Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download

Dental Tribune United Kingdom Edition

September 3-9, 2012United Kingdom EditionComment24 D entistry has always been a challeng- ing profession, and now, with regulation and competition between prac- tices at an all-time high, it is perhaps more challenging than it’s ever been. Be it the CQC, the GDC, PCTs, or even the HMRC, there are just so many hurdles for us to cross, and hoops for us to jump through, it’s staggering that we have any time for our pa- tients at all! Cause for concern But while as a profession we have had to get used to the likes of CQC inspections and the need to fulfil regular quo- tas of CPD, there is one par- ticular aspect to our role as employers that that has given me great cause for concern in recent months. That is, em- ployment law. As a regular visitor to den- tistry shows and conferences throughout the year I am al- ways keen to attend lectures and listen to speakers share their thoughts on dentistry. I am especially interested to learn from our international colleagues, many of whom of- fer a different perspective to what we are used to here in the UK. Our American colleagues in particular will often speak passionately on the subject of branding. According to the US philosophy, in order to run a successful practice – or in- deed a successful business – staff should always reflect the nature of the organisation. Time and time again, any speaker on branding will al- ways say the same thing: if your staffs aren’t ‘on brand’ then find staff who want to work for you! In a British room, this mes- sage often leaves the audience feeling somewhat perplexed. This is because in the UK our labour laws very much favour the employee. As an employer then, if ever we were to em- ploy someone who just wasn’t ‘doing it’ for us anymore, then we’d sorely struggle to part company with that employee on any grounds other than the most serious. Labour laws I fully understand the need for employment laws, and the need to protect employees’ rights. What I don’t agree with however is the completely de- bilitating and sometimes cata- strophic consequences that some of these employment laws can have. How is a dental practice expected to survive if an em- ployee is required to be sus- pended on full pay during an investigation? Not only must the practice meet the cost of the suspended staff member’s pay, but they must also cover the cost of the replacement, and the loss of working ef- ficiency experienced as a re- sult. With employment laws as they stand even the smallest matter can potentially cripple a practice and run it into the ground. Window There’s been some cover- age in the press recently sur- rounding an amendment to employment law that is sup- posed to work in employers’ favour. Essentially it gives em- ployers a two-year window in which they can legally still ask an employee to leave. While this might be a slight change to our benefit, I still can’t help but think this doesn’t ad- dress a number of the funda- mental issues. As an employer, if you have a grievance with a member of staff there will be an in- formal and formal grievance procedure, a disciplinary and even an appeal process. With the rise in unionism within Employment law: know where you stand ‘Time and time again, any speaker on branding will always say the same thing: if your staffs aren’t ‘on brand’ then find staff who want to work for you!’ BHAsoftware