| · Council election
· The profession (5)
· Community pharmacy (3)
· Revalidation
· The Society
· Prescription charges
Letters to the Editor
|
The profession
We need a strong independent future
From Mr S. I. Wells, MRPharmS
I work more than 40 hours every week in a busy community pharmacy. I
will look after pharmacists’ interests not least because I can
empathise with the daily problems and stress levels involved with our
roles. I think it is vital to have a Council member who can ensure that
we and our patients benefit to the maximum as we seize any opportunities
the new contract throws our way. We need to benefit both professionally
and financially from our greatest opportunity in decades.
The fee increases and change in fee structure were totally unfair on
the membership. The treatment of long-serving members and fellows by
the Royal Pharmaceutical Society is a disgrace. Pharmacists who have
worked in our profession for many years should be respected, thanked
and rewarded.
I am particularly concerned about the following: non-practising pharmacists
over the age of 65 should be sent the PJ and not charged fees, and I
will strongly lobby other members of the Council to this end and progress
other members’ interests regarding fee structures and levels; the
Department of Health is consulting on supervision and skill mix in the
pharmacy and we will be doing a GP’s job for half the rewards;
IT systems are nowhere in sight; and whether or not pharmacists are working
with suitably qualified staff within the dispensary.
I am tired of all the mixed messages and moving goal posts when we are
trying to achieve our ever more complex future roles. You, as members,
deserve far more clear and precise messages along with a stronger support
network from your representative body.
Administration is essential but expensive; therefore it needs to be efficient.
I intend to question how your Society could improve such matters.
I hope you can appreciate how passionate I am about representing the
true workforce (you) in working towards a better future for you and your
patients.
Members of Council who truly represent pharmacists will work collectively
for a strong and independent future for our honourable profession. This
year we need all the candidates who support the Save Our Society pledge
to be elected as only then will we have the mandate to resolve problems
once and for all. Please use all your votes to help us.
Steve Wells
Council Election Candidate
Abergele, Conwy
The Council must use its influence to elevate pharmacists’ status
From Mr M. K. Astbury, MRPharmS
My wife and I work every week in community pharmacy. I will look after
pharmacists’ interests, not least because pharmacy provides the
only income that puts food on my family’s table. I am not a big
wig company director or someone
with my finger in other pies. I am Joe Bloggs, pharmacist, and proud
of it.
I was one of the Council members who voted against the increase in fees.
These fees have mainly affected hospital, locum, part-time, retired and
overseas pharmacists. As a step in the right direction I have asked the
Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s resource management committee to
cost the following proposal: non-practising pharmacists over the age
of 65 should be sent the PJ and not charged fees. This will reward our
long-serving members and fellows in the manner they deserve. I will strongly
lobby other members of the Council to this end and progress other members’ interests
regarding fee structures and levels.
Eight new universities have been accredited or are undertaking the accreditation
process for the MPharm degree. At Lambeth, most people only seem worried
about preregistration places.
I worry! If we end up with more pharmacists than jobs the multiples will
pay us as little as they can get away with. If you have a professional
disagreement with an employer it can sometimes be difficult to maintain
professional integrity when you know you can be replaced by someone who
will play ball.
If the Department of Health’s proposed changes to skill mix and
supervision go wrong we could see pharmacist unemployment. We need people
on the Council who will see the trip wires and fight for pharmacists.
I have been doing this and intend to continue.
The Council should be using its influence to reduce sweatshop pharmacies
and reduce the workload heaped on pharmacists while elevating them from
shopkeeper to GP status.
Members of Council who truly represent pharmacists will collectively
work for a strong and independent future for our honourable profession.
This year we need all the candidates who support the Save Our Society
pledge to be elected as only then will we have the mandate to resolve
problems once and for all. Please use all your 15 votes to help us.
Martin Astbury
Council Election Candidate
Chester
The future for pharmacy
From Mr J. D. R. Jolley, FRPharmS
Health minister Lord Warner said in his recent presentation to the Council
for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence that regulatory requirements would
often conflict with representation of health care professionals.
That is certainly my experience of late since the implementation of many
new aspects of the regulations have been made without due regard to the
effect that these will have on loyal and long-serving members of the
Royal Pharmaceutical Society.
Continuing professional development, an essential component of the regulatory
process, has been imposed upon the profession in a way that is not easy
to follow and is inflexible in its application. But what concerns me
even more is that many see the resultant increased level of resignations
from the Register as an inevitable consequence of these regulatory requirements.
The Society’s decision to retain both roles of regulation and professional
representation is defensible only if both roles can be satisfactorily
carried out. I fear that in the past year the emphasis on the need to
establish as an efficient regulator has taken greater priority and the
effect on the membership has not received adequate consideration.
I consider it a priority that the new Council addresses the process of
implementing CPD, the structure and scale of retention fees and a more
realistic system for practising and non-practising categories.
If elected, I am committed to represent the members’ interests
as are all the Save Our Society candidates standing in this election
and together we will make the necessary changes.
John D. R. Jolley
Council Election Candidate
Newbury, Berkshire
Pharmacy is the most humble profession
From Mr A. R. Korsner, MRPharmS
Dennis Fallon’s letter (PJ, 26 February, p236) has focused my
thoughts on what has been bothering me for some years.
Of all the so-called professions, we are the most humble. I do not know
when or how it happened; it just crept up on us in an insidious fashion.
I endorse all the points made by Mr Fallon concerning the way in which
we chase our tails to keep in line with required legislation. What happened
to professional judgement or secundem artem?
It becomes clear that a pharmacist’s relationship with a GP is
equivalent to the relationship between a pharmacist and a technician,
in the way that a pharmacist is required to “approve” technicians’ actions.
What pride is there in a profession, such as ours, that has to go through
a “ring of fire” just in order to remedy mistakes made by
GPs?
There really is no longer any comparison between ourselves (at around £20
per hour) and a lawyer (getting upwards of £150 per hour), optical
locums (at around £250 per day), medical locums (at around £200
per session), dentists (at £300 per day) or accountants (at £100+
an hour). In addition, these professionals are not beholden to anyone
other than to each other.
Where the blame lies I know not, but it needs putting to rights or “natural
selection” will soon see pharmacy’s demise as a profession.
There was a time when we could hold our heads up with any professional
congress. I yearn for those days again.
Adrian Korsner
London N20
Pharmacy should not be using higher rate telephone numbers
From Mr A. S. Cruickshank, MRPharmS
I refer to your news article (PJ, 5 March, p260) concerning premium
rate telephone numbers. These numbers are being used increasingly by
many organisations in order to generate revenue.
In the world of pharmacy several well known companies, including Cegedim,
AAH and more recently the National Pharmaceutical Association, encourage
or insist that a higher rate 0870 number is the only way to communicate
with them.
Sending computer orders to AAH and using the Cegedim help desk require
the use of an 0870 number which costs between 7p and 10p per minute compared
with normal charges of approximately 3p per minute.
I think it would be appropriate to include pharmacies in the NHS ban
on premium rate numbers since, as a caring profession, it would be unthinkable
to punish our customers by charging them extra in order to seek our advice,
which we have always provided free of charge.
Alan Cruickshank
Turriff,
Aberdeenshire
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal