2026 Pharmacist Job Outlook Looks Good

[Apotheker2015]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Not surprised! we're on sdn

LOL seriously? *sigh*

 

[899424]

Within 8 years we'll have 18,000 more pharmacist jobs? Pharmacy schools graduate about 16000 new pharmacists per year. I don't have a good idea of how many pharmacists leave the pharmacy job market per year (retire/die/switch careers) and how many current vacancies there are, but 18000+ new positions over the course of 8 years doesn't actually seem that promising considering the amount of new supply of pharmacists per year and the current saturation in most parts of the country. It's more reassuring than a decline in jobs, I'll give you that.

In other news, a number of reputable, well-established pharmacy schools are extending their application deadlines... Perhaps the pharmacy school bubble is finally going to pop?

There's definitely a problem with how many schools are graduating pharmacist. At this moment, I know a professor at a school that is trying to come up with a program (assuming with other professors) that allows pharmacist to work with doctors. Believe me, I already got the lecture on how should keep my work relationships healthy.

 

[steveysmith54]

It is not just about the number of new grads that enter the market every year. Time and time again, folks forget to mention the pharmacists with BS pharms that just won't retire. I think requiring every registered pharmacist to have a pharmD would be a way to help balance things out. A good number will finally retire. Others will step up to the plate and get that PharmD. It begs the question - if you can no longer pursue a Bachelor of Science in pharmacy, does it make sense for them to be able to continue practicing with a BS pharm?

Some of the BS in Pharm are more qualified and know a ton more about pharmacy than new pharmd graduates from a new school. Back in the day, the board exams were actually legit. You had to know your stuff to pass, i hear. I think that would be a terrible idea. Once you're licensed, you can be a pharmacist until you die unless BOP decides to revoke it.

 

[899424]

Some of the BS in Pharm are more qualified and know a ton more about pharmacy than new pharmd graduates from a new school. Back in the day, the board exams were actually legit. You had to know your stuff to pass, i hear. I think that would be a terrible idea. Once you're licensed, you can be a pharmacist until you die unless BOP decides to revoke it.

the board exams were more legit? That makes no sense.. do you mean they have more work experience than the new graduates? SO they know how to do their jobs better.

 

[gwarm01]

There's definitely a problem with how many schools are graduating pharmacist. At this moment, I know a professor at a school that is trying to come up with a program (assuming with other professors) that allows pharmacist to work with doctors. Believe me, I already got the lecture on how should keep my work relationships healthy.

You should let your professor know that collaborate practice agreements have been around for quite some time. Are you in a state that doesn't allow such an arrangement?

the board exams were more legit? That makes no sense.. do you mean they have more work experience than the new graduates? SO they know how to do their jobs better.

The exams at many schools have gotten easier over time, especially since switching to an all electronic format at my institution.

Licensing exams are considered "minimal competency" exams, but it is entirely likely that previous generations had a different definition of what was minimally competent. It isn't outside the realm of possibility that previous licensing exams were more difficult and had harsher grading criteria.

It's no secret that many recent graduates have been underwhelming in their capacity to practice pharmacy. This is a direct consequence of the documented lower admission standards across the country, and potentially due to an overall lowered quality of education (but that is harder to quantify). The NAPLEX was recently retooled to be more difficult - was this an attempt to remove unqualified new graduates from practice? I can only speculate, but it does show that examination standards can vary over time.

 

[projektreverb]

Not to detract from the topic here but I wanted to chip in on the Naplex. Honestly, having taken the Naplex in July, here are my thoughts about the test. I was a middle of the road student from an average school. GPA was in the bottom 3’s. Nothing stellar. I was able to pass the Naplex (scratched the bottom of the triple digits) with 3 weeks, 6 hours a day of what I called skimming.

Looking back on my experience with the Naplex, it was in my opinion WAY to easy, despite being made more challenging. Not to sound like an a** but I was shocked when I heard people were failing. In my opinion, based on what I saw it genuinely was a minimal competency test...

 

[Modest_anteater]

This reads like more BS pharmacy propaganda about how emerging jobs will save us all.

paid for by the Pharmacy College Dean Collaboration

 

[Sparda29]

How Microsoft Lost Its Mojo: Steve Ballmer and Corporate America’s Most Spectacular Decline

So, I don't think a personnel shortage is necessary the issue anymore from this point on. If you think about the amount of work that you do today versus the work you did back when you graduated, even though you are paid more, you have to be more productive than you are paid. I actually think we are about to hit a ceiling on productivity rate increases especially within inpatient. The point of the talk I gave at Society of Automation in Pharmacy this year was that technology at this point is not a technical but a workflow or return on investment problem right now. Do you automate a 1200 Rx/week store? Do you get a TPN machine with a 6 per week scenario? When does the manpower to maintain equipment and coordinate with a usually hostile IT outweigh just hiring another person?

We are an ROI issue where we are going to have to be weighed against technology, techs, and temperament (ever hired an HR nightmare pharmacist? I've aged more from that than my worst day in practice). There are times where we beat technology, but overall, everyone is going to be squeezed for more and more productivity. There isn't going to be the chill, relaxing job at 50 unless you find a niche that does that (I have that, I think @Sparda29 and the home health has it for now, but who knows?). What's different now than even the Gen X'ers is that the Gen X'ers were not guaranteed lifetime employment, but they were guaranteed employment through old age. Gen Y (Millennial) is not guaranteed full-time employment through old age, but are reasonably guaranteed employment of some sort. Generation Z's incoming problem is that you are a productivity winner or you are going to be a prole loser. Possibly, that day has already come for pharmacy where the stack ranking style of employment claims the old and the marginal, and just working hard only guarantees you a job until the next employment evaluation cycle.

I also enjoyed the day off yesterday. Just found out what happened, and I'm satisfied about my old RxS's fate. Hope Cigna works out just like Walgreens...

Ehh, the owner of my independent is bugging out right now because the formularies for our biggest demographic (Medicare Part D and Managed Medicare) have restricted the high profit items to PA only and the doctors we work with don't want to put the effort in to do PAs. His mentality is, "if it's not making a **** ton of money, I don't want to be a part of it", he doesn't believe in playing the long game and building a large volume over time. He essentially wants to do what Doctor M was doing but in a legal way. (I don't think it is Fraud but it probably is Waste).

I'm hunting for union jobs, I interviewed at the 1199 employment center and now I'm a part of their talent pool. The way union hospitals work when a position opens up is:

1st priority goes to people currently employed at the hospital, say a day shift opens up, the afternoon shift and overnight shift people are asked if they want the job.
2nd priority goes to people in the union talent pool
3rd priorty goes to outside applicants

 

[steveysmith54]

the board exams were more legit? That makes no sense.. do you mean they have more work experience than the new graduates? SO they know how to do their jobs better.

California used to be known for having the most difficult written exam. Yes you had to be able to write sentences. It was way before my time, but I was told passing rate was below 50 percent and also had to wait like six month to retake the exam. Do your homework

 

[899424]

California used to be known for having the most difficult written exam. Yes you had to be able to write sentences. It was way before my time, but I was told passing rate was below 50 percent and also had to wait like six month to retake the exam. Do your homework

lol, ****! you sound like my bf.

 

[mentos]

It is not just about the number of new grads that enter the market every year. Time and time again, folks forget to mention the pharmacists with BS pharms that just won't retire. I think requiring every registered pharmacist to have a pharmD would be a way to help balance things out. A good number will finally retire. Others will step up to the plate and get that PharmD. It begs the question - if you can no longer pursue a Bachelor of Science in pharmacy, does it make sense for them to be able to continue practicing with a BS pharm?

So you want people in their 50s and 60s to go back to school? What can a pharmD do that a BS pharm can't? It's just a stupid title and scam for more money just like residency. The barrier of entry for BS pharm was much higher than for PharmD, who anyone with a pulse can get now.

Imagine you are a pharmD working for 20 years then they require all Rphs to do residency or some crap. By then you'll probably have a family to raise. Ain't nobody got time for that.

 

[899424]

You should let your professor know that collaborate practice agreements have been around for quite some time. Are you in a state that doesn't allow such an arrangement?



The exams at many schools have gotten easier over time, especially since switching to an all electronic format at my institution.

Licensing exams are considered "minimal competency" exams, but it is entirely likely that previous generations had a different definition of what was minimally competent. It isn't outside the realm of possibility that previous licensing exams were more difficult and had harsher grading criteria.

It's no secret that many recent graduates have been underwhelming in their capacity to practice pharmacy. This is a direct consequence of the documented lower admission standards across the country, and potentially due to an overall lowered quality of education (but that is harder to quantify). The NAPLEX was recently retooled to be more difficult - was this an attempt to remove unqualified new graduates from practice? I can only speculate, but it does show that examination standards can vary over time.

Yes, I know about collaborate practice agreements, but that particular professor is in the medical school. He was telling me about how competitive it is with so many schools graduating pharmacy students and how my school is working on something new. In the past, we have done that with grant money, which eventually has transition to the county funding the programs that are a success. And yes, this particular professors has also mentioned to me about how some schools have such low standards, so those students are in class all day to make up for it lol. This particular professor talks directly to me (not in a classroom setting) like he did about my current job situation.

 

[BidingMyTime]

It is not just about the number of new grads that enter the market every year. Time and time again, folks forget to mention the pharmacists with BS pharms that just won't retire. I think requiring every registered pharmacist to have a pharmD would be a way to help balance things out. A good number will finally retire. Others will step up to the plate and get that PharmD. It begs the question - if you can no longer pursue a Bachelor of Science in pharmacy, does it make sense for them to be able to continue practicing with a BS pharm?

That is just stupid. BS. Pharms were still being graduated until 2003.

2003.

Do you really think someone who was 23 - 25 when they got their BS in 2003 is going to retire at age 40 - 42 in 2008? Or that anyone who graduated in 1975 or later (and likely to be under the age of 65) should be expected to retire?

Everyone has always been "grandfathered" in. The 2 year degree pharmacists worked as long as they wanted to, even after 4 year B, then 2 + 3 year BS, then Pharm D became the norm. This has been the same with every degree in the health profession. A MD/DO who graduated with a 2 + 2 year degree got to continue practicing even after 4 + 4, then 4 + 4 + 1, then 4 + 4 + 3+ became the minimum.

 

[Pharmacy Kid]

2019+ is going to be rough for pharmacists. A surplus plus any downturn in the economy is going to lead to a lot of under/unemployed pharmacists.

 

[PieRoller]

It is not just about the number of new grads that enter the market every year. Time and time again, folks forget to mention the pharmacists with BS pharms that just won't retire. I think requiring every registered pharmacist to have a pharmD would be a way to help balance things out. A good number will finally retire. Others will step up to the plate and get that PharmD. It begs the question - if you can no longer pursue a Bachelor of Science in pharmacy, does it make sense for them to be able to continue practicing with a BS pharm?

Your lack of wisdom is dumbfounding. It is normal for professions to advance education and require additional credentialing, justified or not. Very soon you will be seeing new grads with more education (at least on paper) than you.

Then you’ll find yourself with elderly parents, a spouse with cancer, two dying dogs, and a full time job suddenly cut to 20 hours. So now you need to *delay retirement even longer.* Soon a new pharmacist who is so much smarter than you, but who can’t do anything you can’t do, will be willing to take your job for $39 an hour.

You’ll be making millions doing MTM.

Good luck with that.

 

[Apotheker2015]

Your lack of wisdom is dumbfounding. It is normal for professions to advance education and require additional credentialing, justified or not. Very soon you will be seeing new grads with more education (at least on paper) than you.

Then you’ll find yourself with elderly parents, a spouse with cancer, two dying dogs, and a full time job suddenly cut to 20 hours. So now you need to *delay retirement even longer.* Soon a new pharmacist who is so much smarter than you, but who can’t do anything you can’t do, will be willing to take your job for $39 an hour.

You’ll be making millions doing MTM.

Good luck with that.

I posed a valid question to elicit thoughtful responses. If that is the best you can come up with, then that is the best you can come up with.

 

[Apotheker2015]

That is just stupid.

Really? I guess I expected more from your ability to articulate your thoughts. We all have bad days. 🙂

 

[ChalupaBatman86]

Then you’ll find yourself with elderly parents, a spouse with cancer, two dying dogs, and a full time job suddenly cut to 20 hours. So now you need to *delay retirement even longer.* Soon a new pharmacist who is so much smarter than you, but who can’t do anything you can’t do, will be willing to take your job for $39 an hour.

You’ll be making millions doing MTM.

Good luck with that.

Let’s play everybody’s favorite new quiz game:

SDN post or country music song lyrics?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[BC_89]

Really? I guess I expected more from your ability to articulate your thoughts. We all have bad days. 🙂

You should go back and read the rest of his thoughts. Start with “BS Pharms we’re still being graduated until 2003” and read from that point. I’ll make it easier and post it for you below

That is just stupid. BS. Pharms were still being graduated until 2003.

2003.

Do you really think someone who was 23 - 25 when they got their BS in 2003 is going to retire at age 40 - 42 in 2008? Or that anyone who graduated in 1975 or later (and likely to be under the age of 65) should be expected to retire?

Everyone has always been "grandfathered" in. The 2 year degree pharmacists worked as long as they wanted to, even after 4 year B, then 2 + 3 year BS, then Pharm D became the norm. This has been the same with every degree in the health profession. A MD/DO who graduated with a 2 + 2 year degree got to continue practicing even after 4 + 4, then 4 + 4 + 1, then 4 + 4 + 3+ became the minimum.

 

[PieRoller]

Let’s play everybody’s favorite new quiz game:

SDN post or country music song lyrics?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

You’ll be there one day, too, Chalupa. When that day comes, think of me, okay?