Its about time

[VA77]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Chicago moves closer to easing pharmacist workload

Keep in mind this is a proposal and not been voted on but is incredible that its even out there.

 

[wucool33]

Serious question... would a pharmacy still be profitable if this goes into effect? If it’s sustainable, then I’m all for it.

 

[PharmDBro2017]

The Illinois Pharmacy Association executive director is testifying against the proposal?

Kinda ironic, you’d hope that a pharmacist in that position would be on their side.

Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[wagrxm2000]

Everyone move to Chicago, demand is about to soar!!!! No more frozen pay and raises for everyone!!!!

On a serious note, what would pharmacists be doing all day? Ten seems low, I wonder if they just want to bargain to say thirty per hour?

I think this would also cause lower script count stores to close. If your doing say 150 per day, at least three pharmacists would be needed during peak hours where you would definitely be filling thirty an hour. Unless of course no one could wait and the pharmacy would simply stop filling each hour the quota is met.

There are so many other questions.

 

[wucool33]

Also what about auto refills? Do those count?

 

[mikejones123]

Good effort, but they should get rid of the 10 patients per hour requirement. It isn't realistic or practical. Instead just pass something that includes breaks, gets rid of quotas and metrics, and mandates adequate tech help. With these provisions a pharmacy can be profitable and the pharmacist's working conditions can be humane.

 

[BidingMyTime]

I agree, 10 prescriptions/pt is ridiculous. But I am also flabbergasted that IPHA is against this...so much for them supposedly being on the pharmacists side. I quit APHA very early on in the 90's when they overreached their political bounds. I will not be renewing my IPHA membership either over this. This is one of the things that if they couldn't support, then then they should have remained neutral on. Chicago's proposal, while rough and imprecise, is at least trying to protect both pharmacist's and the public's interests. If IPHA truly represented pharmacists, they would be working with the Chicago alderman for a more rational proposal, instead of ignoring the reality that having absolutely no limits whatsoever (as is currently the case in IL) is a recipe for disaster.

 

[gwarm01]

The Illinois Pharmacy Association executive director is testifying against the proposal?

Kinda ironic, you’d hope that a pharmacist in that position would be on their side. View attachment 224285


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Considering it's Illinois, he is probably bought and paid for by Walgreens.

 

[RxPreceptor]

10 patients per hour does not make sense; that could range from 10 to possibly 50+Rx per hour.
2017 and RPhs are still fighting for the "priveledge" of having a break; we've come a long way since the industrial revolution (where's that sarcasm font?).

 

[ChalupaBatman86]

Good intentions here but you really don’t want City Councils messing around with our profession. They don’t know anything about it.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[owlegrad]

I am flabergasted that a pharmacy association would be against anything that improved the working conditions of pharmacists. Making non-filing metrics illegal, mandating lunches and breaks, and more technician help?! Sign me up! The 10/hr is unpractical but don't throw out the baby with the bath water!

 

[ChalupaBatman86]

I can hardly imagine the crazy rules city councils will make if you give them power to regulate pharmacies. Imagine birth control in the Bible Belt, vaccines in Hippie towns, brand name only dispensing in the affluent communities. You just should not go there. That’s what the BOP is for.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Digsbe]

I can hardly imagine the crazy rules city councils will make if you give them power to regulate pharmacies. Imagine birth control in the Bible Belt, vaccines in Hippie towns, brand name only dispensing in the affluent communities. You just should not go there. That’s what the BOP is for.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

The only problem is the BoP's seems to be typically the only health professions board that exists to go after pharmacists whereas other boards protect their professionals (even though the goal of all boards is to protect patients). You'd have to argue that it's a patient safety issue to be worked like a machine with decreasing help (which is directly caused by under-reimbursing PBM's) and not that pharmacists as professionals should have labor rights and protections like most others. I could be wrong, but to my knowledge medical practices and nurses, chiro's, dentists, and others don't have yearly surprise inspections where an auditor is out there looking to fine the practice site for things. I know not all are the same, and the serve an important purpose, but the well-being of pharmacists is likely at the bottom list of their concerns.

 

[VA77]

I agree that the 10 number is out there but everything else I'm for. Mandatory breaks, tech hour ratio, and the IPHA doesn't represent patient safety. Instead of coming out completely against it they should have at least said a couple of these requirements are needed. Very Sad!

 

[BenJammin]

This sounds great if your goal is to drop pharmacist hourly wage below $15 an hour. Might as well consider pharmacy to be a minimum wage job