone else put it, "physicians speak with their feet".

Reply
The Real Mole
4/16/2018 09:02:32 am



Lots of interesting stuff going on here. Unfortunately, the US News fiasco can't be blamed on DeBeer- it's all happened on new Dean DiPaola's watch. My admittedly third hand information lays the blame on deputy under junior assistant dean Brian Adkins who I hear will soon be getting intimately familiar with the underside of a UK Healthcare shuttle bus.

Not sure the Berger "news" warrants much discussion. Berger wanted to be Dean and was openly critical of DeBeer so it sounds to me as though rather than report to DeBeer he preserved his dignity, moved back home and found himself something productive to do (although of course he really isn't in a leadership position at Penn). Good luck to him. Meanwhile UK hired Larry Goldstein from Duke to replace Berger and had Linda Van Eldick from Northwestern share leadership of the neuroscience institute. Seems like everything worked out well. Shame some other people also don't decide to just move and get on with their lives instead of hanging around wasting their time blogging, filing open records requests or trying to sue the university.

Reply
Dan Noonan
4/16/2018 11:36:46 am

Thanks for the comment The Real Mole. I’m not really up on the current administration in the College. It appears to change monthly. There are so many deanlets it appears one practically needs an Ouija board to define blame. For myself, I generally feel that blame always starts at the top. So if this US News fiasco happened under Dr. DiPaola’s watch, then I hope he wasn’t likewise distracted by these time consuming Iroquois Hunt Club and Keeneland parties.

Your appraisal of the current College morale sounds pretty good The Real Mole. I look forward to seeing that translate into a top 10 rating in the next Press-Ganey survey. Being an administrator in the College, I can understand why you would wish anybody challenging the status quo to simply disappear, but for people like Dr. Kearney, this University administration has made it impossible for him to simply “get on with his life”. Then for people like myself and many others who are attempting to speak out against and hopefully right this injustice, we are doing exactly what you have asked, that being: “getting on with our lives”. For myself, I feel that I fought for this privilege by spending 2 years in a war zone and further earned the right by spending over 20 years in the College. I apologize if our presence in this battle for faculty rights, justice and University and hospital transparency is a bit of a nuisance for you and your fellow administrators, but speaking for myself, I think I will stick around if for no other reason than to simply “get on with my life”.

Reply
Dan Noonan
4/17/2018 01:59:48 am

Thanks for the comment The Real Mole. I would be happy to post it once you clean it up a bit.

Lucy
4/17/2018 07:46:29 am

I would just like to state that I am glad that you have kept this blog going. Accountability is something that the administrators in our college and hospital avoid like the plague. If they had nothing to hide they could have long ago put an end to all of this speculation of KMSF money mismanagement by simply authorizing the 5-10 year detailed public audit of KMSF. That would have silenced all of the conspiracy theorists and ended any possible Whistleblowing lawsuit. Think of all of the money that would have been saved as well as the impact it would have had on morale and retention of faculty. But alas this did not happen, and as issues like the Hazard mismanagement and the private jet trips surfaced they became fodder for the “just the tip of the iceberg” theorists. Furthermore, the beauty of the blog and Facebook page are that if you do not like them you simply do not monitor them, and especially you do not post to them. Posting simply fuels the fire and keeps these things going. So thank you Mole and the rest of you university lawyers and administrators for your argumentative and anti-Kearney posts that keep me coming back to this blog and keep the blog going.

Reply
Dan Noonan
4/17/2018 08:40:07 am

Thank you Lucy for your post and thanks for monitoring the blog. It is quite evident that the University lawyers (with outside help) have spent a lot of time and money keeping the details of KMSF money management hidden. One has to believe that it is more than coincidental that these attempts to all of a sudden declare KMSF separate from the University, as well as the lawsuits against individuals requesting KMSF records in Open Records searches and the State’s Attorney General for his declarations that KMSF is part of the University, all occurred following these confrontations Dr. Karpf and General Council Thro had with Dr. Kearney and the Faculty Council. It almost appears that as it turns out, the Practice Plan Committee money mismanagement issues may have been your so-called “tip of the iceberg”. As I remember it, Dr. Karpf at that time was fairly rabid about finding the money to finish his legacy, the hospital. So it probably would also be interesting to see the books detailing the use of research grant indirect costs and College of Medicine tuition revenue during this time period. Finally, the turnover of the positions of EVPHA, College of Medicine Dean, Chief Medical Officer, and rumored heads of the KMSF Executive Committee are also not merely coincidental. Cumulatively these data all circumstantially support the contention noted above, that these extreme sanctions against Dr. Kearney are in response to something more than a very poorly documented history of bad vocabulary that they had endorsed and rewarded for over 25 years.

Reply
The Real Mole
4/18/2018 03:15:31 am

Yes of course I could stop reading this train wreck but where’s the fun in that.
We all agree that there are major problems with UK, the COM and UK Healthcare. What I don’t understand is why the only way you seem to think these problems can be addressed is by retiring and blogging about them, becoming a primary care doctor in South Carolina and filing open records requests or having one of your colleagues take on the university single handed because he misjudged how far he could go criticizing the administration in light of his less than unblemished record of behavior? This blog just recycles the same information and opinions again and again. One common theme is that administrators earn too much and don’t do anything- what do you think are reasonable salaries for chairs of medicine and surgery? How much clinical work should these individuals do? You also don’t like efforts by the college to encourage philanthropy and complain about entertaining and travel expenses. What would a reasonable budget for support of philanthropy be? Who gets to decide if this is excessive or not? Do you think that philanthropy at UK is comparable to that at other large public research universities (its not). Do you think we should do more to encourage philanthropy? Do you think UK Healthcare should enter into partnerships with other regional hospitals so that they can have access to our advanced medicine- for example do you think people living around the state should have access to the Markey Cancer Center or should they just get whatever care their regional hospital can provide? Do you understand that healthcare is a highly regulated business? Do you really think that there is an institution level plan to engage in fraudulent business practices? Do you understand that when dealing with complex business operations people can make honest mistakes? Do you think its responsible due diligence to seek outside expert legal advice in cases where there might be a liability associated with these complex operations? You are keen on the idea that UK is a “public state university” In light of the minimal support for the university and the hospital by the state do you think its reasonable for the university and UK healthcare to try to generate funds that can be used to support infrastructure, academic and research missions through their business operations? Finally, do you understand that the courts have been reluctant to get involved in medical staff credentialing processes recognizing that if everyone involved in this process had legal liability and if anyone who didn’t like the outcome could sue this would make it impossible for hospitals to exert reasonable control over who they want practicing medicine using their facilities and infrastructure? You are so wound up in your own narrative that you never consider any other points of view. In large part the Kearney case can be decided on points of law and I hope and expect that Judge Scorscone will see this for what it is- a coalition of bitter disgruntled largely failed people who are fed up that they don’t have any control over the university that they worked at and are lashing out in desperation because there really isn’t anything else left for them to do. Again, we all agree that there are major problems with UK, the COM and UK Healthcare. These problems would largely be solved by hiring and retaining better faculty, in particular individuals in leadership positions and engaging in research, education and scholarship that improves peer recognition of the institution so that next time, if the deans office bothers to send in the information the COM will hopefully be more highly ranked. If you care so much about the institution why not get involved in something constructive?

Reply
Dan Noonan
4/18/2018 12:17:45 pm

Thanks for the comments The Real Mole, and I also want to thank you for keeping the profane insults out of this one. Well it looks like we touched a nerve here. :-) You ask a lot of questions but clearly provide few answers. Is it your wish that this blog provide answers to all of these questions? Unfortunately I think that is not the case here. Well, even though I feel I am writing to blind eyes, maybe I will touch on a few. Speaking of redundant complaints, you clearly have a sensitivity about physician salaries. I have mentioned multiple times in this blog that this is not an issue with me, but your sensitivity to the subject suggests it is to you. Are you worried that this blog might in some way impact your salary, or are you worried that KMSF being declared a part of the University might render your salary information public information, like all other university faculty?

Then there are the philanthropy issues we have discussed and the expenses related to this activity that you appear to feel are totally justified. My problem with this is that at a budget meeting I directly questioned Dr. Karpf about the meager philanthropic endowments listed for the hospital and College, and his reply was, “that’s the job of the researchers.” Now for the life of me, I can’t figure out why, as a researcher, I was not invited to the Iroquois Hunt Club parties?

One of the things that does have me baffled is your put down of a former basic sciences faculty member that reached retirement age and chose to retire. You have been the one who, throughout the blog comment sections, has complained about the unfunded teaching basic sciences faculty members who refuse to retire when they lose their funding or reach retirement age. Unfortunately I think this simply illustrates your avarice to slight anyone who does not fit into your narrow perspective of what you feel a university professor needs to be doing to be of any value to the University.

Finally you end everything with the question, “why not get involved in something constructive.” Personally I think the blog is highly constructive. Criticism is an essential component to identifying what might be wrong. Knowing what is wrong is essential to constructive change. I can also point out that there have been many scenarios throughout this blog for which constructive suggestions have been aired with respect to possible solutions. I can only guess these constructive suggestions did not fit your preferences or agenda and therefore were unacceptable. The bottom line being, if you do not like what is on the blog simply do not follow it, or better yet, do something constructive and start your own blog.

Reply
The Real Deal
4/19/2018 07:32:18 am

Interesting Real Mole, your solution for making us great is to hire “better faculty”. Easier said than done. State funding for higher education has gone down for the 12th year in a row, federal funding for NIH is going down and available highly funded professors is going down. About the only things going up are student tuition, the number of administrators and their salaries. Our economy, job market and state university status almost relegates us to the fishing game, that being recruit unproven talent and hope for the best. Even in this market the competition is enormous. With the many ongoing lawsuits, some of which have gone national, and poor national rankings in satisfaction surveys, it doesn’t take much to lose a candidate. I like the earlier blog “constructive” suggestions that attempt to upgrade the existing investigator funding levels, improve our Press-Gainey scores and find creative incentives to keep our existing well-funded faculty. Unfortunately, much of this is on the backs of the administration and they, as someone else put it, seem to view the buildings as much more important than the people occupying them.

Reply
food for thought
4/19/2018 03:04:00 pm

Where is the director of KMSF? There has been a change. Someone should ask why the change. Clarity needed. Dr. Kearney has an opportunity.

Reply
Dan Noonan
4/19/2018 05:38:58 pm

Thanks for the comment food for thought. This is out of my knowledge base, but I hope these changes at KMSF render it more transparent with respect to what it is doing with this University revenue. I'm not sure how these changes might help Dr. Kearney, but we can only hope that they do.

Reply
Food for Thought
4/20/2018 09:53:42 am

I do not think this change parallels your optimism. It is unique and continues the pattern you and your followers document of turbulence and administrative glut without reasoning.

Opie
4/24/2018 08:25:27 am

Check this thing everyday and see it has been dormant for a few days. This may be a bit off this topic y’all been debating and probably irrelevant with respect to the Kearney matter, but I do feel it has contributed to the low morale in the hospital. As just one of the many lowlifes working over in the hospital I want to know who came up with the brilliant idea to have PricewaterhouseCooper redesign how we operate our hospital? We paid them what: 500,000-1 million dollars for that beautiful system that we have basically scrapped? This group of business majors came in here and, similar to our upper administration, viewed the lowest paid hospital work staff as the most expendable targets when it came to reorganization and saving money. I feel certain there was not a single person on this PwC crew that had ever worked in a hospital. They saw the job functions and employees as robotics and robots. I realize that a measly 500,000 dollars is pretty close to the average salary for any of our what, 50 or so administrators, but isn’t this what they get paid for? Or is it that we pay these decision makers these big bucks so that they can go out and hire someone like PwC to do their job and take the blame? Well you would have thought they could have gotten something better than PwC, because these people were too busy tweeting to even get the Academy Awards right last year and also were the ones that cleared Facebook’s privacy practices. I am sure someone in our administration got a promotion for this brilliant plan.

Reply
Dan Noonan
4/24/2018 04:39:23 pm

Thanks for your comment Opie. We are still waiting for any news from the courts so feel free to air your concerns. Personally I think this topic adequately fits into the general concern for hospital/college morale and our annual low scores on these, as the Real Deal put it, “satisfaction surveys”. I remember well the PwC invasion. Their man in charge occupied an office next to mine in our research building, and his two to three assistants occupied the small conference room down the hall from these offices. My best guess, from all that I observed, is that you were spot on in your assessment of their hospital work history. They looked and acted more like computer techs or business majors. They pretty much stayed put in this office and conference room during their stay. I don’t know much about the changes implemented other than they resulted in a number of people losing their jobs, a number of people changing jobs and a system that started out as IBU and became known as IBUseless. These cumulatively along with the Dr. Kearney vendetta and the lawsuits have all contributed to this morale problem.

Reply
Bill
4/25/2018 02:26:56 pm

I have some constructive suggestions for increasing the morale and working environment in the hospital. They include: a) resolve this national Kearney embarrassment by simply giving him back his patient privileges, b) increase the transparency with respect to the hospital financial matters by allowing the public audit of KMSF, c) acknowledge the fact that KMSF is truly part of the university or get rid of KMSF as the financial arm of the university hospital and start a KMSF within the university governance system, d) find out where the problems and concerns really lie by having yearly anonymous surveys that allow faculty and staff to air their concerns with respect to what is going on, and e) find out which of these administrators is really being overpaid by requiring 3 year performance reviews at which faculty and staff can anonymously air their concerns with respect to the performance of the department, college and hospital administrators. The Real Mole likes to rant about how unfair and distorted the concerns aired in this blog are, but he/she feels that everyone expressing opinions on the blog and Facebook page that in some way question or complain about the hospital and university authorities are simply part of the problem and not the solution. This is exactly what one might expect from a hospital administrator. They have no real wish to understand the problem, so their solution to morale problems is to throw a party.

Reply
Dan Noonan
4/25/2018 05:07:12 pm

Thanks for your comment Bill. Good "constructive" suggestions, although I suspect any of the University and hospital senior administrators or lawyers reading this will view them as not very constructive.

Reply
Buck naked
5/17/2018 04:43:53 pm

I've been Kearneyd!

UK moves to fire professor, says book sales 'stole from students.' He vows to fight.

Reply
esfileexplorerapkz.info link
9/2/2018 01:09:26 am

Re: Paul A. Kearney, MD, D.Sci, MS, FACS
Professor of Surgery
University of Kentucky College of Medicine
Can you give me moreinfo plz

Reply
Dan Noonan
9/2/2018 06:21:52 am

Thanks for the comment esfileexplor. You are at an older post to this blog. An updated review of the Dr. Kearney case can be found here:

https://www.uky-com-critique.com

Dr. Kearney's lawyer has filed an appeal of Judge Scorsone's ruling on the case.

Reply
bandicam full version patch free download link
9/14/2018 09:32:35 pm

Nice post. I learn something more challenging on different blogs everyday. It will always be stimulating to read content from other writers and practice a little something from their store. I?d prefer to use some with the content on my blog whether you don?t mind. Natually I?ll give you a link on your web blog. Thanks for sharing.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    UKy College of Medicine Discussions

Proudly powered by Weebly