OCSWSSW Code of Ethics
The OCSWSSW code of ethics specifies the standards within which an individual should operate while dealing with other people in the workplace. Specifically, the standards specify the conduct of an individual toward the organization of professional organization that an individual has been contracted to work with during a specified period. However, the code of ethics does not hold an individual responsible for actions that are against their professional freedom. Neil has been operating against the code of ethics for a long time and should be reported to OCSWSSW for directions on the actions to be taken against him. However, the reporting should be based on a clear identification of the standards that Neil has not adhered to and should also be done according to the procedures specified by the code of ethics.
Neil may have been operating within a particular requirement according to the code of ethics at the expense of other standards. Also, the interpretation of the code of ethics should have been different, according to Neil. For example, the code of ethics requires that a professional should always work towards the best interest of the client. In Neil’s case, most clients have been interested in the delivery method offered by Neil. Therefore, reporting Neil should not be based on the fact that the clients have complained of receiving a treatment that is against their interests. However, Neil might have taken advantage of the ignorance to obtain an unnecessary advantage. In this case, the clients prefer being addressed in a public place, but the organization authorities do not know that Neil is using the chance to divert clients to his private agency Moreover, a profession is required to operate according to the agreements between them and the professional agency they are working for at the moment.
A social worker is expected to respect the organization or the person they are working with at all times. Neil is working for the agency and is expected to always operate towards the best interest of the agency. However, the case turns out to show that Neil is operating behind the knowledge of the professional agency to take advantage of the agency’s popularity to win clients. Also, Neil can be said to have been tarnishing the reputation of the agency by charging clients against the knowledge of his supervisors. The services of the agency are given freely and thus charging for the services paints the image of the company as a liar. However, Neil is registered with OCSWSSW and should also be given his freedom to enjoy the privileges specified by the code of ethics. The decision to report him to OCSWSSW should first consider whether the clients that Neil has been diverting to his private agency are supposed to have been served within the agency for which Neil is working. Generally, the decision to report Neil to OCSWSSW takes a series of considerations and does not leave a room for a rushed decision to have him executed. However, Neil has not resigned from working for the agency and thus his operation within the agency’s premises should be governed by the code of ethics as it applies to the agency.
Neil is still an employee in the agency, and thus, his operation should be guided by the code of ethics as it applies to the agency. The code of ethics that Neil has on his agency does not permit him to violate the ethical standards of the professional organization he is working for in a particular period. First, Neil has taken advantage of the client’s interests for his advantage. Most clients prefer being taken to the donuts and Neil appears to be acting towards the interests of the clients. However, the interests of the clients appear to have allowed Neil to source undeserving clients towards his agency (McLeod, 2016). Although the knowledge on whether the clients are aware of the fact that Neil has a private agency is not explicit, the code of ethics does not allow for such form of benefits. Generally, the code of ethics has specified that Neil should not exploit the relationship with a client for personal gain, but Neil has gone against the standards. Moreover, the code of ethics specifies that an outside business, occupation or even an affiliation should not affect the interests of the worker towards having a professional relationship with a client.
The code of ethics specifies that a social worker should not let an outside occupation or affiliation to affect their relationship with the clients. Neil, however, appears to have compromised his professional interests with outside interests. For example, Neil has a private agency that needs new clients. Neil takes advantage of working under a popular agency to divert clients towards his agency. However, the interests of the clients are not met according to their expectations. First, the clients expect that they shall always receive free services from the agency. To their surprise, Neil has been diverting them to a private agency that charges them for services that should be received freely. Also, Neil has compromised his integrity since he has not made his interests known to his supervisor as would be expected. The decision to divert clients towards his agency means that Neil does not hold his position of professional integrity and has decided to take advantage by letting external interests to affect his service delivery. However, Neil has the right to have a private agency, although he should have made a professional decision before beginning his activities.
Neil has a right to own a private agency but has not adhered to his professional standards and has behaved to save his agency at the expense of the agency within which he is working. Neil should have instead terminated his contract with the agency before deciding to proceed with his activities (Bishop, 2017). The agency would have listened to the concerns that Neil would have had and could even have offered support towards his agency. Also, Neil would have had a better client-service system that would not interfere with his daily duties in the agency. Generally, Neil should have maintained an independent relationship between his agency and the agency with which he is working.
The disciplinary committee should come up with a punishment criterion that does not appear lenient and saves the agency from future similar occurrences. For example, heavy fining could be a way of maintaining the conduct of the employees. Generally, the fining should be done according to the terms of the contract if Neil had signed any before starting his work with the agency.
In sum, the reporting of Neil should be based on a clear identification of the standards that Neil has not adhered to and should also be done according to the procedures specified by the code of ethics. Neil has gone against several specifications of the code of ethics, and his external interests are responsible for the compromise. Generally, Neil should have made his interests clear to his supervisor and thus a punishment criterion such as fining should be imposed for his misconduct.
References
Bishop, J. L. (2017). THE IMPORTANCE OF TRAUMA-INFORMED PRACTICE AND HOW IT LINKS TO SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE IN THE FIELD OF MENTAL HEALTH.
McLeod, E. (2016). Legal Disclosure: Practice Implications of O’Connor Applications. Canadian Social Work, 18(1).
