Page 66 - 2020 Annual Reports Book updated1_Neat

represent him-/herself as “certified” by AMT. In no case is a person deemed to be AMT-certified simply
by completing a third-party training program such as VPCS’s.

Legal counsel sent a letter to VPCS’s CEO on January 27, 2020, directing VPCS and any of its
affiliates to immediately cease and desist from utilizing the name “American Medical Technologist[s],”
or “AMT,” on certificates issued to phlebotomy training program graduates, or on any marketing
materials, or for any other purpose. VPCS’s unauthorized use of AMT’s trade name constitutes
misappropriation of AMT’s intellectual property, including but not limited to the “AMT” collective
membership mark registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Regis. No. 0876245, valid
through 9/2/2029). It also amounts to deceptive trade practices under Pennsylvania law. The CEO
responded to the letter by email on 2/12/2020, stating that the certificates in question had been issued
in February 2018 and included AMT’s name due to a clerical error by VPCS’s secretary. She stated that
since that time the certificates issued by the program are in VPCS’s name only and have not included
any reference to AMT.

DISCRIMINATION MATTERS:

Legal counsel occasionally is consulted by AMT Office staff in connection with cases in which
AMT members complain that their AMT credentials are not fully recognized by current or prospective
employers. In such cases the typical process is for AMT staff to send a letter to the employer with
educational material about AMT and the certification in question. If a satisfactory response is not
received after the initial contact, legal counsel is, in appropriate circumstances, asked to write a follow-
up letter.

It should be emphasized that, as a general matter, employers are not prohibited from
discriminating in hiring or employment practices based on an individual’s voluntary certification or level
of educational attainment. The AMT Office staff will seek, however, to educate such employers about
the value of AMT certifications in an effort to have them treated equitably. Members who believe they
have suffered discrimination based on their credentials should not contact AMT’s legal counsel directly
but should first contact the AMT Office.

In the past 12 months, AMT staff fielded and responded to several member inquiries concerning
allegedly discriminatory treatment by prospective employers based on their AMT credentials.

Lovelace Medical Group – Albuquerque, NM – In late December the AMT Office was contacted by Jose
Molina, RMA, who is employed by a cardiology practice owned by Lovelace Medical Group in
Albuquerque. He reported that Lovelace was requiring him and approximately seven other RMAs to
take a different medical assistant certification exam because Lovelace (which recently had purchased
the cardiology practice) did not recognize the RMA(AMT) credential. The purported justification was
because Lovelace did not believe the RMA qualified as an acceptable medical assisting credential under
the Medicare/Medicaid EHR “meaningful use” incentive program.

The matter was referred to legal counsel, who located 2015 correspondence from CMS confirming that
AMT’s RMA credential fully qualifies under the meaningful use standards then in effect. (Those
standards have since been superseded with respect to the Medicare EHR incentive program; however,
they remain in effect for the Medicaid program.) On December 30 Mr. McCarty sent a letter to the head
of HR at Lovelace, along with copies of the CMS correspondence, and pointed out that RMA(AMT)
certificants are indeed fully qualified to enter computerized orders for lab, pharmacy, and imaging under

63