Last edited:
if all of the pharmacists of a company were to be part of a union and together were willing to strike, the company could not possibly replace them fast enough to keep their customers happy, and would certainly give in to demands, I know of some unions that are so strong, they require membership for any employee who is part of the company (this was in a different industry which was much more over saturated)
doesn't matter how saturated it is, as long as a union is strong enough the company does not have capability to respond fast enough for a strike, i really think that pharmacists need to take a stand.
I currently work in a pharmacy where there has been 3 misfills reported in a single day... it gets so busy at times that the pharmacists become frustrated. why arnt there extra techs? why arents their two pharmacists working? this is ridiculous, what if a patient got seriously harmed from the misfills? this is a health care industry not some retail chain selling unneccesary items, their should be more say from the pharmacists.
I am fairly new to this job so i guess these are my first impressions, I am very surprised that people are OK with these conditions?
I think that a single union could be formed with a branch for CVS employees and a branch for walgreens employees. It is just a matter of organizing at and getting every one on board. I dont think getting everyone on board would be too hard.
Better to rock the boat then get kicked off
I think that a single union could be formed with a branch for CVS employees and a branch for walgreens employees. It is just a matter of organizing at and getting every one on board. I dont think getting everyone on board would be too hard.
2. The problem is not only this, but the great pay cut that is about to come in the next five to ten years. A union can prevent this.