RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Sarah McGurk — Wed, 12 Apr 2023 18:21:31 GMT

I noticed your original point immediately, Arlo. I’ve been noticing for a long time that it seems like the RCVS are more «protecting the public from vets» than «protecting vets from the public». Given that some members of the public are deeply unreasonable, it’s a trend that I find concerning.

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Steven Odell — Thu, 30 Mar 2023 21:03:51 GMT

I just get the feeling that the RCVS is rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. I think everyone is in agreement that the profession is in a pretty bleak place at the moment, and the two dealings I have had with them recently just induce a teenage-like eyeroll of frustration on my part.

Firstly, an email from RCVS tells me I've been a very naughty boy and even though I average 50+ hours a year of CPD my reflection isn't up to scratch. Its either automated nonsense or someone is being paid to go through it all and decide I need a slapped wrist.... Gosh, my patients and the general public will now be so much safer that I write something just for the sake of it.

Secondly, as a practice we pay for all our vets' RCVS subs. Simple job, you would have thought. 15 vets x £379 worked out on the calculator, one BACS payment to RCVS, job done. However, not allowed to do this anymore, so vets all have to do it individually themselves, then send receipt into our accounts team. Results in 15 BACS payments to reimburse the staff. Just makes more work for everyone, where there was a perfectly good system already in place. If it ain't broke, and all of that.....

These may be two small trivial matters, but just seem typical of the tinkering and tweaking that just has to happen nowadays. This will have required time and effort in HQ and will always cost money to implement. Its not as if there is plenty of other grander stuff in the RCVS inbox!

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Dinu Catilina — Mon, 27 Mar 2023 21:06:54 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/30598/rcvs-priorities---has-it-got-them-right/241176#241176"]You could start by setting up a Facebook / Zoom account and allowing clients to use that for OOH up to 11:00pm???[/quote]

Clients can already do this if you do your own out of hours.

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 27 Mar 2023 18:27:17 GMT

[quote userid="10320" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/30598/rcvs-priorities---has-it-got-them-right/241169#241169"]The difficulty with this is that, for a single independent practice, without the heft of a large web development budget behind them, easier said than done... [/quote]

Lucy Fleming - I do agree it could seem that way, but I wonder ...

Someone was telling me that the vast majority off OOH calls happen before something like 11:00pm. looking at Vets Now's data:

https://www.vetsurgeon.org/news/b/veterinary-news/posts/video-vets-now-reports-54-year-on-year-growth

You could start by setting up a Facebook / Zoom account and allowing clients to use that for OOH up to 11:00pm??? Then pass the calls over to your OOH provider for the rest???

Or offer a a certain number of online consults at a fixed time, again via zoom or Facetime. Or Facebook for that matter.

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Lucy Fleming — Mon, 27 Mar 2023 11:59:52 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/30598/rcvs-priorities---has-it-got-them-right/241022#241022"]I've said before, but if I owned a practice, I think I would now be looking at how online consultations could be fitted into my offering, so that clients are not tempted by other online providers which may poach via online consultations. [/quote]

The difficulty with this is that, for a single independent practice, without the heft of a large web development budget behind them, easier said than done... The clients might perceive it as cheaper/ easier for them (indeed, it might be) but for us it's clunkier and more time consuming, potentially clincally less preferable (for the pet), and doesn't do anything to utilise staff time any more efficiently...

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Bob Russell — Fri, 10 Mar 2023 13:35:08 GMT

My limited IVC experience is they allow the practices to appear more independent than they really are.

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 10 Mar 2023 12:47:32 GMT

[quote userid="6550" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/30598/rcvs-priorities---has-it-got-them-right/241021#241021"]The idea that the pet population has risen beyond the abilities of the profession to cope does appear to be largely wrong.[/quote]

Gosh, Bob, how interesting. I'd fallen for that 'everyone's gone and bought a puppy during the pandemic' story!

[quote userid="6550" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/30598/rcvs-priorities---has-it-got-them-right/241021#241021"]Far more important appears to be the job crisis the profession faces. Early retirement of senior, experienced vets (often with a nice corporate pot of gold) plus the major move to part time work.[/quote]

Yes, it certainly does seem that way, doesn't it.

[quote userid="6550" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/30598/rcvs-priorities---has-it-got-them-right/241021#241021"]

The answer appears to be to lower the quality threshold so on-line vets can fill a gap. It should not be much cheaper nor is it going to remove the need for many to be seen in person.

This is where the corporates are likely to benefit by directing clients to their own practices. Cherry picking by on-line 'pharmacies' is a threat to a balanced income for all practices but who owns the on-line sites? The same corporates!

[/quote]

Totally agree it will not remove the need for many (most?) to be seen in person.

But I am perhaps less pessimistic about the impact on the independent sector. I mean, the whole world ain't going to wake up on Tuesday and start looking for a vet online to prescribe something. There is time for independents to find ways to compete.

I've said before, but if I owned a practice, I think I would now be looking at how online consultations could be fitted into my offering, so that clients are not tempted by other online providers which may poach via online consultations.

In that regard, I suspect IVC will be the biggest player to watch out for.

Generally speaking, I am against the corporatisation of the world, and the homogenisation of everything. But I've always rather liked IVC's approach, which seems to be to allow its practices to retain their individual identity and character.

But that, of course, makes their practices seem more independent, and therefore I would imagine competing more with real independent practices than Vets4Pets or Companion Care.

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Bob Russell — Fri, 10 Mar 2023 12:21:39 GMT

It was obvious from the start that the committee had already made the decision to allow remote prescribing. There was some justification during lockdown but limited after.

The idea that the pet population has risen beyond the abilities of the profession to cope does appear to be largely wrong.

www.pdsa.org.uk/.../pet-populations-across-the-uk

Far more important appears to be the job crisis the profession faces. Early retirement of senior, experienced vets (often with a nice corporate pot of gold) plus the major move to part time work.

It is poor planning that has got us to this point. Universities filling places with overseas students because UK ones don't cover the costs. Poor remuneration in comparison to their peers and a lack of career structure.

The answer appears to be to lower the quality threshold so on-line vets can fill a gap. It should not be much cheaper nor is it going to remove the need for many to be seen in person.

We are doing OK because we are who we are (independent) and my hope is the corporates will fight each other for business.

Perhaps I am likethe little boy with his finger in the dam but I am approaching retirement way faster than I like!!

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 10 Mar 2023 10:03:41 GMT

[quote userid="6550" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/30598/rcvs-priorities---has-it-got-them-right/241003#241003"]The argument is that the RCVS is no longer acting in the interests of the welfare of patients but to a not very well hidden agenda.[/quote]

What, do you mean the corporate agenda? Because I don't see that. The independent councillors I talk to do not appear to think that. Or have I misunderstood you?

[quote userid="20100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/30598/rcvs-priorities---has-it-got-them-right/241018#241018"]Some outsiders may think they've turned themselves into Capos.[/quote]

Coopers Wamae don't quite understand what you mean!

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Coopers Wamae — Fri, 10 Mar 2023 06:46:25 GMT

Some outsiders may think they've turned themselves into Capos.

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Bob Russell — Wed, 08 Mar 2023 11:25:28 GMT

The argument is that the RCVS is no longer acting in the interests of the welfare of patients but to a not very well hidden agenda.

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Arlo Guthrie — Wed, 08 Mar 2023 10:22:24 GMT

[quote userid="6550" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/30598/rcvs-priorities---has-it-got-them-right/240996#240996"]The whole thing is important. Probably the public interest is the lowest priority.[/quote]

I think we may be talking at cross purposes! What I mean, (and the point made to me) was that the charter puts animal welfare first, and the council code puts public interest first.

My take is that the veterinary oath (as you know) says:

ABOVE ALL, my constant endeavour will be to ensure the health and welfare of animals committed to my care

Surely therefore it follows that the regulation of people who's oath is to prioritise animal welfare, should similarly prioritise animal welfare above all else.

That is the case in the Royal Charter.

But NOT in the Code of Conduct for Councillors, where the sentence implies that public interest is the priority.

Personally, I think that is important. It's the scene setter for new Councillors and what they sign up to.

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Bob Russell — Tue, 07 Mar 2023 10:59:49 GMT

The whole thing is important. Probably the public interest is the lowest priority.

But the lost bit is:

to set, uphold and advance veterinary standards, and to promote, encourage and advance the study and practice of the art and science

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 07 Mar 2023 10:38:34 GMT

Damn, on ipad on train so cant edit. But I was also going to say that I wonder if anyone else picked up on the point of my post: that the charter puts the interests of the health and welfare of animals first (with the wider public interest second), whereas for the Council code, that is reversed and animal health is secondary to the public interest?

Semantics? Important? Not important?

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 07 Mar 2023 10:33:39 GMT

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/30598/rcvs-priorities---has-it-got-them-right/240989#240989"]

Interesting.

Who sets this code of conduct for council members?

[/quote]

Dunno, I will ask.

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Bob Russell — Tue, 07 Mar 2023 10:21:28 GMT

Fun.exciting. challenging. emotionally emersive. An art, a science that depended on enthusiastic, caring vets.

With that came plenty of challenges and pressures (no rose tinted spectacles here). A lot of things are done better now, particularly helped by fewer vets working in isolation. Knowledge spreads much more easily.

It is so depressing to go through a consultative process knowing the decisions have already been made because one legal opinion says so!

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Richard Carter — Tue, 07 Mar 2023 09:42:18 GMT

Think it’s beginning to dawn on all the 1-15 year graduates they have lost their profession to the practice manager, profits and ever increasing rules and laws from both within and without the profession. The RCVS just one more set of nails. Used to be fun and exciting

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Bob Russell — Tue, 07 Mar 2023 09:28:17 GMT

The guide version speaks volumes about this being a profession. The code verson puts us firmly into regulated trade.

Not sure why this is a surprise to anyone really. The RCVS has spent the last few years downgrading the profession.

RE: RCVS priorities - has it got them right?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Tue, 07 Mar 2023 00:36:27 GMT

Interesting.

Who sets this code of conduct for council members?