Boots Pharmacy policy?

hethmar

As I person who til very recently had always paid for prescriptions at Boots, I was often the only person in the shop who had to pay and I still had to wait in line. Now I get them free the wait seems just the same to me, just depends on how busy they are and how many people are waiting in front of me.

WhiteHorse

sarahg1969 wrote: »

Sacked? Seriously? Yes, they should be spoken to, but, come on now.

Yes, since you mention it.

Discrimination as open and as vicious as that deserves the most robust of responses.

rustyboy21

WhiteHorse wrote: »

It is very, very unlikely that this is Boots policy.

Write to Boots head office (never bother with the branch), making a formal complaint.

The staff members concerned should be sacked.

Oh come on now, this OP has obviously dissapeared from the thread, so wasnt so wound up over it, were they?

And why should the person be sacked? It is the OP point which you are acting on, you havent heard the other side, or even if there was any altercation between OP and the staff member.

Why should they be sacked and cost ME AND YOU my/our hard earned money to pay benefits for them, when you don't really know what happened.

... staff member didnt smile at me..... they should be sacked , get over yourself!:rotfl:

Pollycat

WhiteHorse wrote: »

Yes, since you mention it.

Discrimination as open and as vicious as that deserves the most robust of responses.

But we only have the word of the OP (who seems to have disappeared from this thread) that this is what the pharmacy assistant actually said.

I think Hethmar has probably got the right answer below:

hethmar wrote: »

Im wondering if you misunderstood and that the pharmacist meant the people who had already "paid" for their scripts - or had already put them in - would get them first, that is, you would have to wait til people before you had got their scripts.. I find it very hard to believe the interpretation that you may have misheard, it seems unbelievable - I would go back to the branch and ask to speak to the manager there.

WhiteHorse

rustyboy21 wrote: »

It is the OP point which you are acting on, you havent heard the other side, or even if there was any altercation between OP and the staff member.

pollycat wrote:

But we only have the word of the OP (who seems to have disappeared from this thread) that this is what the pharmacy assistant actually said.

True, but we're not mounting an investigation either.

Jeff_Bridges_hair

There are some posts missing from this thread

Pollycat

WhiteHorse wrote: »

True, but we're not mounting an investigation either.

We might not be mounting an investigation but I agree with rustyboy231 that your suggestion that the pharmacy assistant be sacked based on what the OP thinks he/she heard is over the top, especially as Hethmar has put forward a pretty good suggestion of what the pharmacy assistant probably said.

dizziblonde

I don't believe a word of this - being kind, I think they got the wrong end of the stick and it was along the lines of "it'll be a while because there's a pile of prescriptions already put in and paid for that will have to be done first" but the fact the OP did the usual outraged... someone actually questionned the outrage... vanishing OP thing... nah.

valk_scot

I think that the OP got their wires crossed tbh. Saying they had to wait behind "Prescriptions that have been paid for" or "Prescriptions that have been paid for already" (as in handed in and paid for, whether by cash or the goverment) sound mighty similar, especially if the pharmacy was busy and noisy. The sensible thing would have been to clarify this on the spot rather than go away and get worked up about what they might have heard, then come and rant about it on a public forum. Very much a poorer option now would be to write a polite letter of query and complaint to head Office, where they will no doubt express astonishment and horror, apologise profusely then investigate and possibly discipline the unfortunate assistant and pharmacist. And the assistant could possibly lose her job. Really, it's horrible how people can turn what is almost certainly a minor misunderstanding into a hate filled rant. Even if it was discrimination (and I'll bet my next month's supply of season-ticket-paid-for pain killers that it wasn't) a firm enquiry/justified comment on the spot is far more effective.

alisonmeyers

I'm another one who thinks the OP either misheard or is deliberately making false claims. I've been at both ends of the stick, both getting free prescriptions (when I'd been made redundant and was retraining) and paying for them like normal (back in work) and I've never heard of any policy like that, I always use Boots for these things because there's one 2 minutes down the road.
I really, honestly, can't see Boots having this policy, it would be in the papers as discrimination against unemployed/disabled/etc. and would be bad press for very little gain (after all, most people expect to be served in order, and Boots staff don't benefit from having to enforce this rule).
I have however been in a pharmacy where a man picking up his prescription was served in front of a long lunchtime queue - the person serving knew him by name and said they'd been waiting on him. We were told his was a priority prescription. In which case I wouldn't have thought anyone would have a problem with it. I certainly didn't.