Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums, for communication between foot health professionals about podiatry and related topics.
You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members (PM), upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, earn CPD points and access many other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisments in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
I always thought this sort of thing was very unethical, and has certainly given many Podiatrists a bad reputation, but this case below from the HPC in the UK alleges that it affects someones fitness to practice:
Quote:
Notice Of Allegation:
During the course of your practise as a physiotherapist at BridgeHouse Clinic:
1. On 14 March 2008, you advised SL the owner of the BridgeHouse Clinic that you were leaving the BridgeHouse Clinic to set up your own business;
2. You accessed confidential patient information from the BridgeHouse Clinic and used that information on or around 17 March 2008 to contact existing BridgeHouse Clinic patients to advise them that you were setting up your own business;
3. Your actions outlined in Particular 2 amount to misconduct; and
4. By reason of that misconduct, your fitness to practise is impaired.
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
Here is another case before the HPC:
Quote:
Your fitness to practise as a registered health professional is impaired by reason of your misconduct in that:
During the course of your practice as a physiotherapist with Elite Physical Medicine:
In or around January 2006, on behalf of Elite Physical Medicine you entered into negotiations with Central Business Agency (CBA) to purchase the patient list of Gatherer Ltd;
During the course of the negotiations, you obtained information about Gatherer Ltd’s physiotherapy practice, including copies of the accounts for the last three years and the telephone number of the physiotherapy practice;
You were aware that the telephone number for Don Gatherer and Associates had been “decommissioned” as the practice had been closed and was no longer accepting new patients;
You acquired the telephone number for Don Gatherer and Associates and utilized it for the benefit of Elite Physio. As a result of this:
Existing patients of Don Gatherer are given the false impression that they are making an appointment to be treated by Don Gatherer;
You made appointments for Don Gatherer’s existing patients to be treated by Don Gatherer, knowing that he was no longer practising at the clinic;
You gained access to Gatherer Ltd’s patient list by deceptive means and without paying him for it; You knowingly accessed DG’s patient list without consent from CBA or DG and failed to pay for it;
You have deprived Gatherer Ltd of potential income from the sale of the patient list;
You acted dishonestly and unethically in gaining access to Gatherer Ltd’s patient list without the consent of Gatherer Ltd.
I still struggle to see how acting dishonestly and unethically in a business matter affects someone's fitness to practise, but I guess these people get there just deserves for what they did.
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
There are podiatry employers in Melbourne, that are paying qualified podiatry staff $22 Australian per hour. That equates to 11 Euro or 15 US dollars for memory per hour. No bonuses for orthotic sales etc.
When you consider that retail stores pay unqualified workers $20 odd an hour, this is an absolute rip-off.
Now if this employee went away and contacted some old patients, the employer would probably shout "unethical" and run to the board and the association. Common-sense would say that the remuneration was unethical in the first place.
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
Hi Ron et al,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas
There are podiatry employers in Melbourne, that are paying qualified podiatry staff $22 Australian per hour. That equates to 11 Euro or 15 US dollars for memory per hour. No bonuses for orthotic sales etc.
When you consider that retail stores pay unqualified workers $20 odd an hour, this is an absolute rip-off.
Now if this employee went away and contacted some old patients, the employer would probably shout "unethical" and run to the board and the association. Common-sense would say that the remuneration was unethical in the first place.
Ron
Physiotherapist (Masters) & Podiatrist
While I agree that the situation you outline is unfair I would still regard the actions of the employee as dishonest & unacceptable.
If the employee was unhappy with their pay why work for such a poor employer in the first place?
Surely the actions we are discussing are tantamount to theft?
If an individual entered a retail premises but considered the products overpriced would the courts view theft as the individuals right in resetting the price to free?
I imagine not.
While I disagree with many of the HPCs frivolous actions against professionals, I do consider identifying someone as a thief (ie. intentionally misleading/acquiring patients from their employer for personal, financial gain) as appropriate if the circumstances dictate.
In my opinion these are not the acceptable actions of a professional.
Only my thoughts.
Mandy.
__________________
:)
twirly
Mandy Brooks
Brooks Podiatry
S64 0DE
Suffering a fondness for odd things.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to twirly For This Useful Post:
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
I still struggle to see how acting dishonestly and unethically in a business matter affects someone's fitness to practise, but I guess these people get there just deserves for what they did.
This speaks to the person's character. Typically, people have been "struck off registers" for matters of character. I am not making a judgement I am just making the point. Additionally, the contacting of patients in this manner may constitute a breach of employment contract, also may be a common law breach of duty (can be construed as such in some circumstances).
In relation to the above decision, the heart of the matter lies with the real possibility and as was found the reality that ... existing patients of Don Gatherer are given the false impression that they are making an appointment to be treated by Don Gatherer in conjunction with the additional findings of the board.
Further, depending on jurisdiction, it may be considered as a breach of Privacy legislation. This may turn on the reason for which information is provided by patients. Prima facie, patients provide information for therapeutic purposes and for contact purposes related to the therapeutic and related process. It could be construed that a form of "direct marketing" is outisde of this reason.
Regards
NIKO
The Following User Says Thank You to NIKO For This Useful Post:
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
Ron,
I have been a private practitioner in Melbourne and have been employing staff for 12 years. I have never heard of podiatrists being paid that lower wage!!! If that is occuring, the employee is just plain stupid for accepting that as a wage! I am currently advertising a full time position that pays double that, and believe me, I haven't been inundated with applicants. There are plenty of good, well paid jobs out there!!!!
By the way my reception staff get paid $22/hour!
Also why is this relevant to the employee stealing patient listings?
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
Let me clarify that I do not think that is acceptable business pratice to poach or even contact patients with the purpose of encouraging them to see a former employee at their own clinic.
However I also think that there is an issue (as outlined by Ron), with people in our profession preying on new graduates (who yes PODKMM, may be "plain stupid") and paying them extremely poorly for working hard.
I think as new graduates, they can be excused for naivity and inexperience. I see the situation is; the new grads see the prospective employers as 'mentors' or 'more experienced in the profession', and trust them in providing fair employment conditions. Then being taken for a ride.
To avoid this situation, if there were a more structured mentoring system between new grads and a group of fair, experienced podiatrists to provide guidance and advice on such issues as employment conditions and work ethics, maybe new grads may not be so "plain stupid" and these employers would not find it so easy each year to find podiatrists willing to agree.
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
All of this comes down to the perception of ownership. Ownership of patients is a very cloudy concept, as is the perception of ownership of a geographical area and digging further, ownership of employees themselves.
Lets look at an example. Fred (clinic owner) employes Grace. Grace is paid $22 per hour (silly girl). Grace is is a capable podiatrist who along with expanding the client base for her employer, develops strong relationships with her patients. She is a nice girl and people in her care enjoy her company. Grace decides after a while that she will ask for a raise ($22 by the way is tantamount to theft!!) - after all she realises that she is making Fred plenty of money. Fred says no. Grace resigns (as she should). A time later Grace opens up her own clinic 20kms away. Graces patients follow her after seeing her ads in the local paper. Fred cries fowl and threatens Grace with all sorts of things.
SO....questions!
1. Was Grace silly to accept such low wages for a university graduate?
2. Is Fred is a greedy bastard?
3. Is Fred is being anti-competitive in trying to limit Graces right to practice in an area of her choosing?
4. Is Fred exercising ownership over Grace because she worked for him for a while (making threats of board action etc)?
5. What about ownership of a Geographical area? How close is too close?
6. What does Grace do when clients seen at Fred's clinic phone for an appointment?
7. What about the pro's (make you money) an con's (they might leave and start up on their own) of employing staff?
I am not suggesting for a moment that anyone should steal patient details and use them to actively poach... however sometimes people like Fred "ASSUME" that poaching has occurred, when in reality patients have simply followed a good practitioner. What I find amazing is that some employers (you know who you are because your constantly advertising the same positions) treat their staff poorly and feel hard done by when their staff leave. I'd be interested in some feedback here!
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
I also believe that there is really no way of stopping patient 'poaching and do agree that the patients are probably following a good practitioner.
I am an employer who has a clause in my employment contract stating that the employee is limited to 5 years and a10km radius of setting up their own practice. I believe that this is a standard clause, but have also been told it is worth as much as the paper it is written on.
The freedom of trade act????? supposedly defaults all of this????
I also sense a bit of bitterness Chris. Hope you have found good employment now!
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
Quote:
Originally Posted by PODKMM
I am an employer who has a clause in my employment contract stating that the employee is limited to 5 years and a10km radius of setting up their own practice. I believe that this is a standard clause, but have also been told it is worth as much as the paper it is written on.
My understanding, based on my limited understanding of case law in Australia is that these are enforceable provided that they are reasonable. What you and I think is reasonable may not be seen by the courts as reasonable. My understanding is that the courts have not enforced most of those that come before it as they were considered unreasonable (they weren't podiatry related though).
What is reasonable vs unreasonable? I do not think we know.
- an unlimited time (ie forever) would be unreasonable.
- 1 year limit would probably be reasonable.
- would a 5 yr limit be unreasonable?
- excluded from the city would be unreasonable.
- 1km from the current business located would be reasonable.
- would 10km be considered unreasonable?
I do know that a number of lawyers do not advise the inclusion of this clause, but I think it should be included. The reason being to remind the employee that there are potential ethical issues around this if they choose to leave and set up a business nearby,
__________________
Craig Payne
Department of Podiatry
La Trobe University
Melbourne, Australia http://www.latrobe.edu.au/podiatry
__________________________________________________ ___________________________________ God put me on this earth to accomplish a certain number of things - right now I am so far behind, I will never die.
The views expressed above are those of the author and not that of La Trobe University This is where I am, where are you?
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
Fair comment CP
Below is a Non competition covenant drafted by Harmers workplace lawyers in 2008 that they assured me would hold up in a court of law and allow the employer to claim for damages against an ex employee.
Upon the termination of your employment, for whatever reason, you will not, for the period of 6 months, or if that is held by a court to be unreasonable, for a period of 3 months, within a 2 kilometre radius of our practices, without Our prior written consent, be interested, engaged or employed, or act as an adviser or consultant in, or be an employee, agent or officer of, or an adviser or consultant to, any person, firm or corporation interested or engaged in directly or indirectly soliciting any of Our clients, to render services which could be rendered by Us.
For the purposes of this clause, the term ‘Our clients’ includes any of Our clients at the time the breach occurs as well as any client to whom we have rendered services in the 12 months prior to the termination of your employment.
The problem being though you need to be able to prove damages i.e.how much has the actions of the other party cost you? Very difficult to quantify.
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart Blyth
they assured me would hold up in a court of law
I assume the reason would be is that the timeframe and distance in that clause would easily be considered "reasonable" by the courts.
__________________
Craig Payne
Department of Podiatry
La Trobe University
Melbourne, Australia http://www.latrobe.edu.au/podiatry
__________________________________________________ ___________________________________ God put me on this earth to accomplish a certain number of things - right now I am so far behind, I will never die.
The views expressed above are those of the author and not that of La Trobe University This is where I am, where are you?
Re: Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
Yep
And by having the 2 time frames it gives the courts some leeway. If the judge deems the first to be unjust it gives them another clause to fall back on instead of throwing the whole clause out.
Contacting patients of current employer when setting up new clinic
Linear Mode
