|
Prescribing
Storage temperatures
CPD
The Society
The Journal
Letters to the Editor
|
The Society
Grass roots experience is an advantage
From Mr P. Jenkins, FRPharmS
The postgraduate qualifications, work experience and present jobs held
by those standing this year for the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s
Council were most impressive. However, how their careers would fit them
for the job we require them to do is not so clear.
There has been much criticism of the Council’s decisions on modernisation,
culminating in a special general meeting — as near to a mutiny
as is possible within our profession — so perhaps the people who
made those decisions were not in tune with the membership. An understanding
of the beliefs of the rank and file is needed if leadership is to be
a success, or at least leaders must be able to convince them that the
direction is the right one.
To have started one’s career by serving on branch or local pharmaceutical
committees for a significant time could be said to be the only preparation
for higher office. It gives an understanding of what the grass roots
consider to be important. It informs one of grass root problems first
hand, their solutions (perhaps) and their frustrations (certainly). A
comment by a friend that not many candidates seemed to have come up through
the ranks led me to look at the curricula vitae published in the PJ for
this years’ crop of candidates.
For the Council, 18 candidates to elect seven. Fourteen were quoted as
having experience of the grass root committees and, of these, four were
elected.
Does this mean that the electorate does not think an apprenticeship is
necessary for Council membership?
The other interesting side to this is how many officials and staff members
have branch or LPC experience before or during their present jobs.
Before is better than during. A discussion between politicians or officials
and members is often an artificial self-serving process.
What does all this prove and does it fill you with dismay or optimism?
As a matter of record both my friend and I served long apprenticeships
before we served on several national bodies. We think it did us good — well
we would, wouldn’t we?
Peter Jenkins
Cardiff
Membership approval needed before change
From Mr C. J. Young, MRPharmS
I write in support of Anthony
Cox regarding membership approval of any
new or amended Charter (PJ, 9 August, p175).
Members might approve, abstain or vote against any proposed new clause
or change. A clear majority (responding by postal vote) would be necessary
to endorse any change.
After all, shareholders and members of most building societies, etc,
get similar rights. This would involve the membership and reassure the
Council that its thinking was in line with the considered views of most
members.
Christopher Young
Kent and Canterbury Hospital,
Canterbury
|
* PDF files on PJ Online require Acrobat
Reader 4 or later.