The PDA announced last week (October 22) that Boots pharmacists had rejected the multiple’s offer for what it referred to as a 2% pay rise, with the union warning that this “does increase the likelihood that Boots’ pharmacists could consider taking some form of industrial action in the coming months”.

However, the union added that it hopes to persuade Boots to rethink the offer.

In response, the multiple dubbed its offer “substantial”, valuing it at 3.25% overall when factoring in a one-off lump sum worth 0.38% and other rewards for pharmacists at the initial stages of their careers.

But in a statement published yesterday (October 27), the PDA “challenged Boots to correct this statement or alternatively put supporting data into the public domain so that pharmacists can see the facts for themselves”.

The union also disputed Boots’ assertion that it has “awarded overall pay rises to our pharmacists that have exceeded the consumer price index” over the past five years.

C+D has approached Boots for comment.

The negotiations have been referred to the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) – an independent public body that offers advice to employers and employees.

During the talks mediated by ACAS, Boots should “be prepared” to agree on “a fair pay increase for all pharmacists that is above inflation and to start the process of reinstating the purchasing power of pharmacists’ salaries”, the PDA said.

PDA: Pay claim is “well researched”

Last week, the PDA stated that Boots should review its offer to make an “across-the-board increase higher than the current rate of inflation of 3.1%”.

Presenting data yesterday explaining its 2021 pay claim for Boots pharmacists, the PDA said it believes its ask is “well researched, evidence-based, realistic and reflects the views of the employees in the bargaining unit”.

In its analysis, the PDA compared “the level of increase awarded to any pharmacist classified as ‘performing’, who was already being paid the so-called ‘market rate’ for the job”, with inflation. 

The union claimed that “only twice has the Boots salary increment for such a pharmacist exceeded any measure of inflation” over the past five years.

The PDA also claimed that its data “demonstrating the reduction in the value of pharmacists’ pay” had not been disputed by the company during the negotiations.