Pharmacy technicians are the future of our profession: true or false?

[Xenophylia]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Yeah places like CVS already utilize the "acceptable risk" model in running their pharmacies. They know with their deliberate understaffing there WILL be lawsuits, but as long as the damage is kept to a minimum that's just the cost of doing business.

 

[PikminOC]

Yeah places like CVS already utilize the "acceptable risk" model in running their pharmacies. They know with their deliberate understaffing there WILL be lawsuits, but as long as the damage is kept to a minimum that's just the cost of doing business.

Just like hospitals employing so many midlevels

 

[Xenophylia]

The situation is similar, but it's much more "subtle" with the medical profession. With physicians, they're substituting quasi respectable, highly (albeit less highly than physicians) educated professionals in the form of PAs and NPs. With pharmacists- also educated for many years- they're subbing warm bodies that often barely made it through high school and expecting the same quality and performance. I've literally worked with some retail techs who could barely read well enough to locate a drug on a shelf and didn't know the alphabet well enough to find a patient in a pickup bin sorted by last name. Let alone count change, even when the cash register actually told them how much change to give. I wish I were kidding. I swear some of them were so dumb they'd forget to breath regularly if they didn't always have a cell phone in their hand to count the seconds.... Eventually I came to suspect there was a "breathe now " app or something that would send an emoji of a blue, bug eyed smiley face every time they were about to black out.... (And yes I did make them cry pretty regularly as I have a low tolerance for unbridled stupidity).

 

[NorthTexasPharmacist]

Pharmacists are not going to get expanded roles without opposition from the medical board. Since pharmacists couldn't care less about their profession, state boards have the ability to grant technicians more power without worrying about backlash. Aren't they the future of our profession?

I would think the insurance companies and PBMs are the ones who will limit our expansion by not reimbursing any other service we provide.

 

[NorthTexasPharmacist]

Texas considering making the ratio unlimited and expanding tech duties. 65% of you got it oh so wrong. Technicians truly are the future of the profession.

Here is what I don't understand about techs replacing pharmacists. With PAs and nurses, at least they get the education and the training they need to perform some of the tasks physicians do but with pharmacy technicians and pharmacists, the education gap is too great in my opinion.

 

[BenJammin]

Here is what I don't understand about techs replacing pharmacists. With PAs and nurses, at least they get the education and the training they need to perform some of the tasks physicians do but with pharmacy technicians and pharmacists, the education gap is too great in my opinion.

Education gap is irrelevant. What matters is the law. Go check out the recent edition of the law book and see what the state defines as tasks that only a pharmacist can perform. TSBP is about to remove 3 of them.

If a physician assistant can observe Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome from an EKG with as much accuracy as a physician, why does it matter that the physician went to school for 4 years of undergrad, 4 years of medical school, and 6 years of residency? Obviously there is a bit of exaggeration there but you get the point. If a technician ran community pharmacy can operate at the same efficiency and outcome level as a pharmacist, why does it matter that the pharmacist went to school for 8 years + residency and the technician has a high school diploma?

 

[quickpic007]

Last Tuesday the Texas board of pharmacy just approved an unlimited technician ratio and to allow techs to take verbal orders, do transfers, and make necessary changes to prescriptions. This is kind of leading to a big announcement for a project I've been working on since the beginning of the year. It will shock and offend a lot of people but we'll see what happens

Link please!

 

[Pronounce Doxazosin]

Calling technicians the future of pharmacy is like saying Chinese sweatshops are the future of manufacturing.
Companies will always take advantage of cheaper labor, even if it means inferior quality

 

[ldiot]

I love my techs but there's no way they are the future of dispensing when I am interrupted every 5 minutes all day long to fix/do something for them or take a phone call that they can't handle themselves.

 

[Twentytwelve2]

And who trains these technicians to operate in the capacity of a pharmacist? I work retail and the techs are high-school level educated and cannot grasp judgement calls on clinical matters.

 

[Marzapan]

I would think the insurance companies and PBMs are the ones who will limit our expansion by not reimbursing any other service we provide.

What services do pharmacists provide that should be deemed reimbursable (at a clinician level)? That's the problem.

 

[Sabril]

Eventually I came to suspect there was a "breathe now " app or something that would send an emoji of a blue, bug eyed smiley face every time they were about to black out.... (And yes I did make them cry pretty regularly as I have a low tolerance for unbridled stupidity).

It's amazing how some people need a reminder to breathe but can cry and whine instantaneously.

 

[NorthTexasPharmacist]

Education gap is irrelevant. What matters is the law. Go check out the recent edition of the law book and see what the state defines as tasks that only a pharmacist can perform. TSBP is about to remove 3 of them.

If a physician assistant can observe Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome from an EKG with as much accuracy as a physician, why does it matter that the physician went to school for 4 years of undergrad, 4 years of medical school, and 6 years of residency? Obviously there is a bit of exaggeration there but you get the point. If a technician ran community pharmacy can operate at the same efficiency and outcome level as a pharmacist, why does it matter that the pharmacist went to school for 8 years + residency and the technician has a high school diploma?

I would disagree on same outcome level. There are way more than just filling prescriptions obviously and technicians are in no way qualified.

Not sure just because one can read an EKG, that qualifies him or her to be on the same level. Anyone can be trained to read an EKG honestly.

 

[PikminOC]

The situation is similar, but it's much more "subtle" with the medical profession. With physicians, they're substituting quasi respectable, highly (albeit less highly than physicians) educated professionals in the form of PAs and NPs. With pharmacists- also educated for many years- they're subbing warm bodies that often barely made it through high school and expecting the same quality and performance. I've literally worked with some retail techs who could barely read well enough to locate a drug on a shelf and didn't know the alphabet well enough to find a patient in a pickup bin sorted by last name. Let alone count change, even when the cash register actually told them how much change to give. I wish I were kidding. I swear some of them were so dumb they'd forget to breath regularly if they didn't always have a cell phone in their hand to count the seconds.... Eventually I came to suspect there was a "breathe now " app or something that would send an emoji of a blue, bug eyed smiley face every time they were about to black out.... (And yes I did make them cry pretty regularly as I have a low tolerance for unbridled stupidity).

The education difference is similar given the amount of training a physician goes thru

 

[Marzapan]

I would disagree on same outcome level. There are way more than just filling prescriptions obviously and technicians are in no way qualified.

Not sure just because one can read an EKG, that qualifies him or her to be on the same level. Anyone can be trained to read an EKG honestly.

Anyone can be trained on reading a popup on a screen that tells you there is a drug interaction for a prescription they're filling.

Anyone can be trained on how to take a new prescription, transfer a prescription or deal with controlled substances.

Anyone can be trained on how to look up clinical questions such as side effects of medications on Lexicomp.

There is nothing a pharmacist can do that a tech can't do with additional training. The lobbying power for pharmacists vs. pharmacy technicians are about the same (maybe even an edge for pharmacy techs because their scope keeps expanding while pharmacists are staying stagnant), but physicians have lobbying groups that are still head and shoulders above the rest so it doesn't matter if a "midlevel with additional training can displace physicians" because the physician lobbying groups will never allow for that to happen.

 

[owlegrad]

...but physicians have lobbying groups that are still head and shoulders above the rest so it doesn't matter if a "midlevel with additional training can displace physicians" because the physician lobbying groups will never allow for that to happen.

Pure fiction.

 

[NorthTexasPharmacist]

Anyone can be trained on reading a popup on a screen that tells you there is a drug interaction for a prescription they're filling.

Anyone can be trained on how to take a new prescription, transfer a prescription or deal with controlled substances.

Anyone can be trained on how to look up clinical questions such as side effects of medications on Lexicomp.

There is nothing a pharmacist can do that a tech can't do with additional training. The lobbying power for pharmacists vs. pharmacy technicians are about the same (maybe even an edge for pharmacy techs because their scope keeps expanding while pharmacists are staying stagnant), but physicians have lobbying groups that are still head and shoulders above the rest so it doesn't matter if a "midlevel with additional training can displace physicians" because the physician lobbying groups will never allow for that to happen.

I haven't met any technician who was able to explain why or how drug interactions work or how to even look up a clinical question and be able to adequately look them up and understand enough to convey the information to the patient.

How many techs will understand CYP450 enzymes? Does one need to know in order to tell the patient there is an interaction? probably not but you would need to understand it to make sure you're explaining the interaction correctly.

Would you want someone to just read your EKG? or would you want someone that could have an in-depth understanding of how EKGs work and what it's telling you? To evaluate you as a whole and maybe order other diagnostic tests and exams?

Sadly, our profession has been derailed by greed and now we can't even trust ourselves and think ourselves so much less than we are worth.

Hopefully this can change with effort to regulate PBMs and have a unified voice to defend our profession.

 

[Marzapan]

I haven't met any technician who was able to explain why or how drug interactions work or how to even look up a clinical question and be able to adequately look them up and understand enough to convey the information to the patient.

How many techs will understand CYP450 enzymes? Does one need to know in order to tell the patient there is an interaction? probably not but you would need to understand it to make sure you're explaining the interaction correctly.

Nobody explains the mechanisms behind drug interactions when counseling. The conversation is more like "if you take drug A and drug B together then event C can happen" and that's it. Simple enough for a tech to learn. If you want more information (such as if the patient was a HCP trying to be a smart aleck) then you can dial the hotline to talk to a pharmacist.

Would you want someone to just read your EKG? or would you want someone that could have an in-depth understanding of how EKGs work and what it's telling you? To evaluate you as a whole and maybe order other diagnostic tests and exams?

Of course most people would like a more detailed evaluation, but nobody is going to want it if they have to pay for it. And if consumers don't want to pay for "detailed review of medication profiles/medical histories" then why would companies pay for people to provide that service?

Sadly, our profession has been derailed by greed and now we can't even trust ourselves and think ourselves so much less than we are worth.

It's not greed, it's the lack of a true value proposition leading to companies taking advantage of this situation. Every business and corporation is out to make money, not to do things for the sake of volunteerism or altruism and that is a reality of life. So PBMs minimizing reimbursements to pharmacies is not any more "evil" than pharmacies who mark up their products 80%+ or hospitals who perform unnecessary services to maximize how much they can bill. And speaking of worth, your worth isn't defined by what you think, but what the market thinks. And it's obvious that the market doesn't see the value or need for pharmacists.

Hopefully this can change with effort to regulate PBMs and have a unified voice to defend our profession.

Advanced pharmacy technician scope of practice causing pharmacists to be displaced from jobs has nothing to do with decreased PBM reimbursements.

 

[NorthTexasPharmacist]

Nobody explains the mechanisms behind drug interactions when counseling. The conversation is more like "if you take drug A and drug B together then event C can happen" and that's it. Simple enough for a tech to learn. If you want more information (such as if the patient was a HCP trying to be a smart aleck) then you can dial the hotline to talk to a pharmacist.

Of course most people would like a more detailed evaluation, but nobody is going to want it if they have to pay for it. And if consumers don't want to pay for "detailed review of medication profiles/medical histories" then why would companies pay for people to provide that service?

It's not greed, it's the lack of a true value proposition leading to companies taking advantage of this situation. Every business and corporation is out to make money, not to do things for the sake of volunteerism or altruism and that is a reality of life. So PBMs minimizing reimbursements to pharmacies is not any more "evil" than pharmacies who mark up their products 80%+ or hospitals who perform unnecessary services to maximize how much they can bill. And speaking of worth, your worth isn't defined by what you think, but what the market thinks. And it's obvious that the market doesn't see the value or need for pharmacists.

Advanced pharmacy technician scope of practice causing pharmacists to be displaced from jobs has nothing to do with decreased PBM reimbursements.

Interesting perspective. I may bring this up during the local pharmacists meet up. I can't seem to agree with your point of view but maybe others can.

 

[Xenophylia]

I think the issue is not whether techs can do the job "as well" as a pharmacist. That could be argued all day. The real issue is, can techs do the job good enough (and cheap enough) to satisfy the evil retail overlords. And the answer to that is undoubtedly a resounding "YES". Retail has never been about quality, after all.

 

[DH1987]

In my opinion, yes, techs could take over the job of a pharmacist and probably still perform well enough to satisfy the overlords. But, for those mistakes which can and do happen, they will be missed, and there will be harm done. Techs do not have the deep level understanding of drugs that pharmacists do in order to make the right calls on drug interactions or therapy changes, and I would imagine that such an understanding would be very difficult to self-teach. Techs can learn basic info on drugs from working in a pharmacy, sure - but there's a lot of thought process by good pharmacists that aren't vocalized.

Pharmacy school is also quite rigorous and requires someone who is either quite intelligent or quite disciplined to pass (well, I guess it used to). But many technicians are neither, so that is (was) yet another filter that a person with a pharmacist role has to pass.

 

[Twentytwelve2]

The easiest reasoning is the consistency of tech with competency is far and in between. You have tons of techs who cannot spell or pronounce drug names. A lot of them are bad at math as well. Just saying...

 

[Xenophylia]

In my opinion, yes, techs could take over the job of a pharmacist and probably still perform well enough to satisfy the overlords. But, for those mistakes which can and do happen, they will be missed, and there will be harm done. Techs do not have the deep level understanding of drugs that pharmacists do in order to make the right calls on drug interactions or therapy changes, and I would imagine that such an understanding would be very difficult to self-teach. Techs can learn basic info on drugs from working in a pharmacy, sure - but there's a lot of thought process by good pharmacists that aren't vocalized.

Pharmacy school is also quite rigorous and requires someone who is either quite intelligent or quite disciplined to pass (well, I guess it used to). But many technicians are neither, so that is (was) yet another filter that a person with a pharmacist role has to pass.

But again- errors are the cost of doing business. Retail overlords already accept that and build a business model based upon it. Unless those errors start to go over the imaginary line accepted by the overlords, corporate will be ok with them and leave them to the lawyers. Will they go over the line? We won't know till it happens. I'm pretty sure CVS and Walgreens are willing to take the chance if they can make it legal.

 

[Xenophylia]

I had about one good tech for every 10 idiots. Granted I worked retail grocery- pharmacy was a dirty word- and we were given the worst of the worst. Usually they were those warm bodies who couldn't make change on the front end, but due to age, sex, or ethnicity they could't just outright fire. Managers would tell them "we've decided to put you in pharmacy- you won't have to do anything- no one there does." So they came back with the mentality that the would just play on their phones all day. And that's what most of them did. I tried to have personal cell phone use banned in the pharmacy. Management turned me in to HR for being unreasonably mean to the techs for that and I got written up. And cell phone use continued unabated. And at that point I just stopped trying. I later found out that the pharmacy manager (female) communicated with the techs via text WHILE they were at work in our tiny pharmacy rather than simply speaking to them. She liked seeming "cool" with that age group and apparently none of them actually "spoke" to people anymore since none of them had any social skills. Many would ring rxs up without even acknowledging the customers. They would simply say nothing and stare at their shoes. It was unbelievable.

 

[DH1987]

I had about one good tech for every 10 idiots. Granted I worked retail grocery- pharmacy was a dirty word- and we were given the worst of the worst. Usually they were those warm bodies who couldn't make change on the front end, but due to age, sex, or ethnicity they could't just outright fire. Managers would tell them "we've decided to put you in pharmacy- you won't have to do anything- no one there does." So they came back with the mentality that the would just play on their phones all day. And that's what most of them did. I tried to have personal cell phone use banned in the pharmacy. Management turned me in to HR for being unreasonably mean to the techs for that and I got written up. And cell phone use continued unabated. And at that point I just stopped trying. I later found out that the pharmacy manager (female) communicated with the techs via text WHILE they were at work in our tiny pharmacy rather than simply speaking to them. She liked seeming "cool" with that age group and apparently none of them actually "spoke" to people anymore since none of them had any social skills. Many would ring rxs up without even acknowledging the customers. They would simply say nothing and stare at their shoes. It was unbelievable.

Yeah, it's true, good techs are hard to find. Most of them are either high school or college kids who won't stick around for more than a few months, or people who can't get a job anywhere else. Having worked at many stores for over 4 years now, I can say I've known ~5 techs who I can say were good. But can you really expect anything different? Why would a talented person want to work in such an environment for such low pay?

I remember one store hired a technician who scored somewhere around a 17% on the skills assessment because they were so desperate to find help. Good times...

 

[Xenophylia]

Yeah, it's true, good techs are hard to find. Most of them are either high school or college kids who won't stick around for more than a few months, or people who can't get a job anywhere else. Having worked at many stores for over 4 years now, I can say I've known ~5 techs who I can say were good. But can you really expect anything different? Why would a talented person want to work in such an environment for such low pay?

I remember one store hired a technician who scored somewhere around a 17% on the skills assessment because they were so desperate to find help. Good times...

lol. And any good ones immediately left to go hospital where the pay was twice what retail paid, And the hospitals would pay to have them certified. Hard to compete with that when you offer NOTHING.

 

[Sine Cura]

CVS is gonna hire moar people. Some of them might even be pharmacists.

CVS to hire thousands of pharmacy techs as it prepares for more Covid-19 cases, rollout of vaccine

More than 10,000 of the new hires will be full-time and part-time pharmacy technicians who can help dispense medications and administer Covid-19 tests.

www.cnbc.com

FYI couldn't find an official press release (yet)

The larger workforce could also help CVS prepare for another major phase of the pandemic: The rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine, once it’s available. Federal officials will need to give authorization to companies, including CVS, for pharmacy technicians to administer the vaccines under the supervision of an immunization-certified pharmacist. "

GL with that

 

[Marzapan]

CVS is gonna hire moar people. Some of them might even be pharmacists.

CVS to hire thousands of pharmacy techs as it prepares for more Covid-19 cases, rollout of vaccine

More than 10,000 of the new hires will be full-time and part-time pharmacy technicians who can help dispense medications and administer Covid-19 tests.

www.cnbc.com

FYI couldn't find an official press release (yet)



GL with that

LoL at retail pharmacists (and the head of APhA) clinging on to immunizations as the silver bullet that will save retail pharmacy. Techs will be supervised by an immunization-certified pharmacist? Sounds like a front... there is no way that giving a flu shot is more complicated than giving the covid vaccine so if techs can't even give flu shots today then I see that business model changing very soon...

 

[M0df]

So that's basically extra part time tech per store, working maybe 12-20 hours per week. It might be old news because this hiring spree happened in August/September for flu shots and sounds like they are lumping it all together. They will have time to hire more once Covid vaccine is in mass production.

A lot of those hours are 4 hour shifts. Fridays and Saturdays. It does reduce unemployment!

 

[Sine Cura]

(good) techs (with actual experience and skills) in metro areas typically have better options than working these rando shifts at a chain

what does that leave?

Def not getting 20+ solid applications like with those temp pharmacist positions

 

[deleted562805]

Anyone can be trained on reading a popup on a screen that tells you there is a drug interaction for a prescription they're filling.

Anyone can be trained on how to take a new prescription, transfer a prescription or deal with controlled substances.

Anyone can be trained on how to look up clinical questions such as side effects of medications on Lexicomp.

There is nothing a pharmacist can do that a tech can't do with additional training. The lobbying power for pharmacists vs. pharmacy technicians are about the same (maybe even an edge for pharmacy techs because their scope keeps expanding while pharmacists are staying stagnant), but physicians have lobbying groups that are still head and shoulders above the rest so it doesn't matter if a "midlevel with additional training can displace physicians" because the physician lobbying groups will never allow for that to happen.

The Nursing lobbying group is the most powerful with now expanding roles for NP. And even Physicians are selling out their own profession so they can reduce their own liability and make more money by hiring more NPs in private sector and PAs in hospital sector. There are residency programs giving more importance to PAs and NPs than their own residents. Check the Reddits and even the doctor forums. Also BLS is now 4% for Physicians

AMA used to be powerful, but they become like APHA now. AMA is even advocating for lowering the Trump restrictions on foreign physicians.

 

[deleted562805]

Here is what I don't understand about techs replacing pharmacists. With PAs and nurses, at least they get the education and the training they need to perform some of the tasks physicians do but with pharmacy technicians and pharmacists, the education gap is too great in my opinion.

Corporations care about the bottom line. If a pharmacy tech provides equal outcomes compared to a pharmacist, then they can save even more money. Money over safety.

 

[deleted562805]

Pharmacists are not going to get expanded roles without opposition from the medical board. Since pharmacists couldn't care less about their profession, state boards have the ability to grant technicians more power without worrying about backlash. Aren't they the future of our profession?

Pharmacy techs and AI will become the future of pharmacy. Cedar Sinai is also trying to create a residency program for techs. A pharmacy tech manage 340B in Paul Tran’s hospital where he works making pharmacy pay in Seattle. I think even Idaho has expanded tech roles.

 

[BenJammin]

“We’re estimating a much greater need for trained pharmacy technicians this year given the continued presence of COVID-19 in our communities,” said Lisa Bisaccia, Chief Human Resources Officer, CVS Health. “These jobs offer a rewarding career opportunity, with flexible hours, advancement potential and a supportive environment while helping people on their path to better health.”

Not pharmacists but technicians. They're the ones in demand due to COVID. You 65.8%ers are out of your mind.

 

[rxkrafted]

I can't ever see pharmacy techs replacing pharmacists. I can't imagine them keeping up and remembering all the laws that pertain to pharmacy let alone the clinical stuff. As much as I appreciate my techs, none of them will ever go beyond the bare minimum requirement (if anything) because they assume the pharmacist will take care of it.

 

[Xenophylia]

The money for techs would have to be a LOT better to get any higher level of performance from techs. And with that, they would need ACCOUNTABILITY- which is something techs don't understand at present. If you make the "big bucks", then you have to take your job seriously lest you lose that job. No blaming the supervising pharmacist for every mistake. Until techs are held accountable for what they do they will always be just techs.

 

[Marzapan]

I can't ever see pharmacy techs replacing pharmacists. I can't imagine them keeping up and remembering all the laws that pertain to pharmacy let alone the clinical stuff. As much as I appreciate my techs, none of them will ever go beyond the bare minimum requirement (if anything) because they assume the pharmacist will take care of it.

Pharmacists don't need to memorize that stuff either. Just have an administrator keep track of those things and make printouts to post in the pharmacy.

Inventory check on such and such a date... move C2 rx records to long term storage on such and such a date... beef up controlled substance form to increase number of questions to ask the customer before giving them opioids... that sort of thing. A good administrator will help their staff be more productive by doing things to transform cognitive-oriented tasks into process-oriented tasks that can be repeated over and over again quickly (thereby improving efficiency).

 

[johnpharm01]

Pharmacy techs and AI will become the future of pharmacy. Cedar Sinai is also trying to create a residency program for techs. A pharmacy tech manage 340B in Paul Tran’s hospital where he works making pharmacy pay in Seattle. I think even Idaho has expanded tech roles.

I would agree with you that technology will continue to have an increased role, but technicians as they exist now won't replace pharmacists. If you are a retail tech now there is no accountability, little licensure,and no ownership of basic job responsibilities ie showing up on time. Chains paying low wages keeps them from getting solid candidates. In order to get solid candidates they would have to pay more. This would negate the benefits of using techs to replace pharmacists.

When you ask will techs replace pharmacists you are really asking will someone verify rxs for $15 per hour.

And chains do have quality standards. I have hardly seen a tech be able to meet their own, but they aren't enforced because you have the pharmacist who should magically catch them all. Take the rph away and what happens then.

 

[Gombrich12]

The money for techs would have to be a LOT better to get any higher level of performance from techs. And with that, they would need ACCOUNTABILITY- which is something techs don't understand at present. If you make the "big bucks", then you have to take your job seriously lest you lose that job. No blaming the supervising pharmacist for every mistake. Until techs are held accountable for what they do they will always be just techs.

I'm thinking $25-30/hr would work in much of the country to find capable super-techs, but at that level it's not much further from the $42/hr they are already hiring pharmacists at in some parts. I think they can get wages down to $35/hr for pharmacists before no one takes the job, but we'll see.

 

[Xenophylia]

Yeah really I can see some of these desperate, debt riddled new grads taking $35. Might be enough to make minimum loan payments while still living in mommy and daddy's basement...

 

[deleted562805]

Yeah really I can see some of these desperate, debt riddled new grads taking $35. Might be enough to make minimum loan payments while still living in mommy and daddy's basement...

Better than being homeless. Better than what’s happening to people in Palestine, Yemen, and other war torn countries. Better than living in a hut in Malawi

 

[deleted562805]

I would agree with you that technology will continue to have an increased role, but technicians as they exist now won't replace pharmacists. If you are a retail tech now there is no accountability, little licensure,and no ownership of basic job responsibilities ie showing up on time. Chains paying low wages keeps them from getting solid candidates. In order to get solid candidates they would have to pay more. This would negate the benefits of using techs to replace pharmacists.

When you ask will techs replace pharmacists you are really asking will someone verify rxs for $15 per hour.

And chains do have quality standards. I have hardly seen a tech be able to meet their own, but they aren't enforced because you have the pharmacist who should magically catch them all. Take the rph away and what happens then.

Some chain corporate members are becoming board members for many states. All it takes a slight change in the law to push for more tech roles and to increase accountability for techs. Tech roles like tech check tech, techs administering immunizations. Also, all needs is chage in education to show techs are equal to pharmacists.

2. Chains want to hire someone fast to work retail. Why hire a four year doctorate degree when they can hire someone straight out after graduating high school. Chains are in debt and their stocks are tanking. There are more job positings for techs than pharmacists. Chains are hiring more of techs than pharmacists.
This happening in the medical field too. The private equity groups and Admins in hospital are not paying NPs and PAs more than physicians, but they are hiring more of them.

3. AI can handle almost everything a pharmacist does. AI is just right now not scalable. Technology is always expensive up front, but saves money in the long term. Research IBM Watson on how well it can diagnose compared to the top physicians.

 

[johnpharm01]

Some chain corporate members are becoming board members for many states. All it takes a slight change in the law to push for more tech roles and to increase accountability for techs. Tech roles like tech check tech, techs administering immunizations.

Right. Tommorrow all bops could allow technicians to assume rph duties. My point is not one of legality, more common sense and practicality. Kind of like when migrant workers challenged people to take their jobs. Let techs as they are now run the show. The pharmacy won't open on time, will close when a personal emergency arrives and there will be a 25% error rate. See how happy folks are then.

 

[owlegrad]

Tommorrow all bops could allow technicians to assume rph duties.

So I am no lawyer but surely it would take state legislation (not the whims of a BOP) to make a change that large? I am not suggesting that hurtle is insurmountable just that it will take a little more than a BOP meeting to get it done.

Then again maybe HHS can just put out a memo that says techs can replace pharmacists. Who knows?

 

[awval999]

Can a highly motivated bachelor's degree holder learn on the job and perform staff pharmacist tasks at a traditional community pharmacy, yes, but CVS isn't going to be getting that for $15/hr.

As has been eluded to in this thread, all the good techs are already hired by health systems and already make $20-$25, and that is in the Midwest. The Cali bros can chime in but I'm sure techs are pushing $30+ in the People's Republic. New grad RPh's only make $50/hr.

Will we have tech-check-tech over the next decade, yes. Guess what, those techs are going to want to be paid for it.

We will continue to see pharmacy technician wages increase and pharmacist wages stagnant or decrease.

 

[deleted562805]

Who is Paul tran?

A hospital pharmacist in Seattle Washington who is also YouTube pharmacist, where he discusses about job market etc.

 

[deleted820760]

I can't ever see pharmacy techs replacing pharmacists. I can't imagine them keeping up and remembering all the laws that pertain to pharmacy let alone the clinical stuff. As much as I appreciate my techs, none of them will ever go beyond the bare minimum requirement (if anything) because they assume the pharmacist will take care of it.

You appreciate your techs for doing the bare minimum?

 

[rxkrafted]

You appreciate your techs for doing the bare minimum?

Yeah because they get the job done. I've had techs that wouldn't even fulfill that minimum and that's why they no longer work here