In a recent letter to the Pharmaceutical Journal Mark Koziol PDA Chairman and the PDA Union Assistant General Secretary (Strategic) wrote
Noel Baumber in last weeks Journal has expressed concerns that if two of the Alliance Boots Head Office candidates are successful in the forthcoming RPSGB elections, then that will result in two of its senior staff occupying RPSGB Council seats and two of its senior staff occupying English Board seats. He considers that if this occurs, then this might give Boots undue political influence.
The Pharmacists' Defence Association (PDA) has always contended that a disproportionate influence is wielded within the profession by a very small number of large employer organisations and that the views of employees and locum pharmacists are frequently overlooked. The aim of the PDA has always been to address this imbalance and to ensure that the individual pharmacist agenda can be properly represented.
Some pharmacists putting themselves up for election are PDA members.
We encourage all pharmacists to cast their vote and ask that they should also consider candidates who, whilst not necessarily having the backing and support of an employer organization, will nevertheless have a broad appreciation and sympathy for issues as seen through the eyes of the individual employee and locum pharmacist.
The PDA were informed that under PJ rules and in the interests of fairness, no candidate can have their name in the their 'letters column' on more than two occassions. As a consequence we agreed to remove the names of the PDA members; we can now through this article reveal that they are
- Martin Astbury (Council)
- Lindsey Gilpin, (English Board)
- Keith Davies (Welsh Board)