We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Employer Banning Out Of Hours Socialising!
Comments
-
WoodruffsDad wrote: »Nonsense.
Why are you asking for opinions, then, if you've already made your mind up?
You asked about the legality, and I've posted that what they've said is not illegal. And I completely agree with Sue C - if the council are being overly-protective, then your wife should have a conversation with them about it, and explain the detriment to the residents.
They may well have a very good reason for it (protecting staff and employees, I imagine) but if you're just dismissing anything anyone comes back with, then there's no point trying to help or offer a different perspective.
KiKi' <-- See that? It's called an apostrophe. It does not mean "hey, look out, here comes an S".0 -
I would thought its about maintaining professional boundaries and avoiding conflict of interest.0
-
Caroline73 wrote: »I would thought its about maintaining professional boundaries and avoiding conflict of interest.
I agree - I can't find anything on the CQC website, but the GSCC issues clear guidelines on personal relationships with clients. Whilst most of the cases that have been brought relate to sexual relationships, the clear message is that boundaries need to be put in place between professional and client.Gone ... or have I?0 -
Why are you asking for opinions, then, if you've already made your mind up?
You asked about the legality, and I've posted that what they've said is not illegal. And I completely agree with Sue C - if the council are being overly-protective, then your wife should have a conversation with them about it, and explain the detriment to the residents.
They may well have a very good reason for it (protecting staff and employees, I imagine) but if you're just dismissing anything anyone comes back with, then there's no point trying to help or offer a different perspective.
KiKi
"Dismissing anything"? I have so far disagreed with one comment!0 -
Have you even bothered to ask your employer their reasoning behind their decision?0
-
The clear message is that boundaries need to be put in place between professional and client.
This really is politically correct rubbish!
My wife's job is to look after elderly, often vulnerable residents. If she is not allowed to help arrange or take part in any social events with them or to interact with them in a personal level then the resident's lives will be less fulfilling as there will be less for them to do. The staff who look after them will also appear more remote and aloof and it will not be possible to spot the danger signals when someone really needs help.
It is evident from the replies to my post that many people replying have absolutely no idea what sheltered housing is about.0 -
Gordon_Hose wrote: »Have you even bothered to ask your employer their reasoning behind their decision?
Yes. All they say is that they want sheltered housing residents to be less reliant on professionals.0 -
WoodruffsDad wrote: »This really is politically correct rubbish!
My wife's job is to look after elderly, often vulnerable residents. If she is not allowed to help arrange or take part in any social events with them or to interact with them in a personal level then the resident's lives will be less fulfilling as there will be less for them to do. The staff who look after them will also appear more remote and aloof and it will not be possible to spot the danger signals when someone really needs help.
It is evident from the replies to my post that many people replying have absolutely no idea what sheltered housing is about.
Some of my work is with care homes. Therefore I am all too aware of how important professionalism is in this area.
I have highlighted the key word in your post. Safeguards have to be in place when it comes to caring for the elderly, and to form 'friendships' with the residents is not suitable.
Think about it from an outsiders point of view - you regularly visit a client outside of working hours. The client has a failing memory. The client's family visit, and comment that money/ jewellery has gone missing. The client isn't sure where it has gone, but does comment that you were there last night. Who is the first person that will be subject to investigation?Gone ... or have I?0 -
WoodruffsDad wrote: »Yes. All they say is that they want sheltered housing residents to be less reliant on professionals.
That is a good point. If they need additional care you should be feeding that back so their needs can be assessed?Gone ... or have I?0 -
WoodruffsDad wrote: »Yes. All they say is that they want sheltered housing residents to be less reliant on professionals.
There you go then. You have your answer.
I doubt they could legally stop you being in the same places as they are though.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards