Rumor About Pharmacy Accreditation

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Sparda29

Sparda29

En Taro Adun
Lifetime Donor
Verified Member
Pharmacist
Verified Expert
15+ Year Member
Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
9,847
Reaction score
1,843
Points
5,791
Age
39
Location
New York, New York
  1. Pharmacist
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I've heard a rumor about the boards of pharmacy in some states considering to put a cap on the amount of prescriptions a pharmacist can fill daily. I've been told its in the range of 150-200. Therefore, if a pharmacy fills 300 scripts, they are required to have 2 pharmacists on that day.

If there is any truth to this? Will this requirement be good?

It's good because it will increase the demand for pharmacists because it will force pharmacies to hire more pharmacists. However, it will then increase costs to the pharmacies. Chains would probably be able to handle it, but would the independent pharmacies survive that kind of increased cost?
 
Sparda29 said:
I've heard a rumor about the boards of pharmacy in some states considering to put a cap on the amount of prescriptions a pharmacist can fill daily. I've been told its in the range of 150-200. Therefore, if a pharmacy fills 300 scripts, they are required to have 2 pharmacists on that day.

If there is any truth to this? Will this requirement be good?

It's good because it will increase the demand for pharmacists because it will force pharmacies to hire more pharmacists. However, it will then increase costs to the pharmacies. Chains would probably be able to handle it, but would the independent pharmacies survive that kind of increased cost?
Click to expand...
I can see this being a good concept, but doesn't really seem practical, especially at the limit of 150-200. What if you're at 199 and a patient walks up with two rx? I can see going by average weekly rx volume (similar to corporation tech hours) maybe, but it's still going to be hard to enforce I'd think. Not to mention 200/day isn't exactly high volume.
 
Sparda29 said:
I've heard a rumor about the boards of pharmacy in some states considering to put a cap on the amount of prescriptions a pharmacist can fill daily. I've been told its in the range of 150-200. Therefore, if a pharmacy fills 300 scripts, they are required to have 2 pharmacists on that day.

If there is any truth to this? Will this requirement be good?

It's good because it will increase the demand for pharmacists because it will force pharmacies to hire more pharmacists. However, it will then increase costs to the pharmacies. Chains would probably be able to handle it, but would the independent pharmacies survive that kind of increased cost?
Click to expand...

This has been tried in several states has as been smacked down by the big pharmacy corporations. The argument is a state government does not have the right to tell a business how to run its business. North Carolina was the last state I read about and I believe they are currently being sued. Here is a great link from the Texas Board of Pharmacy. Mind you this was from 2003 and things have gotten markedly worse since then.

http://www.tsbp.state.tx.us/files_pdf/Working Conditions.pdf

The best line from the whole statement
"In summary, TSBP encourages pharmacists to be valuable employees and pharmacy owners to be good employers.
Rev. 08/03
Click to expand...

Yeah thats worked out really good!
 
I see this as a good concept (maybe 250 or 300, not 200/day), and if the number goes up, another pharmacist could be hired (so scripts per pharmacist), so then it'll be on the company's conscience that the scripts weren't filled. This would also create new jobs for pharmacists 🙂
 
And I don't understand the fact that states are being sued. You don't see the federal government being sued for requiring a maximum of a 40-hour work week for hourly employees (or is it states? still, not interfering with business). You don't see the states that require a lunch break at work being sued. A state can basically pass whatever laws aren't in the US constitution. Employees' rights are not a part of interstate commerce (as the same amt. of scripts could still be filled with more pharmacists at the store).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
pharm B said:
MountainPharmD, it's because of you I saw that document a while back. I bring it up any time someone asks why we can't have a stool in the pharmacy. "Because we're good employees, working for a good employer." 😀
Click to expand...

That sucks. The director of pharmacy here is outranked by a VP who is just a nurse. I don't get how a nurse has a say in pharmacy operations. She tried coming in here one time to remove the chairs. Also, she doesn't want food in the pharmacy. And she thinks we're overpaid. The problem is that our DOP is easily pushed around and his boss is a feminazi on a power trip (apparently she became very mean after she caught her husband in bed with another nurse from here).
 
Sparda29 said:
That sucks. The director of pharmacy here is outranked by a VP who is just a nurse. I don't get how a nurse has a say in pharmacy operations. She tried coming in here one time to remove the chairs. Also, she doesn't want food in the pharmacy. And she thinks we're overpaid. The problem is that our DOP is easily pushed around and his boss is a feminazi on a power trip (apparently she became very mean after she caught her husband in bed with another nurse from here).
Click to expand...

Nurses have a lot of power at most hospitals. Most of CEO/CNO have nursing backgrounds.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Sparda29 said:
That sucks. The director of pharmacy here is outranked by a VP who is just a nurse. I don't get how a nurse has a say in pharmacy operations. She tried coming in here one time to remove the chairs. Also, she doesn't want food in the pharmacy. And she thinks we're overpaid. The problem is that our DOP is easily pushed around and his boss is a feminazi on a power trip (apparently she became very mean after she caught her husband in bed with another nurse from here).
Click to expand...

The VP is not just a nurse. She is a VP. If you don't see how a VP>DOP then I suggest learning how to read an organizational chart. As for her thinking that yall are overpaid, do you think she is overpaid? In my experence most people think that OTHER PEOPLE are overpaid.

Why would you have food in a hospital pharmacy? Hour long lunch break is not enough? :laugh:
 
Like someone mentioned above, this is already going on in North Carolina. I personally feel that it is great idea. I check almost 400 scripts a day with no overlap on most days. I have overlap every other Monday and Tuesday I work. And they expect me to immunize on top of it all. As far as the lawsuits go, it shouldn't be about how a company runs a business, but how pharmacy is practiced. It is a public health issue. The more stressed a person is with a ridiculous workload, more mistakes will be made which will put the public at risk. If more states do this, this will also answer some of the concerns will all the new schools opening up because there will be a need for more pharmacists. I hope this gains some ground. The chains make enough profit to hire new pharmacists. They are just greedy and want to overwork their employees while they line their pockets. These kind of laws would also make it more feasible for pharmacists to immunize more and do things like MTM when they reach their script limit. This would help advance the profession from beyond a purely dispensing role.
 
Sparda29 said:
That sucks. The director of pharmacy here is outranked by a VP who is just a nurse. I don't get how a nurse has a say in pharmacy operations. She tried coming in here one time to remove the chairs. Also, she doesn't want food in the pharmacy. And she thinks we're overpaid. The problem is that our DOP is easily pushed around and his boss is a feminazi on a power trip (apparently she became very mean after she caught her husband in bed with another nurse from here).
Click to expand...


I would agree that you, Sparda... are definitely overpaid. :meanie:

No food in the pharmacy is not something that she's saying on a whim. If there is food or drink in the pharmacy when inspectors come, you'll get nailed.
 
All4MyDaughter said:
I would agree that you, Sparda... are definitely overpaid. :meanie:

No food in the pharmacy is not something that she's saying on a whim. If there is food or drink in the pharmacy when inspectors come, you'll get nailed.
Click to expand...

I get $14.50/hr, the same thing I used to get at CVS. This facility is one of the lower paid facilities in the area but people stay because its low stress and a relaxed environment.

Yes, she is saying it on a whim because she brought food into the pharmacy before. Find me the state law that says food is not allowed in the pharmacy. You cannot store food in the same refrigerator as medications, but there is no law against having food and drinks on your desk in the pharmacy.

@Owelgrad - it's a nursing home. I work at nights and I come straight there from rotations. Therefore, I had lunch at rotations and by 8PM, I'm starving. We usually order dinner.

She's a VP that started out as a per-diem nurse and went up the ranks to a VP. The Director of Pharmacy should not answer to anyone except to the board. She has no background in how a pharmacy works, therefore she should have no say in how the pharmacy works.
 
I have a family member who is a nurse and worked up the ranks to CEO.

I would hardly consider that person "just a nurse" - they are the CEO and therefore above everyone else at the hospital. I would rather have "just a nurse" as my boss than some jackass business major.
 
Sparda29 said:
She's a VP that started out as a per-diem nurse and went up the ranks to a VP. The Director of Pharmacy should not answer to anyone except to the board. She has no background in how a pharmacy works, therefore she should have no say in how the pharmacy works.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense. So in order to run a hospital you must have been a nurse/pharmacist/MD? I don't understand what you are trying to say. The DOP doesn't own the pharmacy, they are an employee and have a boss, just like everyone else at the hospital. Obviously the CEO of a hospital can't have a background in every section of a hospital.

If you want to only answer to the board own a pharmacy. If you are an employee suck it up and do what your boss says. Something about having a cake as well as eating it.
 
Sparda29 said:
I've heard a rumor about the boards of pharmacy in some states considering to put a cap on the amount of prescriptions a pharmacist can fill daily. I've been told its in the range of 150-200. Therefore, if a pharmacy fills 300 scripts, they are required to have 2 pharmacists on that day.

If there is any truth to this? Will this requirement be good?

It's good because it will increase the demand for pharmacists because it will force pharmacies to hire more pharmacists. However, it will then increase costs to the pharmacies. Chains would probably be able to handle it, but would the independent pharmacies survive that kind of increased cost?
Click to expand...

I had heard that the law they were trying to enact was not that the pharmacy was required to have x number of pharmacists per x number of prescriptions, but rather, if any one pharmacist filled over a certain number in a day, and they made an error, the employer would be held liable, not the pharmacist. Therefore, while it wouldn't be a mandate to hire a pharmacist, it would be in the best interest of the employer to hire some extra manpower if the store generally is a busier store. I could be way off. Although if this is the rule, I think this actually bodes better for our profession than if the way you presented it is accurate.
 
MountainPharmD said:
This has been tried in several states has as been smacked down by the big pharmacy corporations. The argument is a state government does not have the right to tell a business how to run its business. North Carolina was the last state I read about and I believe they are currently being sued. Here is a great link from the Texas Board of Pharmacy. Mind you this was from 2003 and things have gotten markedly worse since then.
Click to expand...

So according to the power players at major corporations, people not involved in pharmacy don't have the right to make mandates about how to run a pharmacy.

I hope the irony isn't lost on anybody here.
 
rofl

pharm chain lobbying budget >>>>>>>> practitioner lobbying budget

throw in lack of public interest/outrage, any bill is DOA.
 
Interesting topic

But if a 200 script/day limit was imposed, I think CVS/Wags would just hire 4+ pharmacists, and send each one home after 2-3 hours... every day. I bet the pharmacy computer system would be set to lock you out after you fill your 200th script.

At busier stores, pharmacists would end up working 15-20 hours/week, over 7 days. Part-time pay, along with part-time benefits. Corporate America wins again!

We need independents to take over the community setting, and pharmacists should support this as much as possible. But how? (seriously, any ideas?)
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Sparda29 said:
Yes, she is saying it on a whim because she brought food into the pharmacy before. Find me the state law that says food is not allowed in the pharmacy. You cannot store food in the same refrigerator as medications, but there is no law against having food and drinks on your desk in the pharmacy.
Click to expand...


It is not a state law. It is JCHAO. My hospital has the same rules. It also means no food at nursing stations or any place were patient care is taking place.

As far as having a problem with a nurse being a VP / CEO/ whatever...what do you think other professions think when pharmacists are running things? It does occasionally happen. The VP of Patient Care Operations is a former nurse at my institution, and she is the boss of the DOP. We occasionally have problems with her, but the reality is that she is a VP now, NOT a nurse. A boss is a boss is a boss.
 
fattunesy said:
It is not a state law. It is JCHAO. My hospital has the same rules. It also means no food at nursing stations or any place were patient care is taking place.

As far as having a problem with a nurse being a VP / CEO/ whatever...what do you think other professions think when pharmacists are running things? It does occasionally happen. The VP of Patient Care Operations is a former nurse at my institution, and she is the boss of the DOP. We occasionally have problems with her, but the reality is that she is a VP now, NOT a nurse. A boss is a boss is a boss.
Click to expand...


Yep. No food is an accreditation thing. We have mock inspections all the time at my facility and they are always harping about no food or drinks outside of the breakroom. If someone has an office that is within the pharmacy but separate (like, it has it's own door) they can have food in the office. Desks that are in the general part of the pharmacy = no food and drink.

And it would be VERY unusual for the DOP to directly report to "the board" of an organization (as Sparda suggested). Usually only the CEO reports to "the board." I'd say that in most places, the pharmacy is ultimately the responsibility of someone who isn't a pharmacist (the CEO or a VP or whoever). In my hospital, our DOP reports to one of the members of "The Quad" which is a group of four administrators that then report to the Medical Center Director. None of the members of The Quad are pharmacists but one of them still oversees pharmacy. For that matter, none of them are housekeepers or cooks, but they still oversee Housekeeping and the cafeteria.
 
All4MyDaughter said:
Yep. No food is an accreditation thing. We have mock inspections all the time at my facility and they are always harping about no food or drinks outside of the breakroom. If someone has an office that is within the pharmacy but separate (like, it has it's own door) they can have food in the office. Desks that are in the general part of the pharmacy = no food and drink.

And it would be VERY unusual for the DOP to directly report to "the board" of an organization (as Sparda suggested). Usually only the CEO reports to "the board." I'd say that in most places, the pharmacy is ultimately the responsibility of someone who isn't a pharmacist (the CEO or a VP or whoever). In my hospital, our DOP reports to one of the members of "The Quad" which is a group of four administrators that then report to the Medical Center Director. None of the members of The Quad are pharmacists but one of them still oversees pharmacy. For that matter, none of them are housekeepers or cooks, but they still oversee Housekeeping and the cafeteria.
Click to expand...

+1

Although I think Sparda meant pharmacist should only report to the board of pharmacy, not members of management/administration. I might be mistaken but I think he meant that pharmacists should not be held accountable by the organization that they work for. Doesn't make any sense, I know. I might be wrong.

Edit: Interestingly enough, if you only want pharmacists as your boss, work CVS. I can draw a line from myself to the CEO and everyone between us is a pharmacist. This is exactly how it was explained during my orientation at least. You would never find that at a hospital!
 
owlegrad said:
+1

Although I think Sparda meant pharmacist should only report to the board of pharmacy, not members of management/administration. I might be mistaken but I think he meant that pharmacists should not be held accountable by the organization that they work for. Doesn't make any sense, I know. I might be wrong.
Click to expand...

Whichever way he meant it... it's wrong. 🙂
 
owlegrad said:
The VP is not just a nurse. She is a VP. If you don't see how a VP>DOP then I suggest learning how to read an organizational chart. As for her thinking that yall are overpaid, do you think she is overpaid? In my experence most people think that OTHER PEOPLE are overpaid.

Why would you have food in a hospital pharmacy? Hour long lunch break is not enough? :laugh:
Click to expand...

Pharmacy should, like, stand alone and be independent... kinda like the Vatican with the DOP playing the role of the pope, or some s---.
 
owlegrad said:
+1

Although I think Sparda meant pharmacist should only report to the board of pharmacy, not members of management/administration. I might be mistaken but I think he meant that pharmacists should not be held accountable by the organization that they work for. Doesn't make any sense, I know. I might be wrong.

Edit: Interestingly enough, if you only want pharmacists as your boss, work CVS. I can draw a line from myself to the CEO and everyone between us is a pharmacist. This is exactly how it was explained during my orientation at least. You would never find that at a hospital!
Click to expand...

What I meant is that the Director of Pharmacy should only have to report the Chief of Medicine or some kind of VP of Pharmacy.
 
Sparda29 said:
What I meant is that the Director of Pharmacy should only have to report the Chief of Medicine or some kind of VP of Pharmacy.
Click to expand...

What would the "VP of Pharmacy" do and who would they report to? I can't imagine there being a need for a position like that.

owlegrad said:
Why would you have food in a hospital pharmacy? Hour long lunch break is not enough? :laugh:
Click to expand...

Guaranteed lunch breaks in hospital pharmacy are a myth. As a resident I manage to take actual lunch breaks more than our pharmacists (staff and clinical). I saw this at several rotations also.
 
ucrx said:
What would the "VP of Pharmacy" do and who would they report to? I can't imagine there being a need for a position like that.



Guaranteed lunch breaks in hospital pharmacy are a myth. As a resident I manage to take actual lunch breaks more than our pharmacists (staff and clinical). I saw this at several rotations also.
Click to expand...

I can only speak or my hospital. We close the pharmacy from 11:-12:00 for lunch. If it is an emergency of course the pharmacist still has to respond, but I have not yet seen that happen.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
owlegrad said:
I can only speak or my hospital. We close the pharmacy from 11:-12:00 for lunch. If it is an emergency of course the pharmacist still has to respond, but I have not yet seen that happen.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm just unlucky.
 
owlegrad said:
I can only speak or my hospital. We close the pharmacy from 11:-12:00 for lunch. If it is an emergency of course the pharmacist still has to respond, but I have not yet seen that happen.
Click to expand...

If you don't mind me asking, how large is your hospital and pharmacy department?
 
Praziquantel86 said:
If you don't mind me asking, how large is your hospital and pharmacy department?
Click to expand...

Hospital - 90 beds. Pharmacy - not sure, maybe 500 square feet? :laugh:
Nah, j/k. Two full time pharmacists, two per diam pharmacist, two ft techs and myself.
 
"government can't tell a business how to run a business" ?

I want to ask them: do you think pilots should be allowed to fly as many hours per day as the airlines want them to?

MountainPharmD said:
This has been tried in several states has as been smacked down by the big pharmacy corporations. The argument is a state government does not have the right to tell a business how to run its business. North Carolina was the last state I read about and I believe they are currently being sued. Here is a great link from the Texas Board of Pharmacy. Mind you this was from 2003 and things have gotten markedly worse since then.

http://www.tsbp.state.tx.us/files_pdf/Working Conditions.pdf

The best line from the whole statement

Yeah thats worked out really good!
Click to expand...
 
firework said:
"government can't tell a business how to run a business" ?

I want to ask them: do you think pilots should be allowed to fly as many hours per day as the airlines want them to?
Click to expand...

You guys are all dancing around the point here. The government regulates business everyday. Why do you think we have a State Board of Pharmacy? It is why we have OSHA, the consumer product safety commision and agencies like the EPA and the DEA. What one thing ties all these together? Public safety.

The big chains are arguing that prescriptions filled per day is not a public safety issue. They are arguing that regulating the amount of prescriptions per day is an illegal intrusion by the goverment into business. Proprietary business information would have to be disclosed to The State Board of Pharmacy. This disclosure could hurt the business and there argument is it is illegal for the government to do this.

I along with every other pharmacist would agree that the amount of prescriptions a pharmacist fills in one day is a public saftey issue. It should be no surprise the big chains do not see it this way.
 
Sure this will require more pharmacists on staff and create more jobs but at the same time I think that companies will lower hourly wages to make up for something like this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Pharmacy managers: First day at a long-term care pharmacy
Replies
0
Views
2K
bigpilllilpill
B
N
Any resource recommendations for Texas pharmacy law?
Replies
2
Views
537
baronzb
B
I
Career Change to Pharmacy
Replies
9
Views
4K
lord999
lord999
WildWing
[Announcement] 2025 Walmart Community Pharmacy Scholarship
Replies
0
Views
3K
WildWing
WildWing
R
Thinking of leaving pharmacy school
Replies
7
Views
5K
gracefuldoc
G
Top Bottom