The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 269 No 7228 p844
14 December 2002

This page
Reprint
Photocopy

PDF* 75K

  PI insurance
  Locums
  Community pharmacy
  Pharmacy practice
  The Profession
  CPD
  Alternative medicine
  Methotrexate
  Modernisation
  Packaging
  The Society

Letters to the Editor

PI insurance

Locums should take out their own PI insurance

From Mr M. Koziol, MRPharmS

I was intrigued by the article entitled "Do pharmacists pay more to practise than other health professionals?" (PJ, 7 December, p804).

In the section entitled "Indemnity insurance" several commentators have alluded to the fact that pharmacy employers provide indemnity for pharmacists working for them. Indeed Andy Murdock, director of Lloydspharmacy, claimed that indemnity was provided by the company's National Pharmaceutical Association insurance.

Such claims miss the point entirely because the real crux of the issue is as alluded to later on in the article by the enlightened Dr Kelly, a general practitioner.

In short he said that he takes out his own personal indemnity insurance because he believes that there is a tendency by trusts to settle claims expediently and because of this, a GP's professional reputation could become an afterthought. Whereas his personal defence organisation will at the outset realise that as a priority there is a severe professional reputation issue at stake.

The experience of the Pharmacy Insurance Agency has shown that the vast majority of civil claims against pharmacists are settled out of court by the insurers of the employer. Just like in the cases described by Dr Kelly, the employer's insurers will not be primarily concerning themselves with the professional reputation of the employee or locum. Their job is to settle the claim on such terms as to be as beneficial as possible to their member (the employer).

I would advise employee and locum pharmacists who truly believe that their interests are well served by relying on their employer's membership of the NPA to think again.

Would their employer's insurer look after their interests in the event of a civil case for compensation? What about a criminal prosecution, where their employer could be a co-defendant in a case where the working environment of the pharmacy was at fault and not the employee or locum? Ultimately, it is clear that an employer's insurer could never look after the interests of an employee in the event of a dispute with the employer, primarily because their raison d'être is to advise and represent the employer.

Indeed, the NPA policy wording says: "Where a conflict arises (between the employer and employee/locum) the Association's allegiance must lie primarily with the member, the owner of the business."

The individual interests of locum and employee pharmacists and their professional reputation are best protected if they carry their own personal insurance which is totally independent of their employer and of their employer's insurer. Only in this way can their personal professional reputation be taken into serious consideration during the handling of a case.

Mark Koziol
Director
Pharmacy Insurance Agency

Send your letter to The Editor

Next Topic (Locums)