It nust be Halloween when the usual trick or treat brigade venture out.
I'm talking about the ongoing process where both locums and agencies are coming in for an onslaught of derision and devaluation without any prominence being given to the reality of locum life in pharmacy.
Those publications that I have written to or otherwise contacted over the past few nonths, asking that they allow a balanced response or rebuttal to claims that locums are of poor quality, offer poor value for money, won't provide services and any other faulire within pharmacy to get it's act together, include people who should know better. Not just because they are pharmacists, because not all are. Not just because editors have a responsibility to provide balance to articles, letters and features which appear in their publications. Not even because many vested interests have their own agenda and are using this issue as one of many smokescreens for what our "leadership" (whoever or whatever they are) are failing to address - let's not go there just now, my soap box is in for repair.
By failing to bring the profession together in the way that the doctors, nurses and other professionals have achieved, we remain weak politically, within the negotiating sphere and within the areas where we need to make our voice heard. If we do not, the profession is heading down a blind alley, an evolutionary cul de sac, and we won't exist in the form we recognise, if we exist at all, in another five to ten years.
Over the years we at NPS have got used to hearing from pharmacists, be they locums, managers, owners, about how they can't wait for the next few years to be over so they can pack in, as they have had enough of the way things are going, of how interference from outside the profession by people who just do not comprehend what issues are involved in our work is damaging, not improving what we do. We have got used to may experienced pharmacists expressing frustration with not feeling able to do their job the way they believe and know from experience, how it should be done, and who state "If I could find something else to do which kept me and my family as comfortable financially as this job, I'd do it tomorrow".
That is really sad, but it's worse to hear it from pharmacists who only qualified a few months ago! These people really are looking for something else and will take it, even if it means retraining. What a waste, what a shame, what a scandal.
Are you happy to be one of the so called "lazy locums" when you know you're not? Are you happy to carry out MUR's, EHC, Smoking Cessation, Minor Ailments, Repeat Dispensing, Electronic Transfer and so on, when you hear that locums won't provide these services?
We need to unite behind an idea and a principle that does not divide us, with the result that we are always conquerd. We need to take back our agenda, think it through, take it out to people, prove it can work and then make it happen, not wait for some pen pusher who wouldn't know a patient if they fell over one on their way to the next vital meeting.
Time to go, the trick or treaters are at the door!
Friday, 29 October 2010
Monday, 25 October 2010
In the kingdom of blind cynicism, the one eyed man is king.
We seem to liver in a world, or at least a country, where cynicism is a way of life. The spending cuts recently announced were inevitable, whoever won the last election. It was always a question of how much, how quickly, and not, "we mustn't cut spending". The media, however, have gone off on their rabble rousing activities where even the impartial BBC keep asking us "What's fair for you - are you a winner or a loser?" Maybe we should ask the French or the Greeks what is fair and what isn't.
How many times have you come across a situation where a customer asks you for change? The common stock response, or politely drafted head office answer is "I'm sorry, but we aren't allowed to open the till unless it's to make a sale", which really means "No, we're a pharmacy, we supply medicines. I think it's the bank you want, why not go and ask them for your change?"
On one of my weekly days of work in the real world as opposed to the office, what I like to think of as my "back to the floor" task, I recently got asked the very question. No, not "Is it fair?", but, "Could you possibly change this £5 note into £1 coins for me?" As I was working in someone elses pharmacy, I asked the dispenser whether the company allowed us to do so. I didn't want to get anyone in trouble for acting on my own initiative, nor to set a precedent for the future which might be uncomfortable for all concerned. I didn't get the answer to the question, she simply checked the change tin and swapped the note for the coins and carried on with what she had been doing.
The elderly lady seemed rather pleased and thanked us profusely, wandered about the small sales area and perused the shelves for a moment or two, then shuffled towards the exit, wishing us a very good day and thanking us again. Just before the door, she stopped by the till and carefully put the five £1 coins into the Macmillan Charity Box, and walked away without looking back.
Of course, businesses have to pay at the bank when they put in a change request, so there will have been some financial cost to that business in handing over the five £1 coins, even though the powers that be there may never know it took place, would they have sanctioned the "transaction" had they known?
Coincidentally, less than an hour later, two representatives of the charity came in and asked to empty the box. I recounted my tale of the coins and asked whether they accepted notes in the boxes. They weren't entirely sure but felt that any donation would be acceptable, whatever the form, as I'm sure we all would. Our conversation drifted round to all the good work done by this and other charities, and whether the government understood just how much people depended on services such as those provided by Macmillan. Anyone who has would understand immediately that their work is priceless, but we also concluded that people would do good works not because of the payment, but because only another human, not a government, can understand how much a hand to hold when you are lonely, or a voice at the other end of a telephone when you don't know what to do next, can transform your world.
The ladies were delighted with the money they had collected from the charity box. For the record, it was around £38. If every box they emptied contained as much as this, they explained, we could do so much more. "It just shows that there are a lot of good people out there", they concluded as they were leaving. I am left wondering how many charity boxes around the country are all the more poor because the owner or manager of the premises refuses to give change unless they open the till for a sale.
How many times have you come across a situation where a customer asks you for change? The common stock response, or politely drafted head office answer is "I'm sorry, but we aren't allowed to open the till unless it's to make a sale", which really means "No, we're a pharmacy, we supply medicines. I think it's the bank you want, why not go and ask them for your change?"
On one of my weekly days of work in the real world as opposed to the office, what I like to think of as my "back to the floor" task, I recently got asked the very question. No, not "Is it fair?", but, "Could you possibly change this £5 note into £1 coins for me?" As I was working in someone elses pharmacy, I asked the dispenser whether the company allowed us to do so. I didn't want to get anyone in trouble for acting on my own initiative, nor to set a precedent for the future which might be uncomfortable for all concerned. I didn't get the answer to the question, she simply checked the change tin and swapped the note for the coins and carried on with what she had been doing.
The elderly lady seemed rather pleased and thanked us profusely, wandered about the small sales area and perused the shelves for a moment or two, then shuffled towards the exit, wishing us a very good day and thanking us again. Just before the door, she stopped by the till and carefully put the five £1 coins into the Macmillan Charity Box, and walked away without looking back.
Of course, businesses have to pay at the bank when they put in a change request, so there will have been some financial cost to that business in handing over the five £1 coins, even though the powers that be there may never know it took place, would they have sanctioned the "transaction" had they known?
Coincidentally, less than an hour later, two representatives of the charity came in and asked to empty the box. I recounted my tale of the coins and asked whether they accepted notes in the boxes. They weren't entirely sure but felt that any donation would be acceptable, whatever the form, as I'm sure we all would. Our conversation drifted round to all the good work done by this and other charities, and whether the government understood just how much people depended on services such as those provided by Macmillan. Anyone who has would understand immediately that their work is priceless, but we also concluded that people would do good works not because of the payment, but because only another human, not a government, can understand how much a hand to hold when you are lonely, or a voice at the other end of a telephone when you don't know what to do next, can transform your world.
The ladies were delighted with the money they had collected from the charity box. For the record, it was around £38. If every box they emptied contained as much as this, they explained, we could do so much more. "It just shows that there are a lot of good people out there", they concluded as they were leaving. I am left wondering how many charity boxes around the country are all the more poor because the owner or manager of the premises refuses to give change unless they open the till for a sale.
Thursday, 14 October 2010
The power of unity
Only a person with a heart of stone could not fail to be moved at the plight of los 33, the Chilean miners who this morning were all saved from their underground prison and walked into the promised land of Camp Hope. Perhaps once in a generation, an event where the prayers, belief, empathy of the world unite behind a group of fellow human beings trapped in a struggle to survive against apparently impossible odds. The last time I recall such a world wide event of this nature was the Apollo 13 moonshot.
Both the miners and astronauts had a number of factors working together in their favour. The individuals were united in their determination that they would survive. They were united in their trust in those working tirelessly on their behalf, to think the unthinkable and come up with some ingenious answers, previously never considered, to move heaven and earth and bring them safely home to their loved ones. How they delivered the impossible!
Unity is an amazing concept, hence the phrase "Divide and conquer". All the miners pulled together and worked together in their own way to ensure that as a group, they were in the best circumstance to react positively when the moment of their deliverance came. The unshakable belief of both them and all the support workers and families, so long camped above the mine, that they were all working together for a common aim, that they would succeed against all odds, is inspiring to us all.
We could all learn a little bit from hope, belief and unity. Let's hope none of us is ever in a situation like the Apollo 13 crew or los 33 to have to learn for ourselves what it takes to face the unknown and walk away intact. But just in case, perhaps tomorrow, we should take a first step towards it. We shouldn't waste our chances, as one day, we might be so fortunate as them.
Both the miners and astronauts had a number of factors working together in their favour. The individuals were united in their determination that they would survive. They were united in their trust in those working tirelessly on their behalf, to think the unthinkable and come up with some ingenious answers, previously never considered, to move heaven and earth and bring them safely home to their loved ones. How they delivered the impossible!
Unity is an amazing concept, hence the phrase "Divide and conquer". All the miners pulled together and worked together in their own way to ensure that as a group, they were in the best circumstance to react positively when the moment of their deliverance came. The unshakable belief of both them and all the support workers and families, so long camped above the mine, that they were all working together for a common aim, that they would succeed against all odds, is inspiring to us all.
We could all learn a little bit from hope, belief and unity. Let's hope none of us is ever in a situation like the Apollo 13 crew or los 33 to have to learn for ourselves what it takes to face the unknown and walk away intact. But just in case, perhaps tomorrow, we should take a first step towards it. We shouldn't waste our chances, as one day, we might be so fortunate as them.
Wednesday, 13 October 2010
Publish and be damned!
We've had a number of difficulties to deal with over the past couple of months which we have kept to ourselves, but have now resolved (we hope!) and some of these along with other things we wanted to tell people have been featured in our e-newsletter for October 2010, which was sent to anyone on our mailing list last night.
If you haven't received a copy, it is because you are not on the list. A copy will be available from our website next week, but if you want to receive a copy before then, along with future e-newsletters, please get in touch and provide us with your e-mail address.
As is ever the case with these new ideas, things didn't go quite to plan. On the plus side, it only took eleven minutes to send to a few thousand people and we didn't cause any servers to crash, as far as we know.
One or two people did receive more than one e-mail, as they were in the mailing list more than once and although we did try to check to prevent this, as it was a manual check (no women took part in the checking), inevitably, it was bound to be imperfect. One lucky person did receive twenty six e-mails, all attaching the newsletter. However, as this happened to be our IT manager, it wasn't too big a deal. We analysed the problem to try to prevent future similar episodes and concluded the fault lay with the nut on the keyboard.
The point of using the newsletter is to quickly and comprehensively get across to a large audience information which would take us a long time to repeat to everyone and which may not always be relevant to each and everyone of us. In addition to communicating information via our website, which is averaging 60 000 hits a month and growing, it gives us chance to promote ideas, especially at a time when individuals in the world of pharmacy appear to be being crowded out and having their voices drowned out by big organisations.
Both we, and you, need to make our voices heard and not continue to allow events to overtake us or move us in directions which we do wish to go and more importantly, which we know to be wrong for the profession and the people whom we collectively serve. Together, we are stronger than any of us could possibly be alone. We should remember that.
If you haven't received a copy, it is because you are not on the list. A copy will be available from our website next week, but if you want to receive a copy before then, along with future e-newsletters, please get in touch and provide us with your e-mail address.
As is ever the case with these new ideas, things didn't go quite to plan. On the plus side, it only took eleven minutes to send to a few thousand people and we didn't cause any servers to crash, as far as we know.
One or two people did receive more than one e-mail, as they were in the mailing list more than once and although we did try to check to prevent this, as it was a manual check (no women took part in the checking), inevitably, it was bound to be imperfect. One lucky person did receive twenty six e-mails, all attaching the newsletter. However, as this happened to be our IT manager, it wasn't too big a deal. We analysed the problem to try to prevent future similar episodes and concluded the fault lay with the nut on the keyboard.
The point of using the newsletter is to quickly and comprehensively get across to a large audience information which would take us a long time to repeat to everyone and which may not always be relevant to each and everyone of us. In addition to communicating information via our website, which is averaging 60 000 hits a month and growing, it gives us chance to promote ideas, especially at a time when individuals in the world of pharmacy appear to be being crowded out and having their voices drowned out by big organisations.
Both we, and you, need to make our voices heard and not continue to allow events to overtake us or move us in directions which we do wish to go and more importantly, which we know to be wrong for the profession and the people whom we collectively serve. Together, we are stronger than any of us could possibly be alone. We should remember that.
Friday, 6 August 2010
Little Boy reaches 65 years old - time to give up or get up?
The idea that the retirement age is being raised from 65 years of age because we are all living longer and that retirement was something most people never saw when the retirement provision was originally constructed.
Shakespeares Seven Ages of Man shows us that little boys have time to play, where play is the work of children, whilst as we pass our prime, we would like time to play more rather than work, but it all has to be paid for somewhere along the line. The worst aspect of judging people by age is that young people often disregard their elders as short of knowledge of the "modern" world based on their experience of six score years of life. Not long ago I had blazing rows with "minor" employees of some PCTs who wanted to "get rid of the old codgers" from the world of pharmacy. Many (codgers) obliged as they were smart and realised we had moved to a scenario where their knowledge and experience would never be acknowledged, and many resigned from the register (of Pharmaceutical Chemists). They were smart enough to see that we were being led by little boys and were following, like lemmings, over the cliff edge. We didn't bother to ask them what they thought, we assumed they were past it. Now, however, we cannot make that choice and must continue to work, even if we don't want to and are not wanted when and if we reach that milestone.
After all, they had been through it all before and built what we inherited and are now bodging due to our relative lack of experience. Does history teach us it's mistakes? Of course! Do we learn them? No!
What was the main news today in all the papers and media? Not the fact that 65 years ago today, Enola Gay dropped Little Boy on the city of Hiroshima, Japan. An estimated 140,000 people were killed instantly or died from the effects of radiation in the months that followed. A further 80,000 people died after the US dropped an atomic bomb on Nagasaki three days later.
The US has since justified the bombings as an alternative to a potentially prolonged and costly land invasion, saying the devastation wrought on the cities forced Japan's surrender days later, on 15 August.
Some of the 55,000 people attending today's ceremony of remembrance made symbolic offerings of water to the victims, as many had complained of thirst as they lay dying, while schoolchildren read out messages of peace. A single bell tolled as the city's people fell silent at 8:15am, the exact time "Little Boy" detonated.
The day that changed the world forever barely warrants a mention today, 6th August 2010. Would we dare sanction the dropping of a nuclear bomb on anyone today? Since the answer is a resounding "NO!", even though we can't be bothered to ask those who were there, the witnesses of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, why should we bother to ask anyone who has been there before in terms of pharmacy in the UK?
So why would the "leadership" who have claimed us as their "membership" without it ever occurring to them that we might not actually want them to lead us anywhere, as we didn't ask for them in the first place (less than 1 in 5 voted for a change, let me remind us all). This isn't a nuclear bomb - that would be a gross insult to everyone involved in events 65 years ago today. But is a a depth charge, silent running and it will come back to haunt us all if we don't face it down. Is it time for a DIFFERENT new professional body? Some think it is and they range from little boys to over 65 years old and more. Could this be a coalition OF THE WILLING?
P.S. I can't be bothered labelling this post. Technology! Why can't id do it for me?
Shakespeares Seven Ages of Man shows us that little boys have time to play, where play is the work of children, whilst as we pass our prime, we would like time to play more rather than work, but it all has to be paid for somewhere along the line. The worst aspect of judging people by age is that young people often disregard their elders as short of knowledge of the "modern" world based on their experience of six score years of life. Not long ago I had blazing rows with "minor" employees of some PCTs who wanted to "get rid of the old codgers" from the world of pharmacy. Many (codgers) obliged as they were smart and realised we had moved to a scenario where their knowledge and experience would never be acknowledged, and many resigned from the register (of Pharmaceutical Chemists). They were smart enough to see that we were being led by little boys and were following, like lemmings, over the cliff edge. We didn't bother to ask them what they thought, we assumed they were past it. Now, however, we cannot make that choice and must continue to work, even if we don't want to and are not wanted when and if we reach that milestone.
After all, they had been through it all before and built what we inherited and are now bodging due to our relative lack of experience. Does history teach us it's mistakes? Of course! Do we learn them? No!
What was the main news today in all the papers and media? Not the fact that 65 years ago today, Enola Gay dropped Little Boy on the city of Hiroshima, Japan. An estimated 140,000 people were killed instantly or died from the effects of radiation in the months that followed. A further 80,000 people died after the US dropped an atomic bomb on Nagasaki three days later.
The US has since justified the bombings as an alternative to a potentially prolonged and costly land invasion, saying the devastation wrought on the cities forced Japan's surrender days later, on 15 August.
Some of the 55,000 people attending today's ceremony of remembrance made symbolic offerings of water to the victims, as many had complained of thirst as they lay dying, while schoolchildren read out messages of peace. A single bell tolled as the city's people fell silent at 8:15am, the exact time "Little Boy" detonated.
The day that changed the world forever barely warrants a mention today, 6th August 2010. Would we dare sanction the dropping of a nuclear bomb on anyone today? Since the answer is a resounding "NO!", even though we can't be bothered to ask those who were there, the witnesses of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, why should we bother to ask anyone who has been there before in terms of pharmacy in the UK?
So why would the "leadership" who have claimed us as their "membership" without it ever occurring to them that we might not actually want them to lead us anywhere, as we didn't ask for them in the first place (less than 1 in 5 voted for a change, let me remind us all). This isn't a nuclear bomb - that would be a gross insult to everyone involved in events 65 years ago today. But is a a depth charge, silent running and it will come back to haunt us all if we don't face it down. Is it time for a DIFFERENT new professional body? Some think it is and they range from little boys to over 65 years old and more. Could this be a coalition OF THE WILLING?
P.S. I can't be bothered labelling this post. Technology! Why can't id do it for me?
Saturday, 17 July 2010
Smart Cards or Smart People?
The news that an estimated 200 000 patients are at risk because of inaccurate data in their Care Records has led to GP leaders calling for an immediate halt to the Governments Summary Care Record programme. What's worse, the majority of these care records have been created and uploaded without patients consent.
It appears that the gaps and innacuracies, such as wrong medication or allergies result largely from operators not having the required smart cards to gain access to the system.
Some PCT areas and some LPCs are promoting the requirement of smart cards for pharmacists as mandatory, others are not remotely interested, creating wide differences in day to day working practices accross the country. Add to this the shambolic approach to facilitating the issue of smart cards by different PCTs, it might just be that as the new government decides to save billions of pounds and scrap failing IT projects, this dislocated approach to smart card issue and use accross professions mirrors that of PCTs, may result in the whole project falling flat on ITs feet.
This is not because it doesn't work - it clearly does when set up properly and people get involved. It's that bad old bueracracy again. If only organisations like the NHS stopped running themselves to suit the organisations priorities and focussed on patients priorities, huge and expensive messes like the Summary Care Records fiasco might be avoided and nmore importantly, patients might feel the NHS is there for their benefit.
For years when we have been working with PCTs, Nightingale Pharmacy Services have always striven to get PCTs to understand that pharmacists work accross several PCT boundaries and they need to recognise that patients do too. Trying to get some of the PCT staff to understand that pharmacists can't deliver the patient care they want if the PCT doesn't understand that we work in this way and do nothing to support us and enable us to provide the services we want to.
At least with pharmacy we know where we stand - if we give poor service, the patient can always vote with their feet and go somewhere else. So people are smart and can react accordingly. Cards are not smart.
It appears that the gaps and innacuracies, such as wrong medication or allergies result largely from operators not having the required smart cards to gain access to the system.
Some PCT areas and some LPCs are promoting the requirement of smart cards for pharmacists as mandatory, others are not remotely interested, creating wide differences in day to day working practices accross the country. Add to this the shambolic approach to facilitating the issue of smart cards by different PCTs, it might just be that as the new government decides to save billions of pounds and scrap failing IT projects, this dislocated approach to smart card issue and use accross professions mirrors that of PCTs, may result in the whole project falling flat on ITs feet.
This is not because it doesn't work - it clearly does when set up properly and people get involved. It's that bad old bueracracy again. If only organisations like the NHS stopped running themselves to suit the organisations priorities and focussed on patients priorities, huge and expensive messes like the Summary Care Records fiasco might be avoided and nmore importantly, patients might feel the NHS is there for their benefit.
For years when we have been working with PCTs, Nightingale Pharmacy Services have always striven to get PCTs to understand that pharmacists work accross several PCT boundaries and they need to recognise that patients do too. Trying to get some of the PCT staff to understand that pharmacists can't deliver the patient care they want if the PCT doesn't understand that we work in this way and do nothing to support us and enable us to provide the services we want to.
At least with pharmacy we know where we stand - if we give poor service, the patient can always vote with their feet and go somewhere else. So people are smart and can react accordingly. Cards are not smart.
Friday, 2 July 2010
this twittering world
"Not here the darkness, in this twittering world.
Descend lower, descend only
Into the world of perpetual solitude"
Not my words, you understand, those of T. S. Eliot who was obviously onto something. If twittering ws good enough for Eliot, I suppose it's good enough for me. Don't think he would have settled for 140 characterrs, though.
The full text is from a quartet of poems, "Burnt Norton". Something to make you stop and think though I don't think it will class as CPD but......
Descend lower, descend only
Into the world of perpetual solitude"
Not my words, you understand, those of T. S. Eliot who was obviously onto something. If twittering ws good enough for Eliot, I suppose it's good enough for me. Don't think he would have settled for 140 characterrs, though.
The full text is from a quartet of poems, "Burnt Norton". Something to make you stop and think though I don't think it will class as CPD but......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)