ShareThis Page
Is UPMC giving Braddock the shaft? |

Is UPMC giving Braddock the shaft?

That new multimillion-dollar entrance to UPMC Braddock certainly looks spiffy.

You might want to go to the venerable old hospital and check out the significant improvements UPMC completed just four months ago. After all, according to an Allegheny County Economic Development Department document, you helped pay for them.

Just don’t dally. The medical facility that has served the Mon Valley since 1906 will close at the end of January.

Citing $27 million in losses at the hospital over the past six years, UPMC announced Friday that it was shuttering the facility, fancy new facade and all.

Forgive those who live and work in struggling Braddock for feeling UPMC essentially is applying a pillow and forcible pressure to the gasping face of a critically ill community.

“I was getting excited with all of the remodeling they were doing up there,” said Al Boss, the owner of A-Boss Opticians, a Braddock Avenue staple for nearly five decades. “But to hear the news (Friday), well, that was just heartbreaking. I fear for the future of the borough.”

The fallout from the closure announcement has Boss and others pondering the following questions:

• Can UPMC afford to keep the hospital open?

Certainly. The Braddock hospital’s losses are relative peanuts to a health-care juggernaut reporting $213 million in operating revenue in 2008-09 — an increase of $29 million over the previous fiscal year.

Consider this: The $27 million the medical facility lost amounts to $4.5 million annually. UPMC is so awash in money that it can afford to pay that amount to just one of its 50,000 employees.

CEO Jeffrey Romoff made $4.5 million in salary and benefits last year.

• Should UPMC keep the hospital open?

A strong case can be made that the hospital shouldn’t close. Curiously enough, UPMC is making it.

UPMC’s own Web site contains an assertion from the Hospital and Healthsystem Association of Pennsylvania that the Braddock hospital generates $124 million annually in regional economic benefit.

In that context, the $4.5 million the hospital supposedly is losing each year doesn’t seem like a particularly large sum, does it?

• Why would UPMC officials spend millions renovating a building they obviously were preparing to shutter?

The county development department contends $10 million was spent on the entrance and upgrading the hospital’s parking area. State taxpayers supposedly paid $3 million of that via a Pennsylvania Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program.

UPMC spokesman Paul Wood disputed the $10 million figure, saying the renovations cost considerably less. He claimed that although the hospital was awarded the state grant, “We never did draw down that money.”

Odd, then, that UPMC’s Web site credits the redevelopment program for being a partner in the entrance project.

Why would UPMC even consider making such a large investment in a doomed facility?

“We did what we needed to do to demonstrate we were serving the Braddock community,” Wood said.

Forgive people in Braddock if they don’t see it that way. Forgive them if they feel UPMC just delivered them a shiny new entrance not to a hospital but an elevator shaft.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.