Odd disciplinary issue... Any advice welcome!

zzzLazyDaisy

emsywoo123 wrote: »

If the VN has broken the Practice's code of conduct, then the correct procedure should be followed.

If the VN has broken the Practice's code of conduct, she should be well aware of this. And much more importantly, she should have been well aware of it before this chain of events ever happened. Why? Because it will be in her contract/employee handbook/code of practice which will be circulated to all employees, together with a clear indication that a breach of this code of conduct will be viewed as misconduct sufficient to render the employee liable to disciplinary action.

What an employer is not entitled to do is to produce a piece of paper after the event, like a rabbit out of a hat, and claim that the employee has breached some rule that she was not informed of and had no way of knowing.

To be honest, even if she had been clearly warned that taking her own animal to another vet's practice would be viewed as a disciplinary matter, I doubt that would be viewed as reasonable, but that is a different issue. (It is a bit like saying that a legal secretary could be disciplined if she chose to consult a solicitor in a different practice about her divorce... the idea is laughable).

Having said all that, the truth is that if she is disciplined and given a warning, there is very little she can do about it, since she can only ask the employment tribunal to intervene in the case of unfair dismissal or unlawful discrimination, so unless she is actually dismissed she probably has little avenue of redress (and no, I haven't overlooked the possibility of her resigning and claiming constructive dismissal, but I would not recommend that course of action because the chances of success are so low).

emsywoo123

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

If the VN has broken the Practice's code of conduct, she should be well aware of this. And much more importantly, she should have been well aware of it before this chain of events ever happened. Why? Because it will be in her contract/employee handbook/code of practice which will be circulated to all employees, together with a clear indication that a breach of this code of conduct will be viewed as misconduct sufficient to render the employee liable to disciplinary action.

What an employer is not entitled to do is to produce a piece of paper after the event, like a rabbit out of a hat, and claim that the employee has breached some rule that she was not informed of and had no way of knowing.

To be honest, even if she had been clearly warned that taking her own animal to another vet's practice would be viewed as a disciplinary matter, I doubt that would be viewed as reasonable, but that is a different issue. (It is a bit like saying that a legal secretary could be disciplined if she chose to consult a solicitor in a different practice about her divorce... the idea is laughable). Reasonable or not, it is the industry standard, I am only trying explain why I think it has happened.

Having said all that, the truth is that if she is disciplined and given a warning, there is very little she can do about it, since she can only ask the employment tribunal to intervene in the case of unfair dismissal or unlawful discrimination, so unless she is actually dismissed she probably has little avenue of redress (and no, I haven't overlooked the possibility of her resigning and claiming constructive dismissal, but I would not recommend that course of action because the chances of success are so low).

I do agree with most of what you have said, the only exception being the paragraph I have commented on

d123

emsywoo123 wrote: »

Not for the dog.

For example, a practice can call another and ask for details on the dogs history, i.e. "Fido Smith belonging to one Mary Smith" But they can't discuss Mary Smith IYSWIM?

And you would be wrong, any data held will be relevant to the DPA, the dog is the property of the owner, any information held with regard to the persons property (in this case, a dog) needs to be held securely and the data bound by the DPA. Even down to the dog's name, without the owners permission that data cannot be released to another party.

emsywoo123

d123 wrote: »

And you would be wrong, any data held will be relevant to the DPA, the dog is the property of the owner, any information held with regard to the persons property (in this case, a dog) will be held and the data bound by the DPA. Even down to the dog's name, without the owners permission that data cannot be released to another party.

Well you pop round and tell all the vets practices in the UK that do this in the UK that they are wrong then

zzzLazyDaisy

If it is indeed the industry standard - and I have no idea, so I'm not going to comment on that - then it is even more the case that all employees should be made fully aware of this, and full written details should be given to all new employees. It is unreasonable to expect an employee to comply with a code of conduct which they have no knowledge of. If that is in fact the case, of course.

emsywoo123

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

If it is indeed the industry standard - and I have no idea, so I'm not going to comment on that - then it is even more the case that all employees should be made fully aware of this, and full written details should be given to all new employees. It is unreasonable to expect an employee to comply with a code of conduct which they have no knowledge of. If that is in fact the case, of course.

I can only speak of my experience of a VN in 2 practices. In one I got it, in the other I did not. So from my experience, a 50/50 chance she did (or didn't, depending on your mindset )

dandelionclock30

She could always say that she thinks they are Barking Mad! at her discliplinary. lol.
At the end of the day its her dog and her money, she can take it where she wants for treatment.

lizzielondon

emsywoo123 wrote: »

This forum requires that you wait 15 seconds between searches. Please try again in 16 seconds.
:rotfl:What? Am I supposed to be a time traveller now!??! Money saving was hard enough, but now this as well? :rotfl:

off topic so apologies but i've read this 3 times and i don't understand why you'd need to be a time traveller?

emsywoo123

lizzielondon wrote: »

off topic so apologies but i've read this 3 times and i don't understand why you'd need to be a time traveller?

:rotfl: :rotfl: I had not long given birth, it made sense at the time

emsywoo123

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

She could always say that she thinks they are Barking Mad! at her discliplinary. lol.
At the end of the day its her dog and her money, she can take it where she wants for treatment.

Yup, and if in doing so she breaks her code of conduct, she can have a warning as well.