Opening a Vet Practice

[dvmcatdog]

I just had a question about opening a small animal practice. When people get out of veterinary school I assume most go work for someone else for awhile. Once someone decides to open up their own practice, how would they go about doing so without hurting anyone involved? I'm just confused on if you tell your clients you're leaving to open somewhere else or if that's wrong to the owner of the practice because you're taking away his clients. Do people open somewhere new without having any clients? How do you get clients? Thanks

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Coquette22]

I just had a question about opening a small animal practice. When people get out of veterinary school I assume most go work for someone else for awhile. Once someone decides to open up their own practice, how would they go about doing so without hurting anyone involved? I'm just confused on if you tell your clients you're leaving to open somewhere else or if that's wrong to the owner of the practice because you're taking away his clients. Do people open somewhere new without having any clients? How do you get clients? Thanks

Opening a brand new practice is generally not advised in today's market, most markets are saturated. Though no, you're often not allowed to tell people that you're opening a new practice, many associate veterinarians have non-compete clauses in their contracts (aka - can't work anywhere within X distance for X time after leaving the practice). For people who are interested in practice ownership, they generally buy-out an existing practice.

 

[CalliopeDVM]

Usually you don't tell your clients that you are leaving, since they're not "your" clients, they are the clinic's clients and they see you when you are working there. Telling clients you are leaving (without your boss' permission to do so) would be interpreted as trying to steal clients, and that is unethical. Those clients may find you in your new clinic out of their own effort, but you should not use your position at clinic X to try and convince them to go to clinic Y instead. When you are working, you are on the boss' payroll, and to do anything that might decrease his/her business -- unless it's for the pets' benefit, like referring to a specialist -- is unethical. And it may be in violation of your contract, too.

Yes, anyone who opens a brand new clinic (not just buying an existing clinic) starts out with no guaranteed clients. How do you get them? Some clients will come out of curiosity after seeing your new building (i.e by your location). You can have a clinic "open house" to introduce yourself to your neighbours. You can advertise to the extent that is allowed by your regulations (which vary based on where you are licensed). You can get known in the community by participating in local events, sponsoring a kids' sports team, or stuff like that. Like starting any new business, building a clientele can be tough.

 

[StartingoverVet]

I disagree with dr. Calliope on the ethics,
1. Most non compete clauses are not enforced as they are rarely structured legally. But still, if you have one best not to violate it,
2. In the absence of a non compete any clients are fair game. I would consider it ethically shady to actively recruit clients on the practice's time, but calling them on your own time and letting them know you are opening a new clinic, especially if you have a good relationship with them is fair game.

Ethical questions are rarely black and white..you have to make your own call on this if there is no guidance from your national veterinary medical association...

 

[dyachei]

I disagree with dr. Calliope on the ethics,
1. Most non compete clauses are not enforced as they are rarely structured legally. But still, if you have one best not to violate it,
2. In the absence of a non compete any clients are fair game. I would consider it ethically shady to actively recruit clients on the practice's time, but calling them on your own time and letting them know you are opening a new clinic, especially if you have a good relationship with them is fair game.

Ethical questions are rarely black and white..you have to make your own call on this if there is no guidance from your national veterinary medical association...

Nah that's a crappy thing to do.

When I started my practice I told clients I was leaving and would be opening my own clinic if they asked why. It is absolutely shady to tell them where you are going. Clients are revenue for that business. And are part of any valuation.

I had a bad relationship with the last clinic and still wouldn't do that.

 

[LetItSnow]

I disagree with dr. Calliope on the ethics,
1. Most non compete clauses are not enforced as they are rarely structured legally. But still, if you have one best not to violate it,

This may be true in fields you have worked in, but I have personally seen them enforced (or attempted enforcement, which caused significant burden to the person attempting to avoid their non-compete) several times .... and that's in my very short time in this field.

So at least in my limited experience, I would view it as more significant than I think you are viewing it. It would be financially devastating if you invested a lot of money opening up a clinic only to find yourself defending a non-compete clause enforcement.

Whether it is technically "ethical" or "unethical" might not be all that significant in the end. It's a small field. If you want a rep in your local community as that doctor who 'stole' a bunch of clients when you were an associate, you might be doing yourself more harm than good. Regardless of the actual truth behind the perception.

I think a better approach is to plan ahead: If you are taking a job as an associate and know you want to leave at some point down the road to open a practice, or buy into another practice, then make sure you negotiate in a way that gives you that opportunity. Nothing wrong with saying "I won't accept your non-compete clause as written; but I will accept a non-compete clause with these changes......"

My non-compete only says I can't go open an ER hospital down the road, which I'm ok with. I'm perfectly free to go work next door in GP, open a GP practice, or whatever. And I'm pretty ok with that agreement. Had it been more restrictive, I would have negotiated a change or not taken the job. I think that's a better way to handle it.

 

[DVMDream]

I disagree with dr. Calliope on the ethics,
1. Most non compete clauses are not enforced as they are rarely structured legally. But still, if you have one best not to violate it,
2. In the absence of a non compete any clients are fair game. I would consider it ethically shady to actively recruit clients on the practice's time, but calling them on your own time and letting them know you are opening a new clinic, especially if you have a good relationship with them is fair game.

Ethical questions are rarely black and white..you have to make your own call on this if there is no guidance from your national veterinary medical association...

It is unethical to "steal" away clients or even employees from your employer. And non compete clauses are enforceable, within reason. A non compete clause including 60% of a town won't fly but one giving a 3-5 mile radius or even a bit more for a large animal vet is completely reasonable and enforceable.

 

[CalliopeDVM]

In the absence of a non compete any clients are fair game. I would consider it ethically shady to actively recruit clients on the practice's time, but calling them on your own time and letting them know you are opening a new clinic, especially if you have a good relationship with them is fair game.

Ethical questions are rarely black and white..you have to make your own call on this if there is no guidance from your national veterinary medical association...

A non-compete clause has absolutely nothing to do with ethical behaviour, and using any resources from the clinic (whether your time or their client list) to solicit clients for your business is unethical -- and I never said anything about talking to them when you meet them at the supermarket or the street. So essentially you agree that they're not "fair game", since you agree that you shouldn't do things on the company time (though I think your term "ethically shady" is an unethical cop out).

I think any non-compete clause is unfair and discriminatory, and I would never sign one nor ask anyone to sign one -- but that's a legal issue, not an ethical one.

 

[StartingoverVet]

A non-compete clause has absolutely nothing to do with ethical behaviour, and using any resources from the clinic (whether your time or their client list) to solicit clients for your business is unethical -- and I never said anything about talking to them when you meet them at the supermarket or the street. So essentially you agree that they're not "fair game", since you agree that you shouldn't do things on the company time (though I think your term "ethically shady" is an unethical cop out).

I think any non-compete clause is unfair and discriminatory, and I would never sign one nor ask anyone to sign one -- but that's a legal issue, not an ethical one.

I think we are agreeing here then.

 

[StartingoverVet]

And non compete clauses are enforceable, within reason. A non compete clause including 60% of a town won't fly but one giving a 3-5 mile radius or even a bit more for a large animal vet is completely reasonable and enforceable.

My brother is a labor lawyer, and he says they are rarely upheld in courts. The most enforceable ones are ones where there is clear consideration given to the person accepting the nonp-compete (i.e., we will give you this raise or promotion, and you have to agree to a non-compete. Non-competes as part of an initial employment package are difficult unless very specifically laid out). Unfortunately most companies have more resources than the people they threaten to sue, so they are still effective. There are variations among states, but that is the general lay of the land.

 

[StartingoverVet]

This may be true in fields you have worked in, but I have personally seen them enforced (or attempted enforcement, which caused significant burden to the person attempting to avoid their non-compete) several times .... and that's in my very short time in this field.

So at least in my limited experience, I would view it as more significant than I think you are viewing it. It would be financially devastating if you invested a lot of money opening up a clinic only to find yourself defending a non-compete clause enforcement.

Whether it is technically "ethical" or "unethical" might not be all that significant in the end. It's a small field. If you want a rep in your local community as that doctor who 'stole' a bunch of clients when you were an associate, you might be doing yourself more harm than good. Regardless of the actual truth behind the perception.

I think a better approach is to plan ahead: If you are taking a job as an associate and know you want to leave at some point down the road to open a practice, or buy into another practice, then make sure you negotiate in a way that gives you that opportunity. Nothing wrong with saying "I won't accept your non-compete clause as written; but I will accept a non-compete clause with these changes......"

My non-compete only says I can't go open an ER hospital down the road, which I'm ok with. I'm perfectly free to go work next door in GP, open a GP practice, or whatever. And I'm pretty ok with that agreement. Had it been more restrictive, I would have negotiated a change or not taken the job. I think that's a better way to handle it.

I think I made it clear that people would be best not to do it if they have a non-compete. Most of my post was what to do if there weren't one.

 

[Minnerbelle]

Unfortunately most companies have more resources than the people they threaten to sue, so they are still effective.

This. Especially if you work for a corporate practice


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[lianali]

My brother is a labor lawyer, and he says they are rarely upheld in courts. The most enforceable ones are ones where there is clear consideration given to the person accepting the nonp-compete (i.e., we will give you this raise or promotion, and you have to agree to a non-compete. Non-competes as part of an initial employment package are difficult unless very specifically laid out). Unfortunately most companies have more resources than the people they threaten to sue, so they are still effective. There are variations among states, but that is the general lay of the land.

Adding some anec-data here. My SO just recently switched companies and his old company tried to hit him with their non-compete clause. After ****ting a brick and finding a local labor lawyer, the kerfuffle between HR departments died down because the old employer's non-compete clause was too broad. FWIW, SO is an engineer.

That said, I would NOT want to live through that experience again. It worked out fine, and he's out of pocket for lawyer fees, but the stress was not fun.

 

[last_rnd]

I asked a Dr I know how they got started. They worked for a couple doctors a few days a week and worked on their own the other days until things grew and they could go out on their own. They worked out of their truck and now has a clinic. Their life looks glorious now, but I think I missed the 10-15years of hell it took to get there