Are medical assistants modern galley slaves?

What it’s all about

In some german GP and specialist practices, conditions are reminiscent of the dark ages when galley slaves had to toil in undignified conditions. This metaphor illustrates the unfortunately frightening reality to which some staff are exposed according to the results of employee surveys carried out as part of practice management company comparisons. Here is a detailed insight into the factors that individually or in combination characterise the miserable working conditions faced by some medical assistants.

Inadequate work equipment

In addition to non-ergonomic workstations and inadequately functioning aids, the employees describe having to share outdated equipment such as PCs with slow processors. This situation is not only inefficient, but also increases stress levels enormously, as staff are constantly under time pressure and technical restrictions make their work even more difficult.

Lack of appreciation

A frequently voiced complaint is that the work performed is hardly valued or not valued at all. Praise and recognition are rare, and employee motivation and job satisfaction are correspondingly low. This climate of disdain leads to high staff turnover and a permanently tense working environment.

Overwork without breaks

Another point of criticism is that the work density is so high that breaks often remain an unattainable luxury. There is no dedicated break room where employees can relax. Instead, they have to eat their snacks standing up or in an outside area of the practice, which leads to prolonged exhaustion.

Restricted holiday planning

A widespread annoyance is that holiday times are set exclusively according to the practice owner’s specifications, without consideration for the personal needs or preferences of the employees. This results in a considerable restriction of the work-life balance, which further increases the feeling of being controlled by others.

Ignored suggestions for improvement

Great frustration arises from the fact that ideas expressed by staff about necessary changes to the work are systematically ignored. In this way, not only do valuable approaches to optimising practice processes remain unrealised, but the practice owner’s behaviour also demotivates employees as they do not feel heard or valued.

Strict instructions without self-determination

Another negative experience is that the work is carried out strictly according to the instructions and specifications of the practice manager, without the employees having any room for manoeuvre to make their own decisions or come up with creative solutions. This rigid way of working stifles staff’s own initiative and sense of responsibility, resulting in work to rule.

Inconsistent work instructions

The next characteristic of “galley practices” is that work instructions and quality criteria frequently change in their design and interpretation, leading to confusion and frustration. This inconsistent leadership makes it difficult to consistently produce good work and further increases stress levels.

Moody behaviour of the boss

The moody behaviour of the boss also contributes to uncertainty. Staff must be constantly prepared for unpredictable reactions and mood changes, which further promotes stress escalation.

Reprimands in front of patients

The comments from the employee surveys show that it is not uncommon for employees to be reprimanded in the presence of patients and colleagues. This behaviour not only undermines the self-esteem of those affected, but also damages the professional image of the practice and the trust of patients.

Unfriendly tone from the boss

An unfriendly tone from bosses is often cited. This type of communication creates a hostile work environment that significantly affects staff morale and productivity.

Constant criticism

Instead of constructive feedback, the employees are usually only exposed to critical assessments of their work. This one-sided negative evaluation demoralises employees and leads to a feeling of inferiority and resignation.

Lack of information

It is also criticised that practice managers rarely or never inform staff about important decisions, changes or plans. This lack of communication creates a feeling of isolation and insecurity, as employees often do not know what to expect.

Conclusion

Overall, these descriptions from employee surveys show that in some of the medical practices, not only human interaction but also work efficiency could be significantly improved by changes in the behaviour of the practice owners. It is to be hoped that the results of the surveys have led to sensitisation among some of the doctors in whose practices the comparisons were carried out.