Tribunal Hears Vet Was Forced to Work Through Lunch at a Company That Says Its Most Important Asset Is Its People
A veterinary surgeon has won a constructive unfair dismissal claim after an employment tribunal heard that she routinely worked through lunch breaks, carried out unpaid overtime and ultimately developed burnout and work-related stress.
On its own, the case is troubling. But what makes it particularly uncomfortable is the contrast between the tribunal findings and the public values promoted by one of the UK’s largest veterinary groups.
The company states that its most important asset is our people. It speaks about caring for animals and people, promoting the highest standards of care and supporting veterinary professionals to deliver excellent treatment.
Veterinary surgeon Michelle Beckett repeatedly worked through lunch breaks and undertook unpaid overtime. The tribunal also heard that she raised concerns about animal care standards and workplace conditions before eventually leaving her position with burnout and work-related stress.
Most pet owners will read that and ask a simple question. How does a vet end up in that position?
Veterinary medicine is not an ordinary profession. The people working within it are responsible for living, feeling patients. They make life and death decisions. They support grieving families. They deal with emergencies, suffering and distress every single day. Nobody expects the job to be easy. What people do expect is that those carrying such responsibility are given the basic conditions needed to do their work safely and effectively.
A lunch break should not be controversial. Being paid for work performed should not be controversial. Being able to raise concerns without fear of repercussions should not be controversial. Yet tribunal cases such as this suggest these issues remain far from resolved.
The public is increasingly sceptical of large corporate ownership across many sectors. Veterinary medicine is no exception. As more independent practices have been absorbed into larger groups, concerns have grown about whether commercial pressures are beginning to influence professional environments in ways that ultimately affect both staff and patients.
The veterinary sector faces genuine challenges. Recruitment shortages, rising costs and increasing demand are all real. But there is a danger in allowing those realities to become an excuse for normalising conditions that would be unacceptable in almost any other profession.
When a vet is expected to work through lunch, it may appear insignificant in isolation. It is not. Lunch breaks exist for a reason. Rest exists for a reason. Recovery exists for a reason. No responsible pet owner would want the person treating their animal to be exhausted, overwhelmed or struggling under relentless workplace pressure.
The veterinary profession depends on highly trained people making good decisions under pressure. The wellbeing of those professionals is therefore not a side issue. It is a central part of maintaining high standards of animal care. That is why this case matters beyond one individual workplace. It raises wider questions about culture, expectations and accountability within modern veterinary practice.
If a company publicly states that its most important asset is its people, then people will reasonably expect that commitment to be visible not just in corporate messaging, but in day-to-day working life. Because caring for animals begins with caring for the people entrusted with their welfare.
And when a tribunal hears that a vet was forced to work through lunch until burnout took hold, it is fair to ask whether those values were reflected in practice.