CVS Closing 46 Stores

[TellingTruth]

---

Members don't see this ad.

CVS Closing 46 stores

My God it's getting worse everyday

 

[Thoughtfulsinner]

Damn 0.5% of their stores. Huge cut.

 

[princeafrica]

Walgreens is changing a local 24 HR store to a regular store and apparently all the overnight pharmacists lost their job

 

[MedicineZ0Z]

Why is this?

 

[MrBonita]

Customer Value Service

 

[mentos]

How many layoffs is that, 150-200? That's like one pharmacy school class size, a drop in the bucket.

 

[TellingTruth]

How many layoffs is that, 150-200? That's like one pharmacy school class size, a drop in the bucket.

It's also 150-200 positions eliminated.

 

[Ximilara]

But they will open new stores also.

 

[lane one]

But they will open new stores also.

Of course they will, 1 store for every new grad. CVS is about to hit a massive growth spurt.

 

[maria1oh]

How many stores do they plan on opening this year? Hopefully more than 46.. walgreens and rite aid have been closing stores for years already. Something like 600

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

It's also 150-200 positions eliminated.

If BLS’s 3-6% growth rate for pharmacist jobs holds true, then there should be around 1,740 new jobs being created each year for 15,000 new grads.

If 200 positions were eliminated from this move alone then it means that the actual pharmacist job growth rate was r3tarded by 200/1,740 = 11.5% compared to projections this year. Though to be fair it is really r3tarded by 200/1,540 = 13% after adjusting because not only were there not the growth of 200 positions (+0), those 200 positions like you said were eliminated completely (-200), and those displaced pharmacists are fighting for those jobs along with the new grads. Someone keep me honest here with the math.

 

[mentos]

If BLS’s 3-6% growth rate for pharmacist jobs holds true, then there should be around 1,740 new jobs being created each year for 15,000 new grads.

If 200 positions were eliminated from this move alone then it means that the actual pharmacist job growth rate was r3tarded by 200/1,740 = 11.5% compared to projections this year. Though to be fair it is really r3tarded by 200/1,540 = 13% after adjusting because not only were there not the growth of 200 positions (+0), those 200 positions like you said were eliminated completely (-200), and those displaced pharmacists are fighting for those jobs along with the new grads. Someone keep me honest here with the math.

The math is legit, definitely r3tarded.

 

[Gombrich12]

If BLS’s 3-6% growth rate for pharmacist jobs holds true, then there should be around 1,740 new jobs being created each year for 15,000 new grads.

If 200 positions were eliminated from this move alone then it means that the actual pharmacist job growth rate was r3tarded by 200/1,740 = 11.5% compared to projections this year. Though to be fair it is really r3tarded by 200/1,540 = 13% after adjusting because not only were there not the growth of 200 positions (+0), those 200 positions like you said were eliminated completely (-200), and those displaced pharmacists are fighting for those jobs along with the new grads. Someone keep me honest here with the math.

That is 1700 net new jobs, so you have to look at the exit rate of pharmacists due to retirements, deaths, etc to really tell what is going on. Last time I looked at it the BLS was using a rate that I thought was maybe a little high. Then again the exit rate may be higher in the future due to declining wages and working conditions.

 

[Sine Cura]

Now imagine financial markets crashing.

 

[owlegrad]

46 stores won’t employ 200 pharmacists. Or do you think they average over 4 pharmacists per store? And projections for the entire pharmacy market accounts for some pharmacies closing. Or do you think the projections assume that no pharmacy will close down in that time frame? So there is really no need to blow it out of proportion.

Although considering that CVS just announced a more profitable quarter then expected it is depressing to see that they are following that up by closing some stores.

 

[beautifulrobot]

If BLS’s 3-6% growth rate for pharmacist jobs holds true, then there should be around 1,740 new jobs being created each year for 15,000 new grads.

If 200 positions were eliminated from this move alone then it means that the actual pharmacist job growth rate was r3tarded by 200/1,740 = 11.5% compared to projections this year. Though to be fair it is really r3tarded by 200/1,540 = 13% after adjusting because not only were there not the growth of 200 positions (+0), those 200 positions like you said were eliminated completely (-200), and those displaced pharmacists are fighting for those jobs along with the new grads. Someone keep me honest here with the math.

As Gombrich mentioned, your methods are flawed. They do not take into account the number of pharmacists leaving the profession (retirement/death/disability/career changes).

edited: realized the numbers do take into account new jobs/positions.

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

As Gombrich mentioned, your methods are flawed. They do not take into account the number of pharmacists leaving the profession (retirement/death/disability/career changes).

edited: realized the numbers do take into account new jobs/positions.

Yeah, this wasn’t a robust analysis. If it were, then we should be comparing the rates of pharmacists leaving the profession against the rates of all the new grads who didn’t get a job right out of school and and rates of residency/fellowship grads who didn’t get a job out of their training. And the thing is those unemployed pharmacists stay in the denominator of pharmacists looking for a job every year they are unemployed. So if you had a 20% unemployment rate in 2019 that goes at run rate, then the unemployment rate in 2020 is 20% + the proportion of grads who haven’t found a job yet in 2019, and it builds on itself year over year.

Given that there are 15,000 new grads for 1,500 new positions each year and maybe 20-30% of pharmacists “stalling” for a job by doing postgraduate training, I’d imagine that the true unemployment rate (if you don’t count residency/fellowship as real employment) is easily 50% each year. So it is not far-fetched that we might be at 80% unemployment over the next couple of years. Obviously people are trying to do things to absorb the oversupply of pharmacists like breaking down full time positions into part time positions and creating PGY-3’s, but at some point the bubble is going to burst.

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

46 stores won’t employ 200 pharmacists. Or do you think they average over 4 pharmacists per store? And projections for the entire pharmacy market accounts for some pharmacies closing. Or do you think the projections assume that no pharmacy will close down in that time frame? So there is really no need to blow it out of proportion.

Although considering that CVS just announced a more profitable quarter then expected it is depressing to see that they are following that up by closing some stores.

I was quoting someone else’s number but I think it’s plausible. Consider that each pharmacy would have 1 PIC and at least 1 -2 staff pharmacists so that would be 92+ pharmacists off the bat. Then you get into the part time floater pool— is there usually a ratio of floaters they hire with no guaranteed hours per store/district? If it’s 1:1 then that’s another 92+ part time pharmacists that are impacted. So that’s 184+ not including DMs and other mid-level managerial positions that can be axed as a result of store closures.

 

[mentos]

Many Rite Aids have not converted to Walgreens yet. I'd imagine that many of them would close once that happens, especially when they're across the block from each other.

 

[mentos]

46 stores won’t employ 200 pharmacists. Or do you think they average over 4 pharmacists per store? And projections for the entire pharmacy market accounts for some pharmacies closing. Or do you think the projections assume that no pharmacy will close down in that time frame? So there is really no need to blow it out of proportion.

Although considering that CVS just announced a more profitable quarter then expected it is depressing to see that they are following that up by closing some stores.

If the store is not profiting then why would they keep it open? You have to stop the bleeding.

 

[owlegrad]

I was quoting someone else’s number but I think it’s plausible. Consider that each pharmacy would have 1 PIC and at least 1 -2 staff pharmacists so that would be 92+ pharmacists off the bat. Then you get into the part time floater pool— is there usually a ratio of floaters they hire with no guaranteed hours per store/district? If it’s 1:1 then that’s another 92+ part time pharmacists that are implicated. So that’s 184+ not including DMs and other mid-level managerial positions that can be axed as a result of store closures.

It won’t be 1:1. Not every store has a part time pharmacist. I bet fewer than 100 pharmacists are impacted. None of the stores will have 2 staffs either, if they were busy enough to warrant that much staff they wouldn’t be closing them. And the only way DMs and other positions would be impacted is if they shut down a whole district.

 

[Gombrich12]

Given that there are 15,000 new grads for 1,500 new positions each year and maybe 20-30% of pharmacists “stalling” for a job by doing postgraduate training, I’d imagine that the true unemployment rate (if you don’t count residency/fellowship as real employment) is easily 50% each year. So it is not far-fetched that we might be at 80% unemployment over the next couple of years. Obviously people are trying to do things to absorb the oversupply of pharmacists like breaking down full time positions into part time positions and creating PGY-3’s, but at some point the bubble is going to burst.

Here is the estimated separations for pharmacists and various healthcare workers. They are estimating 7,400 pharmacists exit the labor force each year along with another 6,200 pharmacists transferring to other jobs. Which results in a total opening of 15,300 jobs per year when you add in the 1,700 new jobs each year. Whether or not 13,000 pharmacists leave the profession each year is going to be highly sensitive to the state of the economy, stock market, and working conditions.

 

[BidingMyTime]

Here is the estimated separations for pharmacists and various healthcare workers. They are estimating 7,400 pharmacists exit the labor force each year along with another 6,200 pharmacists transferring to other jobs. Which results in a total opening of 15,300 jobs per year when you add in the 1,700 new jobs each year. Whether or not 13,000 pharmacists leave the profession each year is going to be highly sensitive to the state of the economy, stock market, and working conditions.

I can't imagine 13,000 pharmacists leaving the profession every year. Here is a site that gives the age breakdown of pharmacists Pharmacists | Data USA As one can see, the majority of pharmacists are between the ages of 25 - 35, these people aren't going to be retiring Anytime soon. The number of pharmacists who are 65 years of age is 3, 250. Yes, only 3,250 and not all of these pharmacists are going to be retiring at age 65. Even if they all did, 3,250 retiring pharmacists is only going to be a mild help to 15,000 new grads looking for jobs.

 

[maria1oh]

Cvs bought a chain called Ritzmans in Ohio. The chain had 23 stores and when cvs bought them they closed all the stores except for 4. So this is not the first time in 2019 cvs is closing stores.

 

[sosoo]

these store closings for the most part are in rural areas. a few years back when city jobs are saturated we tell people to apply in these rural areas. now those jobs are gone. where do we tell people to look for jobs now? Alaska?