Light at the end of the tunnel....Job Offers Thread

[Aznfarmerboi]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Maybe the 84K is for part time?

That is what I was thinking. It is probably 84k for 30 hours. It is salaried but I am sure they will compensate you for extra shifts by the hour.

 

[Commodity]

Woah, I had to make a new profile because I couldn't recover my old account. I did just rejoin to share in the fight to find a job. I wouldn't lie to you guys, as I don't have that much spare time or boredom. I do understand the skepticism however, I am not entirely comfortable putting the letter online and causing trouble for myself.


The first salary cited is $30/hr as a graduate intern. This position is eligible for overtime of 1.5x, $45/hr.

The next salary cited is in the section describing the licensed pharmacist position. It states that I will work on a fill-time basis. Then it says the starting biweekly salary is ~$3200. Biweekly = 26 payments/year = 84k/yr. It does say that you can be compensated for additional duties but only if they exceed 60 hours/week.

I really and truly wish I was wrong. I even excitedly checked in hopes that is was indeed for part time. It is not though.

I can go and talk to the DM. I have been introduced to them. I will let you guys know what I find out. I'll have to try to catch them later in the day as I'm on rotation 9-5 right now.

 

[nguyenulm]

I work at a Hospital in Dallas. $51/hour base pay. $56/hour any work after 7pm. $59.50/hour on weekends.

 

[Momus]

The next salary cited is in the section describing the licensed pharmacist position. It states that I will work on a fill-time basis. Then it says the starting biweekly salary is ~$3200. Biweekly = 26 payments/year = 84k/yr. It does say that you can be compensated for additional duties but only if they exceed 60 hours/week.

Retail? Wow, I'd spit in their face if I get that kind of offer. They ride you hard LOL Maybe, they think you are naive enough to take it.

 

[BMBiology]

The truth is they can low ball you and some new grads who cant find a job will take the offer. Remember, salary jumped in early 2000 when there was a major shortage. Now that supply < demand, expect salary to drop

 

[Momus]

3200/2 weeks that's 40 bucks an hour lol

 

[BMBiology]

We have heard of low ball offers before but just not from one of the big three.

Oh wells, I knew this day was coming. Just not this soon. I am just glad that I have paid back my student loan. I don't think anyone can dispute the following:

(1) record number of new grads
(2) record number of pharmacy schools; many of them are for-profit stand alone pharmacy schools; many established schools are expanding their program and accepting more students; easy to access federal student loans so these schools have ample supply of students
(3) students with GPA < 3.0 are getting accepted; just check the pre-pharmacy forum
(4) pharmacy students can't find a paid internship
(5) pharmacy students are desperately applying for residency; some are doing 2 year residency (this was rare when I was a student)
(6) retail expansion has greatly been reduced
(7) hospitals have been cutting back
(8) cuts in benefits for new grads

What do you really expect to happen next? Cut in salary

 

[waryman]

The first salary cited is $30/hr as a graduate intern. This position is eligible for overtime of 1.5x, $45/hr.

The next salary cited is in the section describing the licensed pharmacist position. It states that I will work on a fill-time basis. Then it says the starting biweekly salary is ~$3200. Biweekly = 26 payments/year = 84k/yr. It does say that you can be compensated for additional duties but only if they exceed 60 hours/week.

That is quite low. My calculated pay for the quoted hours worked happened to be ~$56/hr. However, it is quite possible that your understanding of salaried and what they wrote do not match up. I always took it to assume that the salary figure given was the estimate based upon the initial hours that you were given. I would email them back and clarify if you are actually paid by the hour and the figure given is an estimate of that. I know of no retail position that is actually salaried (as in a hospital).

 

[PharmaSex]

That is quite low. My calculated pay for the quoted hours worked happened to be ~$56/hr. However, it is quite possible that your understanding of salaried and what they wrote do not match up. I always took it to assume that the salary figure given was the estimate based upon the initial hours that you were given. I would email them back and clarify if you are actually paid by the hour and the figure given is an estimate of that. I know of no retail position that is actually salaried (as in a hospital).

very true. My offer was similar in appearance however it was based upon a total of total of 60 hours per bi-weekly period (which is 30 hours per week). If your situation is similar then
$3200 / 60 hours = ~$53/hr

 

[PharmaSex]

Also remember in the above situation, that it is not how much you make per year but rather how much you make per hour. You can always get more hours.

 

[awval999]

We have heard of low ball offers before but just not from one of the big three.

Oh wells, I knew this day was coming. Just not this soon. I am just glad that I have paid back my student loan. I don't think anyone can dispute the following:

(1) record number of new grads
(2) record number of pharmacy schools; many of them are for-profit stand alone pharmacy schools; many established schools are expanding their program and accepting more students; easy to access federal student loans so these schools have ample supply of students
(3) students with GPA < 3.0 are getting accepted; just check the pre-pharmacy forum
(4) pharmacy students can't find a paid internship
(5) pharmacy students are desperately applying for residency; some are doing 2 year residency (this was rare when I was a student)
(6) retail expansion has greatly been reduced
(7) hospitals have been cutting back
(8) cuts in benefits for new grads

What do you really expect to happen next? Cut in salary

I agree wholeheartedly Bio--- but the salary cuts aren't going to go from $115K to $84K in retail in one year.

Even if that offer is legit-- it's not -- RAD could never keep that seat filled. Any RPh would just keep looking for a better job, the turnover would be immense. In no world is a $31K cut from median salary realistic.

I do believe we'll get a drop in salary, but it's much more likely to be a $1-2/hr cut per year for the next 10 years for the new grads, cutting $1/hr per year won't create that turnover. It is also going to be hard to cut below that very important "six-figure salary". I could definitely imagine the new grads in 2023 chiming in about making a flat $100K salary and having a 44hr/wk schedule.

The current crop of RPh's will just see their salaries get cut via inflation. Instead of a 3% COLA raise we'll get 0-1%; a full COLA would be possible if metrics are at 100% but in all reality only a few % of RPhs will get them.

Just not realistic to cut salaries 30-40%. You would be putting probably half of your workforce out on the street because they'd lose their homes, cars, etc because many people-- RPh's included-- live paycheck to paycheck on 102% of their income.

 

[All4MyDaughter]

I agree wholeheartedly Bio--- but the salary cuts aren't going to go from $115K to $84K in retail in one year.

Even if that offer is legit-- it's not -- RAD could never keep that seat filled. Any RPh would just keep looking for a better job, the turnover would be immense. In no world is a $31K cut from median salary realistic.

I do believe we'll get a drop in salary, but it's much more likely to be a $1-2/hr cut per year for the next 10 years for the new grads, cutting $1/hr per year won't create that turnover. It is also going to be hard to cut below that very important "six-figure salary". I could definitely imagine the new grads in 2023 chiming in about making a flat $100K salary and having a 44hr/wk schedule.

The current crop of RPh's will just see their salaries get cut via inflation. Instead of a 3% COLA raise we'll get 0-1%; a full COLA would be possible if metrics are at 100% but in all reality only a few % of RPhs will get them.

Just not realistic to cut salaries 30-40%. You would be putting probably half of your workforce out on the street because they'd lose their homes, cars, etc because many people-- RPh's included-- live paycheck to paycheck on 102% of their income.

Great post. I believe the poster in question has misinterpreted his offer from RAD. There's no way it's 84K for full time with no additional compensation unless you go over 60 hours per week. I agree with you that the salary decrease will be less drastic and will be seen gradually rather than an immediate large reduction.

A few years ago a poster on this site insisted that Kroger in my city was starting all new grads at 90K. That wasn't true then and still isn't true. People are being very alarmist about salaries, like jumping to the conclusion that one ALLEGED low offer means a wholesale mass reduction in salaries is upon us.

Agree about extremely low salaries causing turnover. I'm sure someone will say "the chains will just keep hiring new grads" when more experienced pharmacists leave. That may be true to a degree, in that there are lots of potential hires out there (more graduates). But you can't run a business effectively with constant turnover, and the recruitment/hiring/training process has fairly high associated costs, both direct and indirect.

 

[pezdispenser]

I agree wholeheartedly Bio--- but the salary cuts aren't going to go from $115K to $84K in retail in one year.

Even if that offer is legit-- it's not -- RAD could never keep that seat filled. Any RPh would just keep looking for a better job, the turnover would be immense. In no world is a $31K cut from median salary realistic.

I do believe we'll get a drop in salary, but it's much more likely to be a $1-2/hr cut per year for the next 10 years for the new grads, cutting $1/hr per year won't create that turnover. It is also going to be hard to cut below that very important "six-figure salary". I could definitely imagine the new grads in 2023 chiming in about making a flat $100K salary and having a 44hr/wk schedule.

The current crop of RPh's will just see their salaries get cut via inflation. Instead of a 3% COLA raise we'll get 0-1%; a full COLA would be possible if metrics are at 100% but in all reality only a few % of RPhs will get them.

Just not realistic to cut salaries 30-40%. You would be putting probably half of your workforce out on the street because they'd lose their homes, cars, etc because many people-- RPh's included-- live paycheck to paycheck on 102% of their income.

Yes! I think this is the realistic future as well.

I have seen the starting hourly rate for new grads get cut by a dollar or two each year.

Personally, I only got a 1.25% raise last year. Some previous years I got 0% and I also took two pay CUTS from switching positions so right now I am making the same as I was 5 years ago! But I really love my current job, it's a lot less stressful, and I make a lot of money from my investments so I don't really worry about pharmacy anymore. However, you students and new grads have a tough road ahead!

 

[BMBiology]

Yes! I think this is the realistic future as well.

I have seen the starting hourly rate for new grads get cut by a dollar or two each year.

Personally, I only got a 1.25% raise last year. Some previous years I got 0% and I also took two pay CUTS from switching positions so right now I am making the same as I was 5 years ago! But I really love my current job, it's a lot less stressful, and I make a lot of money from my investments so I don't really worry about pharmacy anymore. However, you students and new grads have a tough road ahead!

It would surprise me if salary is cut by 30%. That's too much. However, I do see many new grads being unemployed or underemployed, just like nursing. I, too, have been investing so I don't have to depend on pharmacy.

 

[BMBiology]

Would anyone seriously do retail for 85 k a year, knowing you will owe 250 k in student loans?

 

[All4MyDaughter]

Yes! I think this is the realistic future as well.

I have seen the starting hourly rate for new grads get cut by a dollar or two each year.

Personally, I only got a 1.25% raise last year. Some previous years I got 0% and I also took two pay CUTS from switching positions so right now I am making the same as I was 5 years ago! But I really love my current job, it's a lot less stressful, and I make a lot of money from my investments so I don't really worry about pharmacy anymore. However, you students and new grads have a tough road ahead!

The lack of raises isn't just a pharmacy thing, though. My husband hasn't had one in several years and his bonus amount has remained level. The economy sucks.

 

[BMBiology]

The lack of raises isn't just a pharmacy thing, though. My husband hasn't had one in several years and his bonus amount has remained level. The economy sucks.

is your husband's company making record profits like CVS?

 

[All4MyDaughter]

is your husband's company making record profits like CVS?

I don't know anything about CVS profits, so I can't really compare.

 

[type b pharmD]

would anyone seriously do retail for 85 k a year, knowing you will owe 250 k in student loans?

ibr.

 

[cbyrd]

Deciding between WAG and CVS:
1) WAG in Tulsa, OK (where my husband currently has a job) offered a salaried exempt $113,360.00 annual salary based on a standard 40 hour work-week schedule.
2) CVS in Santa Rosa, CA offered $59.25/hr + eligible for premium pay

Still trying to figure out the term "salaried exempt." From what I can tell, I will not be paid overtime. I will need to clarify this with the DM.

 

[confettiflyer]

Deciding between WAG and CVS:
1) WAG in Tulsa, OK (where my husband currently has a job) offered a salaried exempt $113,360.00 annual salary based on a standard 40 hour work-week schedule.
2) CVS in Santa Rosa, CA offered $59.25/hr + eligible for premium pay

Still trying to figure out the term "salaried exempt." From what I can tell, I will not be paid overtime. I will need to clarify this with the DM.

Yup salaried exempt = no OT.

Pick Santa Rosa...beautiful place in a quiet area right down the road from the Napa Valley...it's the dead of winter right now and it's like in the high 50's around here.

By law CA pharmacists non-management are hourly non-exempt so generous OT rules apply.

And they got like the best cheese in that area.

 

[pezdispenser]

Deciding between WAG and CVS:
1) WAG in Tulsa, OK (where my husband currently has a job) offered a salaried exempt $113,360.00 annual salary based on a standard 40 hour work-week schedule.
2) CVS in Santa Rosa, CA offered $59.25/hr + eligible for premium pay

Still trying to figure out the term "salaried exempt." From what I can tell, I will not be paid overtime. I will need to clarify this with the DM.

These terms have a different meaning in retail. This is how I understood them:

Salaried and exempt means you will not be paid time and a half beyond 40 hrs/wk. HOWEVER, you do still get paid for those hours, but at a different rate, such as your standard $54.50/hr plus let's say $5-20/hr, so that could be up to $74.50/hr which is still pretty good.

The second however is that I believe CA is much stricter with their workplace laws and pharmacists cannot be classified as salaried, exempt employees. Therefore, they must receive time and a half or "premium pay" for any hours worked beyond 40 hrs/wk or 8 hrs/day.

So go ahead and clarify this with your DM.

 

[pezdispenser]

The first salary cited is $30/hr as a graduate intern. This position is eligible for overtime of 1.5x, $45/hr.

The next salary cited is in the section describing the licensed pharmacist position. It states that I will work on a fill-time basis. Then it says the starting biweekly salary is ~$3200. Biweekly = 26 payments/year = 84k/yr. It does say that you can be compensated for additional duties but only if they exceed 60 hours/week.

I really and truly wish I was wrong. I even excitedly checked in hopes that is was indeed for part time. It is not though.

I can go and talk to the DM. I have been introduced to them. I will let you guys know what I find out. I'll have to try to catch them later in the day as I'm on rotation 9-5 right now.

Something is not right here.

In retail, being "full-time" is more about being eligible for benefits like health insurance. It could still be as low as 30 hours per week.

Being "salaried" is more about being guaranteed to be paid and scheduled a minimum number of hours every week or pay period, and again, this could be as low as 30 hours/week or 60 hours/pay period. You will still get paid by the hour for any additional shifts you work beyond the minimum. This would be at your regular hourly rate up to 40 hrs/wk, and a higher rate beyond that. (But you do not get paid for arriving early or leaving late outside your schedule to, for example, finish off work).

Perhaps there was a mistake when you said you would be "compensated for additional duties but only if they exceed 60 hours/week" and it should be 60 hours/pay period? Because I'm speculating that your offer is for a minimum of 60 hrs/2 wks and you will float and pick up extra shifts as needed. So that makes your hourly rate $53.33/hr which is much more reasonable.

Please get this clarified with your DM, and also find out what your overtime rate is.

 

[Commodity]

Something is not right here.

In retail, being "full-time" is more about being eligible for benefits like health insurance. It could still be as low as 30 hours per week.

Being "salaried" is more about being guaranteed to be paid and scheduled a minimum number of hours every week or pay period, and again, this could be as low as 30 hours/week or 60 hours/pay period. You will still get paid by the hour for any additional shifts you work beyond the minimum. This would be at your regular hourly rate up to 40 hrs/wk, and a higher rate beyond that. (But you do not get paid for arriving early or leaving late outside your schedule to, for example, finish off work).

Perhaps there was a mistake when you said you would be "compensated for additional duties but only if they exceed 60 hours/week" and it should be 60 hours/pay period? Because I'm speculating that your offer is for a minimum of 60 hrs/2 wks and you will float and pick up extra shifts as needed. So that makes your hourly rate $53.33/hr which is much more reasonable.

Please get this clarified with your DM, and also find out what your overtime rate is.

Well I haven't had time to try and talk with the DM yet, but you are certainly right about the compensated additional duties being for bi-weekly pay period. I am truly sorry to cause such as stir. It would be cause for concern for the profession. I will be sure to follow up on this as soon as I can and let you all know what I find out. Thank you all for your support. In my defense, the offer is surely written by a lawyer and heavy in legal-ese.

 

[pharmdtobe2013]

Well I haven't had time to try and talk with the DM yet, but you are certainly right about the compensated additional duties being for bi-weekly pay period. I am truly sorry to cause such as stir. It would be cause for concern for the profession. I will be sure to follow up on this as soon as I can and let you all know what I find out. Thank you all for your support. In my defense, the offer is surely written by a lawyer and heavy in legal-ese.

I received a similar offer from RAD and understood it to be as such: 60 hour biweekly base compensated at $55 per hour. The term salaried guarantees 60 hours pay per 2 weeks but basically excludes you from overtime pay (BUT you do receive the regular $55 per hour). It's considered full time as far as benefits go. The kicker on mine (that wasn't outlined in the offer letter and you should definitely check on this if you will be floating over a wide area) is that drive time cuts into your base hours...but is NOT compensated at regular pay (i.e.$20/hour in my case). Therefore, you could have several of your 60 hours paid at $20/hr rather than full pay. This could bring you in even lower than $80,000 per year.

For someone looking for 30 hours per week, it may be a good option because you get full benefits and whatnot. However, if you're like me and need money to pay off that $200,000 in student loans...it ain't happening. I was fortunate to get 3 other offers around $120,000 per year in a pretty saturated area....so just keep looking and good luck!! 🙂

 

[PharmaSex]

I just contacted the DM of one of my offer letters for Rite Aid and he had stated that the figure given for the bi-weekly pay is for a minimum of 60 hours for the two weeks. If you happen to work more than 60 hours in the given pay period then you would receive compensation equal to the hourly amount of the bi-weekly figure / 60 hours. So you are not salaried per se rather hourly but you would not receive any overtime pay.

For example, if I were to receive $3500 per 2 weeks, this would equate to ~$58/hr. Anything over 60 hours worked would pay $58 for each additional hour over 60 for that pay period. You are guaranteed at least $3500 for those hours worked. Working more than 30 hours in one week would get you additional compensation based on what I have stated as the 60 hours is over a 2 week period.

This should clear everything up about the "salaried exempt" meaning

 

[pharmdtobe2013]

Just curious (and because for the life of me, I can't decide)....who would you guys choose between Walgreens, Kroger, and Target? All are initally floating positions with similar pay, hours, and location. I know every store is going to be different...but overall as a company, who do you recommend?

 

[pharmacy77]

For those of you doubting the previous post about 84k offer from Rite Aid, I can attest that I got an identical offer for Maryland area... needless to say, was very upset... expecting more than that to be able to pay off my loans!

 

[SHC1984]

For those of you doubting the previous post about 84k offer from Rite Aid, I can attest that I got an identical offer for Maryland area... needless to say, was very upset... expecting more than that to be able to pay off my loans!

I think the point is you guys are reading the offer WRONG. It's most likely 84K for 30hrs.

Many places now like Publix for example offer only 30hrs a week. So the pay will be in the 84K to 90K range.

120K is usually for 40hrs a week.

READ it again. lol

 

[pharmdtobe2013]

I think the point is you guys are reading the offer WRONG. It's most likely 84K for 30hrs.

Many places now like Publix for example offer only 30hrs a week. So the pay will be in the 84K to 90K range.

120K is usually for 40hrs a week.

READ it again. lol

pretty sure this person is just emphasizing the fact that rite aid is only offering 30 hours per week now as full time in most areas.

 

[BMBiology]

pretty sure this person is just emphasizing the fact that rite aid is only offering 30 hours per week now as full time in most areas.

Underemployed? I hope that's not the new normal. They just don't want to give you benefits which would cost them additional 30% of your salary. I never trust these corps

 

[Rutgers2015]

Just curious (and because for the life of me, I can't decide)....who would you guys choose between Walgreens, Kroger, and Target? All are initally floating positions with similar pay, hours, and location. I know every store is going to be different...but overall as a company, who do you recommend?

I'm not familiar with Kroger, but I'd choose target. Pharmacy actually closes for a half hour so you can have lunch and not too busy. Not sure about the hours but they are probably better.

 

[SHC1984]

Underemployed? I hope that's not the new normal. They just don't want to give you benefits which would cost them additional 30% of your salary. I never trust these corps

30hrs a week is full time and you will still get the same benefits as 40hrs a week.

It's just that most companies now only offer 30hrs a week. Publix being one of them.

 

[owlegrad]

Underemployed? I hope that's not the new normal. They just don't want to give you benefits which would cost them additional 30% of your salary. I never trust these corps

The poster above said that the offer is considered full time for benefits. Geez.

 

[npage148]

Honestly, 30h for full time is pretty sweet. If you dont care about the cash and extra 10 hours of free time a week is nice. Americans work too much as it is. Plus you can pick up extra shifts if available

 

[BMBiology]

30hrs a week is full time and you will still get the same benefits as 40hrs a week.

It's just that most companies now only offer 30hrs a week. Publix being one of them.

Some states require 32 or more hours to be considered "full time" and to get benefits.

 

[All4MyDaughter]

The poster above said that the offer is considered full time for benefits. Geez.

Reading comprehension or a relentless desire to be negative?

 

[BMBiology]

Virginia:

F. A "qualified full-time employee" means an employee filling a new, permanent full-time position in a major business facility in the Commonwealth. A "new, permanent full-time position" is a job of an indefinite duration, created by the company as a result of the establishment or expansion of a major business facility in the Commonwealth, requiring a minimum of 35 hours of an employee's time a week for the entire normal year of the company's operations, which "normal year" shall consist of at least 48 weeks, or a position of indefinite duration which requires a minimum of 35 hours of an employee's time a week for the portion of the taxable year in which the employee was initially hired for, or transferred to, the major business facility in the Commonwealth. Seasonal or temporary positions, or a job created when a job function is shifted from an existing location in the Commonwealth to the new major business facility and positions in building and grounds maintenance, security, and other such positions which are ancillary to the principal activities performed by the employees at a major business facility shall not qualify as new, permanent full-time positions.

http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?000+cod+58.1-439

 

[owlegrad]

Virginia:

You understand that is the minimum, right? The company can always choose to be MORE generous than that, which is what the poster said Right Aid is doing, giving full time benefits for less than 35 hours per week. You are just wrong.

 

[owlegrad]

Reading comprehension or a relentless desire to be negative?

Both

 

[BMBiology]

You understand that is the minimum, right? The company can always choose to be MORE generous than that, which is what the poster said Right Aid is doing, giving full time benefits for less than 35 hours per week. You are just wrong.

Sure and a company like Rite Aid is making so much money that they are giving their already well-paid employees more than they are legally obligated to do.

It doesn't make sense to me that they would hire more pharmacists while give them only 30 hours a week work but full benefits. I knew there was a reason why Rite Aid may go bankrupt.

 

[pezdispenser]

It doesn't make sense to me that they would hire more pharmacists while give them only 30 hours a week work but full benefits. I knew there was a reason why Rite Aid may go bankrupt.

Other chains and even some hospitals also do it. It's sometimes called "flex" full-time because it gives employers more flexibility to increase staffing when needed, they already have pharmacists trained and ready to go, and they don't have to pay overtime. For example, if they are more busy during the flu season, they can schedule these pharmacists for the full 40 hrs/wk. Then when it's less busy, drop them down to 30 hrs without having to lay anyone off only to rehire people later.

Most of the new grads in my area got offers like this. Very likely caused by the saturation. So yeah, it is starting to look like the new normal. 🙁

 

[BMBiology]

Most of the new grads in my area got offers like this. Very likely caused by the saturation. So yeah, it is starting to look like the new normal. 🙁

Unfortunately, you guys are one step behind California. It has been like this for the last 2 years. Part-time job with no benefits. Even the ones who got a full time position, they have to wait a year before they get anything. Of course, many new grads don't think much about benefits. Trying to get health insurance on the open market is pretty expensive.

 

[Sparda29]

My hospital is looking for a temp morning shift worker, most likely to become permanent, any New York ppl interested, pm me.

 

[pezdispenser]

Unfortunately, you guys are one step behind California. It has been like this for the last 2 years. Part-time job with no benefits. Even the ones who got a full time position, they have to wait a year before they get anything. Of course, many new grads don't think much about benefits. Trying to get health insurance on the open market is pretty expensive.

Just to clarify, the flex full-time offers I was talking about for a minimum 30 hrs/wk DO include benefits and health insurance.

Also, I know California has strict workplace laws and they have to pay time and a half for overtime. This is great when you get it, but the managers are not stupid so they will try to cut back on overtime. On the other hand, my employer only pays our base rate + $5/hr for overtime, so they don't mind paying this. So even if you were only offered the flex full-time 30 hrs/wk when you were hired, we tend to get about 65 hrs/wk when it gets busy.

 

[All4MyDaughter]

Just to clarify, the flex full-time offers I was talking about for a minimum 30 hrs/wk DO included benefits and health insurance.

Also, I know California has strict workplace laws and they have to pay time and a half for overtime. This is great when you get it, but the managers are not stupid so they will try to cut back on overtime. On the other hand, my employer only pays our base rate + $5/hr for overtime, so they don't mind paying this. So even if you were only offered the flex full-time 30 hrs/wk when you were hired, we tend to get about 65 hrs/wk when it gets busy.

65 hours a week? Do you have to work extra? 30 hours per week sounds perfect for my situation.

 

[MountainPharmD]

I agree wholeheartedly Bio--- but the salary cuts aren't going to go from $115K to $84K in retail in one year.

Even if that offer is legit-- it's not -- RAD could never keep that seat filled. Any RPh would just keep looking for a better job, the turnover would be immense. In no world is a $31K cut from median salary realistic.

I do believe we'll get a drop in salary, but it's much more likely to be a $1-2/hr cut per year for the next 10 years for the new grads, cutting $1/hr per year won't create that turnover. It is also going to be hard to cut below that very important "six-figure salary". I could definitely imagine the new grads in 2023 chiming in about making a flat $100K salary and having a 44hr/wk schedule.

The current crop of RPh's will just see their salaries get cut via inflation. Instead of a 3% COLA raise we'll get 0-1%; a full COLA would be possible if metrics are at 100% but in all reality only a few % of RPhs will get them.

Just not realistic to cut salaries 30-40%. You would be putting probably half of your workforce out on the street because they'd lose their homes, cars, etc because many people-- RPh's included-- live paycheck to paycheck on 102% of their income.

If you're a pharmacist and living paycheck to paycheck you're an idiot.

 

[pezdispenser]

65 hours a week? Do you have to work extra? 30 hours per week sounds perfect for my situation.

Hehe they are not that generous. When they need you, they will bump you up to 40 hrs and you have to do it. But anything beyond 40 hrs is voluntary. Just saying that because the overtime pay rate is low, there is plenty available. So for people worried that 30 hrs is not enough, they should stock up on overtime whenever they can.

 

[Momus]

Hehe they are not that generous. When they need you, they will bump you up to 40 hrs and you have to do it. But anything beyond 40 hrs is voluntary. Just saying that because the overtime pay rate is low, there is plenty available. So for people worried that 30 hrs is not enough, they should stock up on overtime whenever they can.

There are a lot of pharmacist in my area right now with 40h/week contract. My scheduler is having trouble to give these pharmacists 40h/week due to saturation. They bitch and moan if they don't get exactly 40h and my scheduler has to beg people to take vacation days to give them enough hours. You (scheduler) schedule less than 40h, they bitch, you schedule more, you pay OT.

A full time 30h/week is good for employer. They schedule you to only get 30h, and you can't bitch and moan if you want more hours because you agree to it. They can however schedule you up to 40h without worrying you are going to get OT. You don't really have to take the shifts if you don't want to because again, you agree to only work 30h. The old 40h/week has no flexibility for employer. Once the schedule is set, everyone is getting 40h/week. If they need people to cover certain shift ASAP for any reason, they only have a few set of people to call that doesn't produce OT. If everyone full time contract is 30h/week, it's easy to get someone in ASAP.

If they start hiring many people at 30h/week, RPH turn over is not going to affect them at all since they can bump up the hours of 3-4 other pharmacists to cover that hole. Employer has more power to not give a chit and fire you if you suck. It's like front end low wage cashier, turn over is high and they don't give a chit because everyone else is working part time and willing to take your hours if you are gone.

 

[BMBiology]

^^ do you know if these pharmacists who work 30 hours a week also get benefits? In my area, they don't.

The ones who get 40 hours and get benefits have to wait: 1 year for vacation time, 1 year for health benefits, 2 years for 401 k matching.