Internal oversight...hmm, well the man in question was later promoted. Okay, so he was 'warned' about his behaviour but we don't know to what extent. Without this film we (and the owner) would have never known about it. Anyone who does that to an animal (particularly one in pain or frightened) shouldn't be working with animals.
@gavsky23 Gavsky but the guy was disciplined, He shouldn't have hit the dog but the program was very careful to say there was no animal cruelty. the guys sounds like a bit of a dick but he's now lost his job and will probably never work in the industry again. He has also been getting death threats. nurses are not paid much, so I'm sure he actually does love animals, but you are right he is maybe not suited to stressful situations. The point is the company was not at fault
@gavsky23 ....by that I mean, they can't be held responsible for the actions of one bad employee. or one employee's mistake. they disciplined him on th ebasis of the facts they had to hand. they don't secretly film their employees, so can't just sack people on other employee's say so. once they'd seen the footage, he resigned. My whole point here is that Panorama has conducted a character assasination on one company. Why? are the rumours of a woman with a grudge and with friends in the BBC true?
this documentary is all sensationalism!!!! I'm a vet nurse and have worked in lots of clinics in the UK and Australia. In my experience instinces like these are few and far between! They are totally unacceptable and not tolerated in the veterinary world, however we are powerless to stop the occasional individual the first time, but let me assure you they would not get a chance to do it again!!!!
did not strike me as anything to be worried about. It's good that some bad issues were raised but i feel panorama could have cut the program by at least half. Alot of it seemed like filler, like the irish setter or the blood donor company. I think the bbc did set out to make a controvesy and had a slated view. Most perplexing was their focussing on one company. It sounds like they took at lest two years to make the program, so could have taken a wider view
he could be her boss. That said indies have strengths too. Another point to make is that you should look at medivet's business model. It's a partnership group. So it is actually a group of practices that are run and owned by individual vets, who pool resources, have increased buying power, and use central hospitals. incidentally many indies use these same hospitals. If one vet is dishonest, it has no bearing on the next door vet. Finally, though i saw a couple of shocking things, most footage
Kids in prison is not the issue, though they are obviously more important that animals. This whole thing is very polarising. I've read a few of the posts and people seem quite extreme in their views. I've worked in chain vets and indipendants and must say there are pros and cons to both. One of the benefits of the chain, is that issues such as the nurse hitting the dog, are dealt with. If a nurse sees a vet, for example, doing something wrong, she can report him through management. At an indie
The nurse did a bad thing. He was then severely reprimanded. At somepoint, possibly up to a year later, as this was all filmed over a year ago, some of it two years ago, he is promoted to a higher role. Maybe he should have been sacked at first, that is a reasonable debating point. However, aside from the out and out loons who post death threats, there are those who post semi-violent things. Like they beat him up or something. These assinine comments do not contribute to the debate.
In a week when the BBC revealed a secret manual outlining permissible restraint techniques, including punching the sternum and dragging one's boot down the shin, the only surprise is the lack of an outcry. Oh right, these restraint techniques are designed for use on children in private prisons and not animals. So that's all right then.
Though I think this program has hyped up the situation, I agree this is a public relations disaster for medvet. Unfortunately, it will be young nurses who are made redundant when their business drops off. The bad vet, has already left the company...
The main issue in the program was the dodgy vet in stamfor. His actions were dispicable but he was found out, investigated and then struck off after due process. The industry's self regulation worked and justice was done. So, I don't see why this is being used as a stick to beat the company. They have some internal issues, which need to be resolved, but destroying their business, which is essentially what the bbc have done, will only resort in the redundancies of 100s of innocent people.
The main issue in the program was the dodgy vet in stamfor. His actions were dispicable but he was found out, investigated and then struck off after due process. The industry's self regulation worked and justice was done. So, I don't see why this is being used as a stick to beat the company. They have some internal issues, which need to be resolved, but destroying their business, which is essentially what the bbc have done, will only resort in the redundancies of 100s of innocent people.
@sirboximus6661 If you know anything about nursing, you'd know there is no such thing as a normal shift. I'd be livid if someone treated my cat like a puppet or hit my dog. The struck off vet, was found out and struck off. The company was loyal to him at first but once they realised he was dodgy, he resigned (or was asked to resign maybe). But if you looked behind th scenes of any workplace, veterinary or not, you'd find examples of bad behaviour amoung junior staff.
the guy who did this is actually quite an arse in real life but actions have been taken against him for doing this. its clear that all the other nurses were outraged at him for doing this and later went on to report him. this program is crazy. its unbelivable that panorama have chosen to pick spesifically on medivet and no other practice. as far as complaining about money goes, goddards is just as expensive as medivet but there is nothing on here about them!!!!!
you just said the system worked?! correct me if i'm wrong but didn't that guy arron who hit the dog because he didn't like shar pei's subjected the dog a beating? you say the system works but this guy got promoted to head nurse at another practice didn't he?
you are a weak guy your trying too hard to make people try to believe your not a medicare employee, who writes "i'm off to catch the noght train to bedfordshire" haha please! give me a break!!
@pagzz100 . That guy sounds like a prick, from the description panoarama gave. But before i trust a onesided program, i think the guy deserves a fair hearing. it seems pretty cut and dried from listening to the edited sound recording. however, he was processed through an internal system and reprimanded. He is later promoted. maybe the company felt he had learnt from the mistake and gave him a chance. would you like it to be branded for the rest of your life for one mistake. come on
You are clearly a medivet employee sillagrrl, for one you are defending someone striking a dog just hours after aputating it's leg, two I see you haven't defended the screwing the customers and insurance companies over because this is impossible to defend, you only defend the veterinary side of things because you are clearly from the industry giving the opinion this is every day practice. Finally you only joined three days ago a little suspect when medi vet claim you're unrelated to them.
There was another incident that i think bears scrutiny. At one point a nurse divides a clients charges between three claims on an insurance claim. This was clearly not acceptable but again you can see that the vet was probably working from good, if misguided, motives. If all the charges had been put on one condition, the client's insurance policy would have been maxed out and they'd have to pay the excess. The vet was trying to help the client at the expense of the insurance company.
@Theblobby118 . OK, so you put several hundred people out of work because of one bady vet and a couple of badly behaved nurses. Get real! Listen to yourself. Ok there is a problem, but closing the comapny or boycotting them would be pointless and reactionary.
@republican1916yeah - I understand your point, but I would not 'boycott' the company based on any personal maliciousness, only because I would want what is best for my pets. And at the moment, Medivet seems to have problems that need to be addressed. I would have had far more respect for the company had they acknowledged issues and not blatently lied, as they did in the case of the dog whose paw was injured at the vet. A one off incident I know, but it was the way they dealt with it.
@PapaGuade . It looks to me that the company was faced with the accusation by the program but weren't shown the film. The would have talked to the staff to get their side. If the staff stuck with their story, maybe the company decided to back them. If this isn't the case, and the company just decided to lie when faced with this evidence, they've really shot themselves in the foot
@Katsense - once again, I understand that, but knowing it would be part of the investigation as they were faced with the accusation, surely it would have been better to 'no comment at this time' or do a through internal investigation to ensure that their comments were correct? It would be interesting to know!
@PapaGuade . You are right there. I'm only guessing and have nothing to base my reactions on. I imagine though, that if I'm right, the vet in question will now be in serious trouble at work. I'm not defending her but I can see she was sort of trying to help the new nurse who made the original mistake. It shows that honesty is the best policy
I disagree - hitting a distressed animal is cruelty. Medivet pride themselves on care.
9 months investigation at some branches - who knows what else goes on in other branches. Hopefully Medivet will learn from this episode, but given the responses on the programme, it is unlikely. To be on the safe side, I'll steer clear.
The thing is, though i agree this has been spun by the bbc and they want their story but once the daily mail reading dog lovers get their teeth into this, it's going to go apeshit crazy and all vets/nurses are going to get it in the neck!
Here we see the company's internal correction system working. After nine months of undercover investigation, this is the closest they come to malpractice. The nurse reacts to a distress and very large dog. We don't see the incident but can only assume it was not called for. Whether he did wrong or not, he was disciplined after being reported by other nurses. Hardly a scoop
@sillagrrrl WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU BLABBERING ABOUT ?????!!!!!!!!!!! , i'm watching that program right now, and the actions of those employees for medivet is disgraceful, did you not even see what that dumb bitch was doing to the cat ???!!! are you fucking stupid ???!!!!!!!!!!!!! .
my mother has been a canine behaviorist for over 25 years with more that 300 dogs she's cared for, iv'e grown up around hundreds of dogs and horses, DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ANIMALS ???!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Internal oversight...hmm, well the man in question was later promoted. Okay, so he was 'warned' about his behaviour but we don't know to what extent. Without this film we (and the owner) would have never known about it. Anyone who does that to an animal (particularly one in pain or frightened) shouldn't be working with animals.
gavsky23 1 year ago
@gavsky23 Gavsky but the guy was disciplined, He shouldn't have hit the dog but the program was very careful to say there was no animal cruelty. the guys sounds like a bit of a dick but he's now lost his job and will probably never work in the industry again. He has also been getting death threats. nurses are not paid much, so I'm sure he actually does love animals, but you are right he is maybe not suited to stressful situations. The point is the company was not at fault
sillagrrrl 1 year ago
@gavsky23 ....by that I mean, they can't be held responsible for the actions of one bad employee. or one employee's mistake. they disciplined him on th ebasis of the facts they had to hand. they don't secretly film their employees, so can't just sack people on other employee's say so. once they'd seen the footage, he resigned. My whole point here is that Panorama has conducted a character assasination on one company. Why? are the rumours of a woman with a grudge and with friends in the BBC true?
sillagrrrl 1 year ago
this documentary is all sensationalism!!!! I'm a vet nurse and have worked in lots of clinics in the UK and Australia. In my experience instinces like these are few and far between! They are totally unacceptable and not tolerated in the veterinary world, however we are powerless to stop the occasional individual the first time, but let me assure you they would not get a chance to do it again!!!!
alexandrafitz 1 year ago
did not strike me as anything to be worried about. It's good that some bad issues were raised but i feel panorama could have cut the program by at least half. Alot of it seemed like filler, like the irish setter or the blood donor company. I think the bbc did set out to make a controvesy and had a slated view. Most perplexing was their focussing on one company. It sounds like they took at lest two years to make the program, so could have taken a wider view
MegaNurse321 1 year ago 12
he could be her boss. That said indies have strengths too. Another point to make is that you should look at medivet's business model. It's a partnership group. So it is actually a group of practices that are run and owned by individual vets, who pool resources, have increased buying power, and use central hospitals. incidentally many indies use these same hospitals. If one vet is dishonest, it has no bearing on the next door vet. Finally, though i saw a couple of shocking things, most footage
MegaNurse321 1 year ago 12
Kids in prison is not the issue, though they are obviously more important that animals. This whole thing is very polarising. I've read a few of the posts and people seem quite extreme in their views. I've worked in chain vets and indipendants and must say there are pros and cons to both. One of the benefits of the chain, is that issues such as the nurse hitting the dog, are dealt with. If a nurse sees a vet, for example, doing something wrong, she can report him through management. At an indie
MegaNurse321 1 year ago 11
The nurse did a bad thing. He was then severely reprimanded. At somepoint, possibly up to a year later, as this was all filmed over a year ago, some of it two years ago, he is promoted to a higher role. Maybe he should have been sacked at first, that is a reasonable debating point. However, aside from the out and out loons who post death threats, there are those who post semi-violent things. Like they beat him up or something. These assinine comments do not contribute to the debate.
Katsense 1 year ago 11
In a week when the BBC revealed a secret manual outlining permissible restraint techniques, including punching the sternum and dragging one's boot down the shin, the only surprise is the lack of an outcry. Oh right, these restraint techniques are designed for use on children in private prisons and not animals. So that's all right then.
cynosure32 1 year ago 5
@cynosure32 This is totally true. It shows the skews sense of priority of the public
cuteychicken 1 year ago 9
Though I think this program has hyped up the situation, I agree this is a public relations disaster for medvet. Unfortunately, it will be young nurses who are made redundant when their business drops off. The bad vet, has already left the company...
MegaNurse321 1 year ago 4
The main issue in the program was the dodgy vet in stamfor. His actions were dispicable but he was found out, investigated and then struck off after due process. The industry's self regulation worked and justice was done. So, I don't see why this is being used as a stick to beat the company. They have some internal issues, which need to be resolved, but destroying their business, which is essentially what the bbc have done, will only resort in the redundancies of 100s of innocent people.
MegaNurse321 1 year ago
The main issue in the program was the dodgy vet in stamfor. His actions were dispicable but he was found out, investigated and then struck off after due process. The industry's self regulation worked and justice was done. So, I don't see why this is being used as a stick to beat the company. They have some internal issues, which need to be resolved, but destroying their business, which is essentially what the bbc have done, will only resort in the redundancies of 100s of innocent people.
MegaNurse321 1 year ago
@sirboximus6661 If you know anything about nursing, you'd know there is no such thing as a normal shift. I'd be livid if someone treated my cat like a puppet or hit my dog. The struck off vet, was found out and struck off. The company was loyal to him at first but once they realised he was dodgy, he resigned (or was asked to resign maybe). But if you looked behind th scenes of any workplace, veterinary or not, you'd find examples of bad behaviour amoung junior staff.
Katsense 1 year ago 18
the guy who did this is actually quite an arse in real life but actions have been taken against him for doing this. its clear that all the other nurses were outraged at him for doing this and later went on to report him. this program is crazy. its unbelivable that panorama have chosen to pick spesifically on medivet and no other practice. as far as complaining about money goes, goddards is just as expensive as medivet but there is nothing on here about them!!!!!
starraven278 1 year ago 3
you just said the system worked?! correct me if i'm wrong but didn't that guy arron who hit the dog because he didn't like shar pei's subjected the dog a beating? you say the system works but this guy got promoted to head nurse at another practice didn't he?
you are a weak guy your trying too hard to make people try to believe your not a medicare employee, who writes "i'm off to catch the noght train to bedfordshire" haha please! give me a break!!
pagzz100 1 year ago
@pagzz100 . That guy sounds like a prick, from the description panoarama gave. But before i trust a onesided program, i think the guy deserves a fair hearing. it seems pretty cut and dried from listening to the edited sound recording. however, he was processed through an internal system and reprimanded. He is later promoted. maybe the company felt he had learnt from the mistake and gave him a chance. would you like it to be branded for the rest of your life for one mistake. come on
Katsense 1 year ago 4
You are clearly a medivet employee sillagrrl, for one you are defending someone striking a dog just hours after aputating it's leg, two I see you haven't defended the screwing the customers and insurance companies over because this is impossible to defend, you only defend the veterinary side of things because you are clearly from the industry giving the opinion this is every day practice. Finally you only joined three days ago a little suspect when medi vet claim you're unrelated to them.
pagzz100 1 year ago
There was another incident that i think bears scrutiny. At one point a nurse divides a clients charges between three claims on an insurance claim. This was clearly not acceptable but again you can see that the vet was probably working from good, if misguided, motives. If all the charges had been put on one condition, the client's insurance policy would have been maxed out and they'd have to pay the excess. The vet was trying to help the client at the expense of the insurance company.
Katsense 1 year ago
It's not right to hit an animal that has just had an op or hit any any animal for that matter.
lilyfurryears 1 year ago
@lilyfurryears You are right there. I totally agree.
republican1916yeah 1 year ago
Close down now Medivet. Enough is enough
Theblobby118 1 year ago
@Theblobby118 . OK, so you put several hundred people out of work because of one bady vet and a couple of badly behaved nurses. Get real! Listen to yourself. Ok there is a problem, but closing the comapny or boycotting them would be pointless and reactionary.
republican1916yeah 1 year ago
@republican1916yeah - I understand your point, but I would not 'boycott' the company based on any personal maliciousness, only because I would want what is best for my pets. And at the moment, Medivet seems to have problems that need to be addressed. I would have had far more respect for the company had they acknowledged issues and not blatently lied, as they did in the case of the dog whose paw was injured at the vet. A one off incident I know, but it was the way they dealt with it.
PapaGuade 1 year ago
@PapaGuade . It looks to me that the company was faced with the accusation by the program but weren't shown the film. The would have talked to the staff to get their side. If the staff stuck with their story, maybe the company decided to back them. If this isn't the case, and the company just decided to lie when faced with this evidence, they've really shot themselves in the foot
Katsense 1 year ago
@Katsense - once again, I understand that, but knowing it would be part of the investigation as they were faced with the accusation, surely it would have been better to 'no comment at this time' or do a through internal investigation to ensure that their comments were correct? It would be interesting to know!
PapaGuade 1 year ago
@PapaGuade . You are right there. I'm only guessing and have nothing to base my reactions on. I imagine though, that if I'm right, the vet in question will now be in serious trouble at work. I'm not defending her but I can see she was sort of trying to help the new nurse who made the original mistake. It shows that honesty is the best policy
Katsense 1 year ago
Comment removed
PapaGuade 1 year ago
I disagree - hitting a distressed animal is cruelty. Medivet pride themselves on care.
9 months investigation at some branches - who knows what else goes on in other branches. Hopefully Medivet will learn from this episode, but given the responses on the programme, it is unlikely. To be on the safe side, I'll steer clear.
PapaGuade 1 year ago
Comment removed
grantrr4 1 year ago
The thing is, though i agree this has been spun by the bbc and they want their story but once the daily mail reading dog lovers get their teeth into this, it's going to go apeshit crazy and all vets/nurses are going to get it in the neck!
republican1916yeah 1 year ago 3
You are right sillgrill, this is bollocks. hyped up shite!
republican1916yeah 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
bartapian4 1 year ago
Here we see the company's internal correction system working. After nine months of undercover investigation, this is the closest they come to malpractice. The nurse reacts to a distress and very large dog. We don't see the incident but can only assume it was not called for. Whether he did wrong or not, he was disciplined after being reported by other nurses. Hardly a scoop
sillagrrrl 1 year ago 15
@sillagrrrl WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU BLABBERING ABOUT ?????!!!!!!!!!!! , i'm watching that program right now, and the actions of those employees for medivet is disgraceful, did you not even see what that dumb bitch was doing to the cat ???!!! are you fucking stupid ???!!!!!!!!!!!!! .
my mother has been a canine behaviorist for over 25 years with more that 300 dogs she's cared for, iv'e grown up around hundreds of dogs and horses, DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ANIMALS ???!!!!!!!!!!!!!
bartapian4 1 year ago
@bartapian4 When you say your mother is a canine behaviorist, do you mean she is a behaviourist who specialises in canines or something else?
cynosure32 1 year ago 3