Here we go again

Re: Here we go again

Lorna McHardy — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 10:11:46 GMT

[quote user="Stephen Courtney"]

I think all of us have special clients, for whatever reason, that become extremely hard to charge appropriately. WWII veterans, Iraq and Afghanistan veterans , Hounds for heroes, housebound old ladies, ......it can go on forever.

I do what have to do to keep my boss and my conscience happy. Must get it right because most of the time I am left to manage my branch as i see fit, and we make good turnover so the clients are happy too. Even I am happy, most of the time!

[/quote]

Re: Here we go again

Bob Russell — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 09:32:43 GMT

No hard and fast rules here I am afraid but there are some cases that 'discounts' seem appropriate.

I am sorry if I sounded overly critical of your choice of free consults. It was not meant to be quite as it sounded. I was just interested in the reasoning behind it!

We don't charge for any of the 'helper' dogs such as guide dogs/ hearing dogs although we do take advantage of replacement vaccines where we can!

Re: Here we go again

Stephen Courtney — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 23:11:41 GMT

Re: Here we go again

Malcolm Ness — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 18:43:56 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]

Since you and Mr Ness are both there..... Are you following the lead of the Pres RCVS Dr Davies? Are either of you offering a "free case" to a deserving cause? Cracking CSR that sort of thing

JGW

[/quote]

Like most (in fact probably all) other vets we have been doing it for years. The Davies pro bono scheme is interesting though - not for its philanthropy but for the combination of good PR with a neat way of reducing to a trickle the number of freebie cases you get asked to do.

Re: Here we go again

Alex Gough — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 17:12:23 GMT

Think I will bow (bough - that was another one I missed out in the post that bizarrely somehow led to this new turn in the thread) out of this one. It's a salutary lesson though for anyone considering advertising to the profession that they have a scheme to help the deserving, how it is perceived.

Re: Here we go again

Lorna McHardy — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 17:09:34 GMT

[quote user="plantagenet"]

I have an 80 year old lady who does ironing to pay for her dog, I don't charge her consults (or much else) but I haven't put it in the paper!

[/quote]

See, that's clearly where you're going wrong. You should be phoning up the local press every time she comes in, giving them a nice quotation to use and perhaps a wee photo of her doggie, and a nice pat on the back with a slogan along the lines of "Your Local Community Vet Helps the Elderly!"

You and every other practice owner who reduces or waives fees, and every veterinary surgeon who has ever offered to pay for the occasional explap out of personal finances just because of being sorry for the owner and not wanting to just put the beast down. Been there, done that. Feel zero need to turn it into a publicity stunt.

And more to the point, feel very strongly that we shouldn't need to turn such things into publicity stunts, and moreover, that there's something dubious about doing so. We're human beings, dammit, that's what human beings do. Turning it into a buzzphrase like CSR or whatever, and using it to foster business with the implied message that nobody else does these wonderful things, just... feels wrong.

Re: Here we go again

plantagenet — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:53:35 GMT

[quote user="alex gough"]I'd be interested in knowing which worthy groups plantagenet and Bob give free consults too.[/quote]

I told you, WW2 veterans, actually quite a lot of pensioners in general. I have an 80 year old lady who does ironing to pay for her dog, I don't charge her consults (or much else) but I haven't put it in the paper!

Re: Here we go again

Alex Gough — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:09:54 GMT

So yes, the starting pay is 13895, or 12969 if you are a university cadet entrant. I presume you were making the point that it doesn't seem much for someone to be risking their life for their country, unless you were thinking only brigadiers seek referral. The situation arose because Alasdair treated a serviceman's dog and felt strongly that we should be doing more for them. Take it in whichever way you like. I'd be interested in knowing which worthy groups plantagenet and Bob give free consults too.

Re: Here we go again

Bob Russell — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 15:35:25 GMT

Perhaps a quick trip to:

http://www.armedforces.co.uk/armypayscales.htm

will give an idea of the economic worthiness of free referral consults!

I am not knocking the armed forces and you would have to pay me a heck of a lot of money to get shot at in a desert somewhere but the cynic in me sees a bit of a stunt here.

Not a complaint and I will certainly not be sending an email to profcon. Each to his or her own!

Re: Here we go again

plantagenet — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 15:23:34 GMT

[quote user="alex gough"]free referral consults to members of the armed forces[/quote]

I am a great supporter of the armed forces, but don't quite understand the rational behind fee reduction. I would rather use such gestures to aid impoverished WW2 veterans and can think of many other groups worthy of assistance, who may be far more financially compromised.

Do I sniff a advertising stunt, or am I being cynical?

Re: Here we go again

Alex Gough — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 14:34:37 GMT

A couple of weeks ago we launched a scheme to give free referral consults to members of the armed forces. Was in Vet Times, all Alasdair's idea! Not sure what Dr Davies is up to.

Alex

Re: Here we go again

J G Wray — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 13:00:16 GMT

[quote user="alex gough"]but I love this spelling of hiccough/hiccup[/quote]

Since you and Mr Ness are both there..... Are you following the lead of the Pres RCVS Dr Davies? Are either of you offering a "free case" to a deserving cause? Cracking CSR that sort of thing

JGW

Re: Here we go again

Alex Gough — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 12:52:12 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]There were no hiccoughs[/quote]

Slightly off topic, but I love this spelling of hiccough/hiccup, because it is one of the 9 ways that you can pronounce the last 4 letters of my surname, although few people follow through and use that particular pronunciation. I have long ago come to the conclusion that mispronunciation of my surname is just tough, and I have to put up with it as do the people of Slough. Anyway, probably doesn't advance the discussion much (smothers an embarrassed cough)

Alex G....

Re: Here we go again

J G Wray — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 12:26:38 GMT

[quote user="Malcolm Ness"]Two key differences though - your chef already has a successful business and, having two Michelin stars, his position as a "top chef" is well founded. Mr Inglis has yet to prove himself as a successful practice owner and his description of himself as "top vet" is less well founded..[/quote]

The analogy doesn't stretch too far and you know I was talking about the presentation of the work and the "experioence" rather than qualities imbued in the personality. There were no hiccoughs because they are well prepared and drilled, hallmarks of the professional n'est-ce pas? The food was sensational and because I perceived value I enjoyed it and paid without demur, the hallmarks of a good service experience n'est-ce pas?

This restaurant is not trading on a TV qualified reputation, there is no "star" there, but it has worked out, that to thrive, they need to embrace the new and the traditional. That's interesting, not frightening.

JGW

Re: Here we go again

Alet Engelbrecht — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 12:08:53 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]I've made what you've called "achingly-dull" suggestions about how to promote our profession which are sustainable, repeatable and could become cultural in the sense of normal practice. "Achingly-dull" stuff may not have the same instant appeal as your vet-dog-survey, but it is becoming a norm in other industries and worthy of dissemination through the mass media channels as a steady background noise. It can also be stoked up to reactive stuff as well as and when needed, which is kind of the point, eh?[/quote]

Feeling a bit indignant, JGW?

Arlo - please stop, you may just make him hysterical...

Re: Here we go again

Mark Rowland — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:40:22 GMT

You could also say that a top chef with 2 Michelin stars is focussed on his carreer, does that make him think nothing of his clientelle?I wonder if the food produced was at a reduced rate because if not he could be said to be profiteering.

Re: Here we go again

Malcolm Ness — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 10:06:36 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"] I was thinking how like Mr Inglis proposed practice this was. I was watching a high class professional and his team at work[/quote]

Two key differences though - your chef already has a successful business and, having two Michelin stars, his position as a "top chef" is well founded. Mr Inglis has yet to prove himself as a successful practice owner and his description of himself as "top vet" is less well founded..

Re: Here we go again

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 08:02:36 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]You naughty man, you're splitting hairs again.[/quote]

Sorry, I genuinely didn't mean to.I meant only that from memory, you had suggested in a previous thread that pushing the profession's Corporate Social Responsibility (or CSR) was the way to fight back against the negative stuff.

Bearing in mind the context, which was that we were talking about media coverage, I presumed (perhaps wrongly), that you thought this would be a good strategy for generating media coverage.

Almost my entire career has been devoted to communicating. In my experience, communicating something requires two things in every case. And really it doesn't matter whether you are talking to a journalist, a key opinion leader, or the man on the street. First, of course, you need to have defined what it is you are trying to say. But then, AS IMPORTANTLY, you need to make sure it is wrapped up in an interesting story that will capture your audience's attention.

Journalists are one of the toughest and most critical audiences you can communicate a story to. Largely because they are trying to decide whether your story is interesting enough to repeat to millions. But really, I do not believe the criteria for communicating directly with the man in the street should be any lower. Nobody wants to be bored.

So, talk to me about CSR, and I've switched off before you get to the letter 'R'. What I want to know is how do you think CSR translates into something which will grab me (or more importantly, members of the public and journalists), by the cajones.

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]To be honest, I do agree that a consistent, positive message is more appealing to me. [/quote]

I ABSOLUTELY, COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY agree with you (and JGW in the sense that I think this is what he is trying to achieve).

Re: Here we go again

J G Wray — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 07:20:29 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]

[quote user="J G Wray"]Apart from the dog/vet survey thingy, does anyone else on this list have any suggestions for a system to sustain the long term protection of the profession?[/quote]

What, apart from showing by our actions the thousands of people who see their vet every single day that we are a caring, trustworthy profssion?

[/quote]

Errr yes.

JGW

Re: Here we go again

Tim Cheyne — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 05:53:00 GMT

[quote user="plantagenet"]I rather liked when it was a brass plate ans 2 lines in the phone book, so you just were not allowed to do this ghastly advertising which we then all get dragged into.[/quote]

Me, too; the time when vets were professional people, not shopkeepers. However we have to accept that the greatly increased number of vets practising in UK, the improved facilities and support staff, the requirement for accommodation better than the spare room by the garage, and the considerably improved pay and conditions for employees, all need "feet through the door" to pay for them. Unfortunately, 'it pays to advertise'. In some countries, perhaps not in UK, the medics are facing the same situation.

Tim.

Re: Here we go again

plantagenet — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 22:37:39 GMT

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]Private practice vets historically don't have the time or resources to do this;[/quote]

Hmm......

I rather liked when it was a brass plate ans 2 lines in the phone book, so you just were not allowed to do this ghastly advertising which we then all get dragged into. Am I hypocritical to advertise - probably, but also realistic, and I do try to avoid implicit criticism.

So many practices in blowing their own trumpets are denigrating others "really caring" what, are the rest of us just shamming it. " A professional approach to your pet" the rest of us just wade in and muck about. "value for money", "we;re here to help you" etc. just browse the yellow pages.

Re: Here we go again

Gillian Mostyn — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 22:12:59 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]Apart from the dog/vet survey thingy, does anyone else on this list have any suggestions for a system to sustain the long term protection of the profession?[/quote]

What, apart from showing by our actions the thousands of people who see their vet every single day that we are a caring, trustworthy profssion?

I actually think the majority of people in this country already do think very well of their vet. Maybe some think we are too expensive, and that vets earn an excessive living, but I don't actually think we are thought of as conmen or crooks. That is why I worry that people within the profession saying just that could be so harmful. Especially one with a media presence. As has been said, it creates the 'no smoke without fire' mentality where trying to defend ourselves starts looking like a cover-up.

Re: Here we go again

Mark Hedberg — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 21:05:59 GMT

To be honest, I do agree that a consistent, positive message is more appealing to me.

The reason some bigger charities are so good at the PR thing is they're good at loudly "fighting the good fight"; the pictures of kitties saved, the children hugging doggies, and trumpeting how many abused pets they've helped. Private practice vets historically don't have the time or resources to do this; therefore who can blame people on the street for assuming where there's no smoke, there's no fire! Coupled with the fact that there are vets out there who are not presenting their best face to the clients; the media jump on this and then all you hear are that private practices are the money grubbing bad guys. Openness is a good idea, positive PR is a good idea; strike a match instead of curse the darkness.

That said, it's certainly a resource intensive job; and many vets would need to be involved. Possibly an initiative under one of the vet associations; but consistent message is the key.

Re: Here we go again

J G Wray — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 20:40:54 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]I didn't call your ideas achingly dull. I said you had described them in achingly dull terms (if I recall correctly, you suggested a media campaign to promote the professions 'CSR', which believe me would not resonate with a tabloid journalist)[/quote]

You naughty man, you're splitting hairs again.

CSR is not my idea (or yours) and you know I didn't invent defintions like:

"..CSR is about how companies manage the business processes to produce an overall positive impact on society.

But, it looks to me like the way to deal with detractors long term, rather than running to teacher. I'm also not so sure that the tabloid journalist is really who we need to justify ourselves to, rather it is the public/society. And, as the social media develop traditional PR, through the channels you are suggesting for the vet/dog survey thing, "The Press", are looking hard and proibably unnecessary to me. Mr Inglis is Tweeting/covering other social media and even putting his own TV channel out there. At the moment he's broadcasting lots of positive noise and that's how I currently see the projection of CSR. But then this is all achingly dull.

Apart from the dog/vet survey thingy, does anyone else on this list have any suggestions for a system to sustain the long term protection of the profession?

JGW

Re: Here we go again

Arlo Guthrie — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:56:31 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]I disagree, particularly in Mr Inglis' case because , in his activties he blurs the distinction between being a traditional vet, for whom the regulatory mechansims were set, and a media entity.[/quote]

The reason I disagree with you is simply this: it is many many million times easier to approach a media vet and persuade them that it is wrong to denigrate the profession than it is to get positive media coverage to counter their public statements after the event.

[quote user="J G Wray"]stop feeling so sorry for ourselves[/quote]

I'm not sure that anyone is feeling sorry for themselves, or as you said later, overly worried. These are not sentiments I've picked up in these forums, other than from you. I just read comments from people who are angry when they see their profession being attacked.

[quote user="J G Wray"]Mr Inglis changed his message, because he's a smart guy and it was the right thing to do, b[/quote]

I agree with you that it was the right thing to do. I don't agree with you that it was particularly smart.

[quote user="J G Wray"]I've made what you've called "achingly-dull" suggestions[/quote]

I didn't call your ideas achingly dull. I said you had described them in achingly dull terms (if I recall correctly, you suggested a media campaign to promote the professions 'CSR', which believe me would not resonate with a tabloid journalist)