Study objectives: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) recently proposed lowering the minimum required protected time for emergency medicine (EM) core faculty to approximately 4 hours per week. Given limited information on academic EM faculty work hours and non-clinical allocation, we sought to determine and compare actual and contracted numbers of clinical and non-clinical (ie, education, administration, research) work hours. Actual time allocation was also compared to faculty’s ideal allocation. We determined factors significantly associated with job satisfaction as measured by the Global Job Satisfaction scale (GJS).Study Design/MethodsWe performed a cross-sectional survey of faculty from 50 of the 249 total United States EM residency programs in the spring of 2020. A convenience, selective sampling strategy was used to optimize geographic locations, hospital type and residency setting. Information on work hours, the GJS, demographic, and EM department characteristics were collected. The survey was piloted and revised through faculty feedback. Summary statistics included percentages for categorical variables and medians with interquartile ranges (IQR) for continuous variables. Continuous variables were compared with Wilcox signed rank tests and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Associations with GJS were examined using stepwise backward linear regression modeling.Results/FindingsOf 1791 surveys sent via email, 265 responses were received, yielding a response rate of 14.8%. Respondents were predominantly male (66%), married (80%), white (75.6%). Most practiced in a university setting (55%) versus community (17%) or county (18%). 77.7% identified as core faculty. The weekly median number of contracted clinical [median (IQR): 22 (16 - 22)] and non-clinical hours [12 (5- 13)] was lower than the number of actual clinical and non-clinical hours worked [difference (95% CI): 2.7 (1.5 - 4.1)] and [6.0 (3.8 - 8.8)], respectively. Respondents reported a median ideal distribution of 50% clinical work; however, the actual percentage was 62% [difference, (95% CI): 14.4% (10.8% - 17.6%)]. Core faculty reported working a median of 5 hours per week on education (IQR: 4 - 7) and a median of 2 hours per week on research (IQR: 1 - 4). Unexpectedly, a large percentage of EM faculty were unsure of the number of clinical hours specified in their contract (20%). Factors associated with increased job satisfaction included increased non-clinical time allocation, lower administrative time allocation, and core faculty status.ConclusionThis study provides one of the first descriptions of EM faculty work hours and elucidates the association between work allocation and job satisfaction. Faculty were contracted for a greater portion of clinical and administrative hours than desired and actually work more hours in both clinical and non-clinical domains than is specified in their contracts. EM faculty reported median education-related work hours slightly above newly proposed minimums. Taken together, this suggests faculty are already performing uncompensated work and spend less time on education and research than desired. Core faculty are likely to experience decreased job satisfaction and increased burnout if non-clinical faculty hours are lowered to the proposed minimum thresholds.No, authors do not have interests to disclose Study objectives: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) recently proposed lowering the minimum required protected time for emergency medicine (EM) core faculty to approximately 4 hours per week. Given limited information on academic EM faculty work hours and non-clinical allocation, we sought to determine and compare actual and contracted numbers of clinical and non-clinical (ie, education, administration, research) work hours. Actual time allocation was also compared to faculty’s ideal allocation. We determined factors significantly associated with job satisfaction as measured by the Global Job Satisfaction scale (GJS). Study Design/MethodsWe performed a cross-sectional survey of faculty from 50 of the 249 total United States EM residency programs in the spring of 2020. A convenience, selective sampling strategy was used to optimize geographic locations, hospital type and residency setting. Information on work hours, the GJS, demographic, and EM department characteristics were collected. The survey was piloted and revised through faculty feedback. Summary statistics included percentages for categorical variables and medians with interquartile ranges (IQR) for continuous variables. Continuous variables were compared with Wilcox signed rank tests and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Associations with GJS were examined using stepwise backward linear regression modeling. We performed a cross-sectional survey of faculty from 50 of the 249 total United States EM residency programs in the spring of 2020. A convenience, selective sampling strategy was used to optimize geographic locations, hospital type and residency setting. Information on work hours, the GJS, demographic, and EM department characteristics were collected. The survey was piloted and revised through faculty feedback. Summary statistics included percentages for categorical variables and medians with interquartile ranges (IQR) for continuous variables. Continuous variables were compared with Wilcox signed rank tests and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Associations with GJS were examined using stepwise backward linear regression modeling. Results/FindingsOf 1791 surveys sent via email, 265 responses were received, yielding a response rate of 14.8%. Respondents were predominantly male (66%), married (80%), white (75.6%). Most practiced in a university setting (55%) versus community (17%) or county (18%). 77.7% identified as core faculty. The weekly median number of contracted clinical [median (IQR): 22 (16 - 22)] and non-clinical hours [12 (5- 13)] was lower than the number of actual clinical and non-clinical hours worked [difference (95% CI): 2.7 (1.5 - 4.1)] and [6.0 (3.8 - 8.8)], respectively. Respondents reported a median ideal distribution of 50% clinical work; however, the actual percentage was 62% [difference, (95% CI): 14.4% (10.8% - 17.6%)]. Core faculty reported working a median of 5 hours per week on education (IQR: 4 - 7) and a median of 2 hours per week on research (IQR: 1 - 4). Unexpectedly, a large percentage of EM faculty were unsure of the number of clinical hours specified in their contract (20%). Factors associated with increased job satisfaction included increased non-clinical time allocation, lower administrative time allocation, and core faculty status. Of 1791 surveys sent via email, 265 responses were received, yielding a response rate of 14.8%. Respondents were predominantly male (66%), married (80%), white (75.6%). Most practiced in a university setting (55%) versus community (17%) or county (18%). 77.7% identified as core faculty. The weekly median number of contracted clinical [median (IQR): 22 (16 - 22)] and non-clinical hours [12 (5- 13)] was lower than the number of actual clinical and non-clinical hours worked [difference (95% CI): 2.7 (1.5 - 4.1)] and [6.0 (3.8 - 8.8)], respectively. Respondents reported a median ideal distribution of 50% clinical work; however, the actual percentage was 62% [difference, (95% CI): 14.4% (10.8% - 17.6%)]. Core faculty reported working a median of 5 hours per week on education (IQR: 4 - 7) and a median of 2 hours per week on research (IQR: 1 - 4). Unexpectedly, a large percentage of EM faculty were unsure of the number of clinical hours specified in their contract (20%). Factors associated with increased job satisfaction included increased non-clinical time allocation, lower administrative time allocation, and core faculty status. ConclusionThis study provides one of the first descriptions of EM faculty work hours and elucidates the association between work allocation and job satisfaction. Faculty were contracted for a greater portion of clinical and administrative hours than desired and actually work more hours in both clinical and non-clinical domains than is specified in their contracts. EM faculty reported median education-related work hours slightly above newly proposed minimums. Taken together, this suggests faculty are already performing uncompensated work and spend less time on education and research than desired. Core faculty are likely to experience decreased job satisfaction and increased burnout if non-clinical faculty hours are lowered to the proposed minimum thresholds.No, authors do not have interests to disclose This study provides one of the first descriptions of EM faculty work hours and elucidates the association between work allocation and job satisfaction. Faculty were contracted for a greater portion of clinical and administrative hours than desired and actually work more hours in both clinical and non-clinical domains than is specified in their contracts. EM faculty reported median education-related work hours slightly above newly proposed minimums. Taken together, this suggests faculty are already performing uncompensated work and spend less time on education and research than desired. Core faculty are likely to experience decreased job satisfaction and increased burnout if non-clinical faculty hours are lowered to the proposed minimum thresholds.