From Mr F. A. Yusuf, MRPharmS
SIR,—In response to Mrs O’Neill’s letter (PJ, September 23,
p445), although I sympathise
with her particular situation, I would say that more often than not, the boot
is on the other foot. The threshold of 1,600 prescription items for the professional
allowance and other recent legislation means that there are very few “quiet”
pharmacies where a pharmacist (locum or manager) can idle his time away.
In the experiences of many pharmacists (including myself), when one is covering
for a regular manager pharmacist at least one member of staff feels that it
is time to get on his (or usually her) high horse. This can range from mild
insubordination to positive rudeness. However, in order to keep the pharmacist’s
end up and show a positive, professional image to the public, one puts up with
it — bearing in mind our duty to serve the patient to the best of our ability.
One could, after the booking, complain to the owner or manager, but some of
the latter have what appears to be an overprotective bond with their staff.
One also risks, if one complains, not being booked again which can, in the winter
months, lead to a paucity of bookings. Alternatively, one could refuse such
placements but this limits one’s spectrum somewhat.
Furthermore, some locum agencies appear to be more interested in their fee than
ascertaining whether a pharmacy has adequate staff levels, a decent computer
or ethicals and generics arranged according to the English alphabet.
Our Society says that one pharmacist should be able to handle 3,000 items per
month, but appears to take no account of counter sales, turnover, telephone
queries or nursing home prescriptions, etc.
Faiz Yusuf
London E17