Opinion: RPS insurance offer – this feels underhand to me

In Opinion

Follow this topic

Bookmark

Record learning outcomes

In the run-up to becoming a Royal College, questions are being raised about the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s priorities. Is the organisation truly focused on serving its members, or has it begun to put its own interests above theirs? Recent actions regarding professional liability insurance have sparked debate among pharmacists about the value and integrity of RPS membership.

Membership or marketing?

Last year, as many other pharmacists will have done, I received an email and a letter from the Society informing me that RPS professional liability insurance would be automatically included with my membership. If it was something that I didn’t want or need, I would have to actively opt out of the insurance cover. This sat very uncomfortably with me.

To be fair, I agree, at least in part, with automatically including professional indemnity (PI) insurance as part of the membership package and I certainly think it is reasonable for this approach to be taken with new members. At the time of joining, members can choose to keep the insurance element of their membership or not. But the tactic of asking existing members to actively opt out of PI insurance strikes me as arrogant and even underhand.

Immoral

There are a number of problems with this approach. When I originally read the letter, I felt that it can’t be legally acceptable. An addition of a new ‘paid for’ service, without asking permission, did not seem right.

After reflecting, I am sure the RPS made sure that it stayed within the law – however, it feels to me that it is stretching things a bit. Perhaps by bundling the insurance into the membership fee, rather than having it as an additional, separate cost, it changes the scenario. However, it seems (to me, anyway) like the Society is playing the system somewhat.

Secondly, it feels immoral. It is like an underhand marketing trick, hoping that members will take the insurance by default rather than by choice. I’m sure there will be many who end up with this insurance by accident because they have missed or not bothered to read the email or letter. Many of these members will have PI insurance from other sources and will end up with a double cost.

Perhaps marketeers and commercial managers will argue that this is the members’ problem and they should be reading properly any communication sent by the RPS. Indeed they should, but if members are not engaged enough with the RPS to read their communications, this is a problem for the organisation. It is also the action of a body that is not putting the interests of its members first.

Thirdly, I think it is actually a poor commercial decision. It will increase income for the RPS but perhaps only in the short term. I think that members could actually be offended by this approach, even to the extent of resigning their membership, especially if they incur extra cost by paying for the insurance by default. Could it be an own goal if member numbers fall?

Why would I want to be a member of an organisation that puts the interests of itself above those of its members? I imagine that the argument rehearsed by the RPS is that this approach has been used to support a financially robust body that can in turn support its members. But surely you cannot do this at the expense of the organisation’s own integrity.

Value for money

We need a strong professional body – of course we do. So it follows that there needs to be a critical mass of pharmacists in membership to give the RPS the credibility to speak for the profession as a whole. To increase and maintain member numbers, the benefits of membership, both tangible and intangible, need to present real value for money. I’m far from convinced that this is the case here.

I have been a loyal member of the RPS since the separation of regulator and representative body and the formation of the GPhC. As I said, I absolutely support the need for a strong professional body to promote pharmacy and support its members. But, RPS, you are on notice. Treat me as a member with respect and give me value for money. If you don’t, I – maybe with many other pharmacists – will be reconsidering our continued membership, Royal College or not.

Are you taking out professional liability insurance with the RPS? Let us know.