court says walgreens can fire pharmacist over anti-vaccine stance
However, Walgreens provided a persuasive argument that Prewitt had refused to immunize their customers and this was part of his job description under the new program. This refusal was grounds for demoting the pharmacist. Since Prewitt refused to perform his job and refused to work as a floater for shifts that weren’t his regular ones at his store location in Oxford, Walgreens terminated his employment with the company.
Walgreens firing RPH’s for not being comfortable with certain categories of medications ?
“This was not a decision that was easy for him to make, but one that is firmly grounded in his religious convictions,” Larry Crain, Hall’s lawyer, told the Tennessean. Crain said Hall had worked at Walgreens since 1997 and was a deacon at a Baptist church.
Prior to his firing and the FDA changes, Hall claims that his bosses had allowed him not to sell Plan B due to his religious objections. He said pharmacists were eventually told that they had to stock and sell the drug.
Hall claims he purchased the shipment of Plan B because it was mislabeled. He said he was told “it was part of his job duties to sell Plan B” and that was the reason for his firing.
How often have we seen a spokesperson from Walgreens state that they cannot FORCE a Pharmacist to fill a Rx that they are uncomfortable with. It is the Pharmacist’s individual decision. This information about Walgreen’s Pharmacists being fired for declining to give vaccinations or sell a particular product.. because they are uncomfortable with doing so.
Does this suggest that Walgreen has set up policies that are “forcing” Pharmacists to NOT FILL certain medications or categories of medications ?
Since most/all the medications that would appear to be covered under WAG’s “GFP”.. would be for those people diagnosed with subjective diseases … which would qualify those pts to be covered by the Americans with Disability Act. Does this suggest a pattern of discrimination ?
Filed under: General Problems
The thing I don’t understand is… I was a LOYAL customer for about 20 years before they decided to stop filing my CII’s… what’s the deal with that? I had tons of other meds filled there also so its not like CII’s were the only ones I filled. I don’t understand why they would WANT to lose the business?
Pharmacy schools should state up front that if a person has any doubts for any reason not to sell a legal product they should consider another course of study. Religious or cultural beliefs must not override a patients desire to purchase a legal product. If a person has some beliefs that conflict with another persons legal rights they should not work in a pharmacy. You want to preach, work in a church or a temple or a mosque not in a drugstore.
Exactly, and they should also let them know up front that there will also be customers with an agenda who will demand on what they do not sell to as far as legal products to patients and those people do not dictate that agenda to them either. Again any religious or cultural or whatever beliefs should be checked at the door of the job.
[…] https://www.pharmaciststeve.com/?p=9704#comment-9537 […]
What is Walgreens discriminating against? Certain patients, medical conditions, or drugs? Is it all three? How do we know which ones each pharmacist or the corporation is biased against? Is it discrimination based solely on fear of the DEA? When pharmacies and doctors comply with DEA regulations, are they automatically not in compliance with the ADA?
Is the ADA as much help to disabled people as it purports to be? Or do other federal laws, like ERISA, cancel out the good that the ADA can do?
When will I run out of questions?