can we refuse a client appointment, getting answers from unresponsive vendors, and more

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…

1. Can we refuse a massage appointment for a sex offender?

I am a front desk coordinator in a clinic that is part of a large healthcare system. I schedule appointments and assist patients who come in to see providers of various departments, including massage therapy. Recently, I saw an alert about a patient who was scheduled to see a particular massage therapist that indicated he had been discharged from another clinic in the same healthcare system for sexual harassment. Part of my job is to review past appointments for patients, and I saw that in his written scheduling request, he self-identified as a convicted sex offender and described in explicit sexual terms what he “definitely would not be doing” to this provider, “so don’t worry.” As he was scheduled to come in later that day, I decided to alert the provider herself (a 20-something female, Anna), my supervisor, and the massage therapy clinic supervisor. I learned that they were already aware of the situation and were still planning to allow him to come in for his appointment while they consulted risk management and the legal team. The plan was to have another person in the room during the treatment (Anna’s supervisor, also a woman).

Anna and I have a friendly relationship (for reference, I am a woman close to retirement age), and she confided in me that she was very uncomfortable with the arrangement and was absolutely not going to provide the treatment. Her supervisor decided to cancel the appointment since they had not figured out the legal aspect, but clocked it as a “provider cancel” rather than “admin cancel,” which dings Anna’s compliance. After legal/risk were fully consulted, the clinic decided to allow this man to reschedule and come in, as long as they put in place a “behavior contract.”

He has not yet come back into the clinic, and Anna told me she would call in sick if he was on the schedule anyway, but I am deeply disturbed that it was even allowed to get this far. I am trying to decide if I should leave this alone or escalate this further. One one hand, Anna seems to have a good handle on it herself. On the other, after reading his explicit scheduling request message, I would feel extremely uncomfortable if he were to come in, as I would be the one checking him in. Am I wrong to feel like the clinic manager should have shut this all down from the get-go and banned this patient? Or at the very least banned him from seeing female providers? Are there really legal implications in health care for refusing to treat a patient that supersede the safety of myself, Anna, and our other coworkers?

Your health care system may have its own internal policies, but in general medical providers can refuse to provide treatment if a patient is abusive or threatening or puts their or their staff’s safety at risk. Massage therapists absolutely can decline to see patients whose behavior makes them uncomfortable.

If the clinic is open to having this man as a patient, they should ensure that the provider seeing them feels comfortable doing it — and they need to make it safe for the provider to say if they don’t (something Anna apparently doesn’t feel she can do). But frankly, even if Anna were comfortable with it, since he’s already sent an inappropriate message that you were subjected to, they should be giving everyone who might interact with him a veto. Realistically, businesses don’t always work like that — but Anna, at a minimum, should have the ability to opt out without being penalized (and this is true for all sorts of appointments, but particularly for one as intimate as massage therapy).

Can you talk to Anna again and urge her to be more assertive about not feeling comfortable taking this patient, and offer to lend your voice to hers if she does?

2. Applying for a job that my best reference might morally disagree with

I am on the West Coast, applying to work at Planned Parenthood. I really want this job!

My best reference, a former supervisor, has told me she will be a good reference for me, as we worked closely together for many years. I believe her, and I have always felt gratitude toward her for this.

However, I also know that she is a practicing Catholic, and I have no idea what her views are of Planned Parenthood. I would hope that she would still speak well of me, but I am worried about giving her a heads-up if I make it to the references stage. All of my other references are fine, but not nearly as high-quality or relevant as hers will be.

What do I do here? I don’t want to offend her or put her in an awkward position of choosing between faith and friendship, but I also really, really want this job, and her viewpoint is nearly identical to the manager who I would potentially have at the health clinic. (Note: this would not be a patient-facing role, but an administrative one.)

Just ask! “I’m applying for an administrative job at Planned Parenthood and wanted to make sure you’d be comfortable with you listing me as a reference.”

It might be a total non-issue for her (for all we know, she might support Planned Parenthood, or at least not have strong feelings about them), or she might be perfectly capable of separating her feelings about reproductive health care from the reference she gives you. But if she feels weird about it, this gives her a chance to tell you.

Related:
giving a reference when you have a moral objection to the employee

3. How can I get answers from unresponsive vendors?

Do you have suggestions on how to deal with third parties, typically vendors, who are not responding/acting in a reasonable timeframe?

I tend to spend quite some time on emails to make sure they are as clear as possible, but I notice that some third parties will answer only one out of three (clearly labeled) questions, or just not reply at all. Over the phone I have similar issues: some will rarely pick up the phone and if they do will commit to doing something that they will have forgotten to do if I call them again a week later.

What is a good way to get these third parties to work with you, especially in cases where it’s not possible to use a different third party? Does it make sense to keep calling them multiple times a day? Maybe give them feedback the way you would an employee? Ask for a different person to contact? These are typically vendors that couldn’t be swapped for another one without massive effort, and what we typically need support for is how a certain feature works or there’s something broken on their end that we need a fix for.

These are vendors, so they’re to some degree accountable for keeping you happy so they retain your business — or at least they’re supposed to be. In reality, your business may not be large enough for you to have much leverage, but you’re certainly entitled to expect a reasonable level of responsiveness, or that they’ll at least tell you if they’re not going to be able to give you the level of service you want.

The first thing to try is naming the problem for them: “I’m having trouble getting answers to call and emails, and often when we do hear back, only one question will be answered when we’d asked several. I’m also finding I have to follow up on things we agreed VendorCompany will take care of. Is there someone else I should be sending these requests to, or a different way I should be communicating them?” Sometimes just calling out the problem like that will put the person on notice that they need to step up their game.

But if that doesn’t work, it’s completely reasonable to ask for a different point of contact. You can either ask the problem person themselves to connect you with someone else, or you can go over their head and ask someone else.

4. Should I leave a job after one month for a better one?

I recently accepted a position with a nonprofit that works closely with a school. The job requires three days a week at the school, which is quite far from my home, and two days a week in an office closer to me. The salary is $55K, but the benefits are not great. Health insurance kicks in after 60 days (a bit expensive), and there are 15 vacation days, 5 sick days, and no personal days. The probation period is 6 months.

However, I’m also being considered for a position working directly for the school, which has significantly better benefits. The salary would range from $65K to $75K (closer to the higher end given my experience), and I would receive 50 vacation days, as I would get the same vacation as the students, including summers off and winter breaks. The health benefits are much better, and there are opportunities for raises based on both cost of living and merit. Additionally, there is room for career advancement in this role.

This second position would start in April, while the first job I’ve accepted begins in March. I’ve been unemployed for two months, and I’m dealing with personal challenges, including a recent family loss. Given my situation, I’m concerned about going without income for another month and the long commute to the nonprofit job.

If I were to take the first job and leave after a month, would that look bad in the eyes of employer? I don’t want to burn bridges. I don’t want to outright say that I found a better opportunity, but I’m considering explaining my personal circumstances (grieving a family member and concerns about health insurance since I have a neurological disorder) and the difficulty of the commute.

The first employer won’t be happy and it’s likely to burn a bridge with them in terms of future employment there, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do it. It sounds like the second job is better for you all around, and you need to do what’s best for you (just as they would do what’s best for them when it comes to employing you!). You can apologize for the timing and say it fell in your lap and both the salary and the health insurance were too good to pass up. You don’t need to mention anything personal beyond that.

Related:
how do I tell my brand new job I’m leaving for a better offer?

5. Why can supervisors be prohibited from discussing wages and working conditions, when employees must be allowed to?

You mentioned in a recent column that it is not illegal for supervisors to be barred from discussing working conditions (and salary too).

Why is that? How did it become the law that supervisors are exempt from the right to discuss salary and working conditions? And what are the potential consequences for supervisors who do engage in these activities?

It’s because the law in question — the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA)— was formed mostly to protect unions and unionizing, although it extends those protection to less formal organizing among employees. The NRLA generally excludes supervisors from voting in union elections or being represented by unions; the idea is that it’s hard for managers to truly act in the best interests of employees if those interests differ from management’s, and they might feel pressure from above to vote against employees’ interests or wishes.

The law defines supervisors as anyone “having the authority, in the interest of the employer, to hire, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or responsibly to direct them, or adjust their grievances, or effectively to recommend such action, if in connection with the foregoing the exercise of such authority is not of a merely routine or clerical nature, but requires the use of independent judgment.”

The post can we refuse a client appointment, getting answers from unresponsive vendors, and more appeared first on Ask a Manager.

View the full article