Pharmacy Technician Suspended for Four Months After Submitting False Employment Reference

The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) Fitness to Practise Committee investigated a pharmacy technician who submitted a false employment reference to a locum agency in an attempt to secure a new job.

The incident occurred in December 2014, during a period when the registrant had been struggling to find employment after leaving his previous role at The Christie Hospital. Instead of seeking a genuine reference, he created a fraudulent document using the name of a former line manager and submitted it to a locum recruitment agency.

The deception was immediately uncovered, leading to regulatory action by the GPhC.

Findings:

The Fitness to Practise Committee found that the registrant’s actions amounted to serious misconduct, specifically:

• Intentional Dishonesty:
  • The pharmacy technician knowingly created a false reference and attempted to deceive a recruitment agency.
  • His actions required premeditation and deliberate effort.
• Breach of Trust:
  • By falsifying professional documents, he risked damaging public trust in pharmacy professionals.
• Failure to Uphold Professional Standards:
  • The committee stressed that dishonesty is incompatible with the integrity expected of pharmacy professionals.

While the registrant initially failed to appreciate the impact of his actions, he later expressed remorse and admitted his misconduct.

The committee concluded that a finding of impairment was necessary to maintain public confidence in the profession and to reinforce professional standards.

GPhC Determination on Impairment:

The GPhC emphasised that dishonesty is a serious matter, even when no direct harm to patients occurs.

The committee ruled that the pharmacy technician’s fitness to practise was impaired, as dishonesty undermines public confidence in pharmacy professionals.

Given that the registrant had accepted responsibility for his actions, the committee determined that a suspension, rather than removal from the register, was appropriate.

Sanction:

The committee imposed a four-month suspension, considering the following factors:

• Aggravating Factors:
  • The registrant’s actions were deliberate and dishonest.
  • He falsified an official document to gain employment under false pretences.
• Mitigating Factors:
  • The registrant admitted his dishonesty at the earliest opportunity.
  • He expressed deep remorse and accepted responsibility for his misconduct.
  • He had no prior disciplinary history and had since demonstrated impeccable conduct in subsequent employment.
  • His actions were an isolated incident during a period of financial hardship and personal stress.

The committee ruled out permanent removal from the register, considering that:

• The registrant had shown genuine remorse and insight.
• His misconduct was an isolated event, not part of a pattern of dishonesty.
• He had since worked honestly and professionally in subsequent roles.

A review hearing was deemed unnecessary, as the registrant had already demonstrated insight and remorse.

Learning Points for Pharmacy Professionals:

This case serves as an important reminder of the professional expectations for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, particularly regarding honesty and integrity.

1. Dishonesty Has Serious Consequences:
   • Any attempt to mislead employers, regulatory bodies, or agencies can result in suspension or removal from the register.
   • Even if no patient harm occurs, fraudulent actions can severely impact professional reputation.
2. Integrity is Essential in Pharmacy Practice:
   • The GPhC takes a firm stance on dishonesty, as it directly affects public trust in pharmacy professionals.
   • All pharmacy professionals must ensure that their conduct, both inside and outside of work, aligns with professional standards.
3. Employment Struggles Do Not Justify Dishonesty:
   • While job insecurity can be stressful, it does not excuse falsifying documents or misleading employers.
   • Seeking mentorship, career guidance, or professional support is always a better option than engaging in dishonest behaviour.
4. Regulatory Insight and Remorse Are Critical:
   • The committee considered remorse and insight as key factors in deciding against removal from the register.
   • Professionals who take full responsibility and show genuine efforts to improve may receive less severe sanctions.
5. Short-Term Gain Can Lead to Long-Term Repercussions:
   • A moment of dishonesty can result in lasting professional consequences, including suspension, loss of employment opportunities, and damage to reputation.
   • Upholding ethical standards is always the best course of action for career longevity.