Court Opinion

ID: 9580721
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:07:58.913886+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:36:28.306595
License: Public Domain

STEELMAN, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in the majority’s holding that the trial court did not err in refusing to rule on the constitutional question. However, I must respectfully dissent as to the portion of the opinion affirming the ruling of the trial court that the Pharmacy Board lacked authority to adopt Rule .2506.
The proposed rule in question reads as follows:
.2506 Pharmacist Work Conditions.
A permit holder shall not require a pharmacist to work longer than 12 continuous hours per work day. A pharmacist working longer than six continuous hours per work day shall be allowed during that time period to take a 30 minute meal break and one additional 15 minute break.
The statutes relevant to whether the Pharmacy Board has the authority to enact this proposed rule are as follows:
§ 90-85.6 Board of Pharmacy; creation; membership; qualification of members.
(a) Creation. — The responsibility for enforcing the provisions of this Article and the laws pertaining to the distribution and use of drugs is vested in the Board. The Board shall adopt reasonable rules for the performance of its duties. The Board shall have all of the duties, powers and authorities specifically granted by and necessary for the enforcement of this Article, as well as any other duties, powers and authorities that may be granted from time to time by other appropriate statutes.
*309§ 90-85.21. Pharmacy permit
(a) In accordance with Board regulations, each pharmacy in North Carolina shall annually register with the Board on a form provided by the Board. The application shall identify the pharmacist-manager of the pharmacy and all pharmacy personnel employed in the pharmacy.
§ 90-85.32. Rules pertaining to filling, refilling, transfer, and mail or common-carrier delivery of prescription orders
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the Board may adopt rules governing the filling, refilling and transfer of prescription orders not inconsistent with other provisions of law regarding the distribution of drugs and devices. The rules shall assure the safe and secure distribution of drugs and devices.
The majority opinion rests upon the assertion that “setting limits on the number of hours a pharmacist can work and requiring breaks for meals and otherwise, clearly does not concern the filling, refilling and transfer of prescriptions.” I disagree.
The accurate filling of prescriptions is an essential requirement of the practice of pharmacy. The North Carolina Pharmacy Practice Act (Article 4A of Chapter 90 of the North Carolina General Statutes) was enacted by the General Assembly, requiring mandatory licensure of pharmacists to “insure minimum standards of competency and to protect the public from those who might otherwise present a danger to the public health, safety and welfare.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-85.2. Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-85.6(a) the North Carolina Board of Pharmacy is charged with enforcing the provisions of the Pharmacy Practice Act. The majority asserts that there is no relationship between the continuous hours worked by a pharmacist and their ability to accurately perform their work. Clearly this is not correct. The consequences of an improperly filled prescription can be deadly to a customer. This was recognized by the North Carolina Board of Pharmacy when it enacted 21 NCAC 46.1811 effective 1 July 1996, which reads as follows:
Pharmacists shall not dispense and permit holders shall not allow a pharmacist to dispense prescription drugs at such a rate per hour or per day as to pose a danger to the public health or safety.
*310The proposed rule is simply a refinement of the existing rule, setting forth specific guidelines for the consecutive hours to be worked by a pharmacist. As with 21 NCAC 46.1811, the proposed rule is limited to pharmacists, who are defined in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-85.3Q?) as persons licensed to practice pharmacy.
The majority further argues that the sole entity with the authority to regulate working conditions for pharmacists is the Department of Labor, and the sole method of such regulation is through the Wage and Hour Act. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 95-25.1 et seq. The purpose of the Wage and Hour Act is to balance the welfare of workers, through insuring reasonable wages and working hours, against the competing needs of North Carolina businesses. Amos v. Oakdale Knitting Co., 102 N.C. App. 782, 786, 403 S.E.2d 565, 567 rev’d on other grounds, 331 N.C. 348, 416 S.E.2d 166 (1992). Thus, the welfare interests protected by the regulation of hours under the Wage and Hour Act are those of the worker, not the consuming public.
State agencies other than the Department of Labor have the authority to regulate working hours for the purpose of protecting the general public from over-worked employees. For example, in an effort to prevent accidents, the Department of Transportation regulates the number of hours commercial truck drivers can operate their vehicles. N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 20-377, 20-381; 19A N.C.A.C. 3D.0801(b)(l). In the instant case, the purpose of the proposed rule was the protection of the welfare of the general public from the hazards inherent in over-worked and over-tired pharmacists filling prescriptions. This regulation is well within the mandate granted the N.C. Pharmacy Board by the General Assembly.
In light of the purpose of the Pharmacy Practice Act, and the scope of authority given to the N.C. Board of Pharmacy under this Act, I would hold that the N.C. Pharmacy Board was authorized to enact the proposed rule and that the Rules Review Commission was in error in rejecting it.