Laying off CVS Pharmacy Supervisors
Started by wickedone
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
Walgreens reduced their field management significantly. I am sure CVS was watching to see how it went and will copy them if it is successful.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
That's the next layer of fat to get cut, IMO. My boss has three Targets in his geographic "district" but Target is keeping its current middle pharmacy management and its being treated like another division in the company. You know that can't last.
Everyone with target was guaranteed a job with CVS. Last week target payed out all vacation and other benefits including bonuses. Some of us walked away with a 60k pay day. Haven't heard of anyone being let go by cvs yet, though.
Huge success, at least I think so. My supervisor is around all the time now. We had too many different positions anyways.
Your supervisor is around more now that there are fewer of them? How does that work?
I believe they transferred most of the administrative tasks to the store manager, and added a sort of non-manager role that takes care of customer complaints. It seems smart in that it flattens out the management structure and makes the store manager role more desirable, providing a nice career path to retain more employees (like the Walmart store manager).
Isn't it pretty stupid to have RxSups reporting to DM's reporting to RM's reporting to AVP's reporting to SVP's reporting to an EVP? How much value could possibly be added at each level? Just people s***ing on the people one level below them about metrics.
This
So wag got rid of CL, Rxsup, and Dm. Now its just the supervisor and he has about 10 or so stores. So there's more supervisors but less total positions. He's around every two weeks.
Yeah I wondered the same thing when I worked there. I always assumed there were just simply too many stores to supervise, so there are a minimum number of management levels to keep it from getting out of hand. Wouldn't make a lot of sense to have a RxSups over 20 stores, and the AVP have >100 RxSups reporting to them. Those numbers are fictional to illustrate my logic, but it seems like there are too many stores to do it any other way.
I'd heard that there was a guarantee of jobs as well including offer letters generated from cvs to target pharmacy employees. But having gone through an acquisition when one PBM BOUGHT THE SMALL PBM that I worked for at that time, I can assure you all that those "guarantees"only go as far as optimal profitability will allow it to. I envision ex- Target middle management getting axed around May.
I know of target stores doing 100 rxs per day that literally share a parking lot with a cvs ... Those target pharmacies will be not for long in 2016.
Yah I'm curious of the same thing for the middle management folk. I'd assume the same. Give them 6 months to a year and if they don't she other jobs around the country then they may be let go. This way it saves target the PR of letting go all of those employees.
Now part of the deal says that the decision to close the pharmacy in target belongs to target. So in the situation where two locations share the same demographic the cvs store is more likely to close and filter everyone into the target. We will see just how well target holds up this end of their partnership.
it may be more difficult for CVS to get value out of that real estate in many locations, hence my reluctance to agree with you that the Target pharmacy would be more likely to stay open than a CVS within the same parking lot. Not to mention the lack of drive thrus
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
They will, but haven't yet. The last area to get Rxconnect is Colorado, where there are no CVS retail pharmacies. And I heard they are getting it between April and june
Target is not a broken company. Like previous acquisitions, the middle management will either keeps their role or take up roles in other parts of the company. There is a huge shortage of talented middle managers at CVS that deals with pharmacy specifically and even DM roles. The last few DMs in my region were external hires because they could not fill it internally. For any business, it is always cheaper to promote internally than pay more for external talent and wait for them to be trained up.
Most of the talent from Target pharmacy will be pharmacy management and that is something all pharmacy companies need because learning pharmacy is like learning a second language for non pharmacy people...
Last edited:
Where have you been?
Of course there will be layoffs for middle management...how is this even a question? They just acquired Target; there is a huge overlap in middle management right now. I work for Walgreens and I can tell you guys....walgreens is the leader in cutting labor costs...so if you want to see what your districts look like...ask your friend at walgreens.
I only recall one earlier communication about that topic and it was right after the announcement in June. Essentially it said that everyone with target would be guaranteed a job unless there were extenuating circumstances. They never provided a definition for those circumstances but I assume they were along the lines of theft, harassment, etc.
Yes, Target pharmacy management had so much talent that they were sold off to a company with " less talented middle managers"...CVS. How precisely do you measure that talent? Because they were doing 24% GP and still losing money as a department. 24% GP makes you a nice living while only filling 120 rxs s day...
Cvs measures talent via this competency model....
Target compared to some other chains out there is far from broken. As a company, they have done well against Walmart and Amazon. That would speak volumes about their management. CVS has acquired broken companies before with ****ty people and lay them off. Target is not one of them.
To be clear, CVS did NOT acquire the retail middle management. They acquired the PHARMACY middle management. Perhaps that fact was lost on you.
While I agree with you that Target is an excellent retailer, they weren't running their pharmacy department well. I'm sure they have some talented middle managers, but what value do they add as managers in a CVS pharmacy? The may have management skills, but they know nothing about running a CVS or the metrics (all 2 billion). If I were calling the shots I would rather promote good RXM to RXsup rather than an existing Target middle manager. Seems like their culture of being everyone's cheerleader wouldn't work so well at CVS when the bullets start flying. Target had a totally different mindset about running a pharmacy and that would take a long time to shake.
Yes. And the metrics will roll out slowly too. The only metric Target will be getting initially is WeCare workflow metric.
" we care" work flow metric -- you can't make this **** up. That's right up there with " the ministry of truth" from 1984.
Can one of you expand upon what's included in the " we care" work flow initiative?
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
On this topic, it is a really weird metric to introduce first. It has no practical business value, like inventory controls would nor does it measure customer satisfaction the way MCE is meant to. I don't think I can think of an odder choice for first metric to introduce. The only thing I can think is that most CVS are doing so poorly at this that they wanted our "new" stores to get it right before introducing the rest. *shrug*
Not only that but they aren't even upgrading our computer systems right away to Rx connect, so it's going to take some time before those things are even able to be measured.
I think the reason they started with WeCare is because it's the simplest set and they don't want to overwhelm their fresh meat. Technically if you excel at those metrics, then your RXscore should be good once they start tracking it. Plus if you're trying to teach an entire pharmacy team a new Rx system and workflow, it would probably be beneficial to explain the workflow metrics simultaneously.
The idea is that getting scripts out "efficiently" (enter scripts on time, check voicemail in a timely manner, deal with third-party rejects in a timely manner, and verify scripts on time) and proactively dealing with OOS, insurance rejects, and refill authorization requests (by calling the patient so they don't show up at the pharmacy and freak out) correlates with increased customer satisfaction (fewer complaints like "why didn't you call me? I had to make blah blah number of trips") and fewer in-person interruptions (telling people to come back instead of just getting them out the door in the first place because they don't care how many people were ahead of them, they "need" it NOW, so you can move on), so more scripts sold.
The truth is if you're constantly behind and putting out fires on the spot rather than being proactive, you waste a lot of time and you can lose scripts. Doesn't matter if you work for CVS or another chain
Now, whether you have adequate staffing at CVS to do well on WeCare, that's another issue... well it's chain retail, being fast and efficient is the #1 goal (and of course don't make a dispensing error because that wastes time!) no matter who you work for because you sell more scripts. I was in a district where you had That One Store that always got 100 every month (even busy stores with WeCare in the 90s) and then you had ****shows in single digits because of high turnover. When I worked for CVS I saw the difference in just getting **** out on time (even if you are taking 15 minutes to enter "acute" scripts like CVS "permits" you are taking too long; I started haranguing people to drop everything whenever new e-scripts came in and enter scripts ASAP) and getting people to call patients when **** came up so they don't come in all pissed off and waste your time. Get people out instead of telling them to come back later... because they actually come back later and have fun when you are down to you and one tech.
WeCare does sound Orwellian but it's important to the company for reasons stated above. In 2015 field management was really cracking the whip to get stores in line (it used to be that < 10 WeCare points over a rolling time period made you a "challenge store." In 2015 they changed the threshold to < 25 and I wouldn't be surprised if they increase this threshold in 2016. FYI 30 out of 100 YTD would put you in the bottom 5% of stores. 70 of 100 in the 50% percentile IIRC.
The truth is if you're constantly behind and putting out fires on the spot rather than being proactive, you waste a lot of time and you can lose scripts. Doesn't matter if you work for CVS or another chain
Now, whether you have adequate staffing at CVS to do well on WeCare, that's another issue... well it's chain retail, being fast and efficient is the #1 goal (and of course don't make a dispensing error because that wastes time!) no matter who you work for because you sell more scripts. I was in a district where you had That One Store that always got 100 every month (even busy stores with WeCare in the 90s) and then you had ****shows in single digits because of high turnover. When I worked for CVS I saw the difference in just getting **** out on time (even if you are taking 15 minutes to enter "acute" scripts like CVS "permits" you are taking too long; I started haranguing people to drop everything whenever new e-scripts came in and enter scripts ASAP) and getting people to call patients when **** came up so they don't come in all pissed off and waste your time. Get people out instead of telling them to come back later... because they actually come back later and have fun when you are down to you and one tech.
WeCare does sound Orwellian but it's important to the company for reasons stated above. In 2015 field management was really cracking the whip to get stores in line (it used to be that < 10 WeCare points over a rolling time period made you a "challenge store." In 2015 they changed the threshold to < 25 and I wouldn't be surprised if they increase this threshold in 2016. FYI 30 out of 100 YTD would put you in the bottom 5% of stores. 70 of 100 in the 50% percentile IIRC.
Last edited:
I can see how the rx manager cares, but how the hell does cvs get their staff pharmacists to give 2 ****s about their insane metrics...
Because they are professionals. Because CVS is giving them over 115K-135K/ year. You do what the boss requests.
Because you can be replaced, duh. I hope you aren't taking that 6 figure salary for granted or it may be taken away by a debt burden new grad.
I'm the debt burdened new grad!
Then you should appreciate what you are being paid and do what is required.
While I like my current staff, that's not always been the case. I've seen plenty of hard working floaters that I would have rather had then some of those staff pharmacists. Luckily I don't see change in the future since we hit our goals.
Former staff pharmacist - Life is simply easier when your metrics are good. You don't get extra calls from the DM, RXsup or whatever "emerging leader" pawn that they've enlisted to follow up on all the metrics. And as Sina Cura said, following the workflow and doing well on the metrics will make your pharmacy run more smoothly. CVS doesn't just track a bunch of worthless garbage. Probably 90% of their metrics are necessary measurements for running a solid business. The metrics the CVS bosses care about most is your RX score based off of surveys that people fill out asking questions like, what it ready when it was promised? Was it in stock? Were you addressed by name? All the other millions of metrics simply exist as a diagnostic tool to use when your RX score is bad.
Example: 60% of people who got surveys last month said their RX was not in stock and had to be ordered. Then your boss looks at all your inventory metrics and realizes you've ****ed the whole thing to hell and haven't ordered from your outside vendor in a month, or weren't completing cycle scans or whatever the metric points to.
Of course this only works if you have the staffing to complete these tasks. But simply put, metrics increase your pharmacy's profitability, so if you want to keep your job (and grow that stock price) you try to do well on the metrics.
WeCare is actually one of the better tools CVS has implemented. When your WeCare is above 80, your store runs smooth. IF it's above 90, you're pretty much on auto pilot and literally has zero stress.
What is this "RX score"? Never heard of it.
WeCare is ok, if you are actually following workflow and using it correctly. Sadly the culture at much of CVS is to "beat" the metrics. Print out of QT and delete it before it goes red. Don't do any predata entry so it can't go red. For the love of pharmacy gods don't let anything go red at production and if it does, retime it (making more work for yourself vs just getting the script ready). Access the voicemail wither you have time to write it down or not. I won't even get into the craziness that people come up with for DR calls. This is what >90% WeCare looks like for most CVS' I would be willing to wager.
WeCare is ok, if you are actually following workflow and using it correctly. Sadly the culture at much of CVS is to "beat" the metrics. Print out of QT and delete it before it goes red. Don't do any predata entry so it can't go red. For the love of pharmacy gods don't let anything go red at production and if it does, retime it (making more work for yourself vs just getting the script ready). Access the voicemail wither you have time to write it down or not. I won't even get into the craziness that people come up with for DR calls. This is what >90% WeCare looks like for most CVS' I would be willing to wager.
When you change the time in qp or qv ,the system still considers the original time ,not the updated time for we care. Which is good as my pic used to waste his time changing time .
And yet, people still do it (true story).
I feel like CVS would save so much money if they just had 1 DM for a store that has the qualifications for Rx sup. So pretty much keep the Rx sups, get rid of the DmS and change Rx sup title to DM. Everytime there is an issue where I need to call one of them they never know what to do. Then they advise me to call helpdesk aka tech support line. Like tech support line should not be doing the jobs of my Rx sup or DM, not to mention they don't even have that information there. I get so frustrated when my Rx sup just pushes off problems because they dont know how to resolve it. They make enough to figure it out.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
From the liability perspective, I'll have a huge laugh if Walgreens in particular thinks they can do away with the complete RxS/DM separation as they attempted this in 1998-2002 with predictably catastrophic results in the West Coast (to the point that the AVP for my old area was forced out as he was called one too many times to the AZ and CA boards in the interim days). If you're wondering, the rightsizing of RxS and middle management occurs on a 10-15 year cycle for varying reasons. What the effect is that is basically six sigma's the 'worst' of the RxS out of the company ('worst' is a variable definition ranging from gets the company in actual trouble with the community or Board to personally irritates the hell out of the AVP). This is where the RxS earn their real pay by surviving the cycle by doing what is necessary. The motion keeps all of them from becoming complacent at least. It's a small world, my least favorite RxS from my intern days in the area got pink slipped as I am reading his application right now to join the feds. OPM just replied saying that I do not need to recuse myself from his Professional Standards Board as I requested on conflict of interest as I only have a professional and not personal animus toward him.
My impression of the CVS leadership dichotomy was that the RxS was the more intelligent and qualified of the two. RxS was at some point a practicing pharmacist that was well versed in ass kissing and general assholery. The DM on the other hand was a former store manager (which are all former 7-11 managers) that had enough CVS smoke blown up his ass to think he can push around pharmacists. But when push came to shove, RxS trumped DM every time when it comes to matters that affect the pharmacy. Probably because DMs can do whatever they want in the front store to keep people happy, but in the pharmacy there are rules and regulations that they don't understand so they stay out of it. You can't just go around waiving co-pays if someone bitches enough.
When an Rx Sup gets promoted at CVS they become DM. Many DM are pharmacists.
