Judge hears arguments in Mayo doctor’s academic freedom, retaliation case
Mayo Clinic
(ABC 6 News) – An Olmsted County judge heard arguments for and against dismissing part of a Mayo Clinic doctor’s lawsuit against the hospital.
Dr. Michael Joyner, a Mayo Clinic physician and professor of anesthesiology at Mayo’s College of Medicine and Science, claimed last year Mayo violated its tenure and academic-freedom policies after the clinic issued Joyner a suspension (resulting in loss of pay) following comments Joyner made to the New York Times in regards to testosterone’s long-term affects on transgender women athletes.
RELATED: Mayo doctor sues Clinic, claims retaliation against interviews; alleged whistleblowing
Last month, the Clinic moved to dismiss three of Joyner’s five charges against the medical institution, claiming that Mayo Clinic’s anti-retaliation and appeals policies are not legally binding.
Attorney Ryan Mick, representing Mayo Clinic, as well as president/CEO Gianrico Farrugia and anesthesiology department chair Carlos Mantilla, said in a motion hearing Monday, April 8, that it’s simple — Joyner’s position at Mayo, no matter how lengthy or tenured, “doesn’t magically turn something that is not a contract into a contract.”
Kelly Miller, representing Dr. Joyner, argued that as Mayo Clinic benefits from its status as a tax-exempt educational institution, violating its own academic freedom policy should be construed as a contractual breach.
Miller pointed out that Mayo Clinic has argued that Dr. Joyner’s 36-year career is “akin to tenure” in order to qualify for academic tax breaks in federal court, and adopted its academic freedom policy in order to qualify for those same tax exemptions.
Claiming that the academic freedom policy is not enforceable endangers Mayo’s argument that it is an educational institution, Miller argued.
Furthermore, Miller said other policies that Mayo Clinic did not intend to enforce have included disclaimers saying they were not “binding contracts.”
Not so, the academic freedom policy, she said.
“It may have been a bad look for accreditation to admit that they had no intention to allow employees to exercise their rights to academic freedom,” Miller said.
ABC 6 News reached out to Mayo Clinic about the connection between the hospital’s academic freedom policy and its tax status.
Mayo Clinic public relations representative Andrea Kalmanovitz said the argument was “incorrect.”
“The academic freedom policy has no bearing on our tax exempt status,” Kalmanovitz said.
“The main question here is whether Mayo Clinic is responsible for upholding its promises to employees,” Miller said.
“There’s a lot there,” Mick responded. “But respectfully, none of it matters.”
Mick argued in turn that although claiming the academic freedom policy is binding benefits Joyner, it does not rise to the level of an obligation, such as paid leave or another benefit.
Judge Kathy M. Wallace, of Olmsted County, took the matter under consideration and said she would provide a written adjudication.
There is not estimated timeline for Wallace’s decision.
The Academic Freedom Alliance, which supports Joyner’s lawsuit, issued the following statement April 8:
“We believe the promises made in Mayo’s academic freedom policy are important, director of operations Howard L. Muncy said. “Academic freedom is essential if scholars are to fulfill their vocation as truth-seekers and colleges and universities, including those dedicated to the health profession, are to be faithful to their mission as truth-seeking institutions.”