So I had my interview...

[Coleorlo]

Asked 6 professors and 6 P3/P4 students about what they think the job market might look like in 4 years. Got some interesting replies...

One professor said that there will be jobs, just not a lot in the urban sectors. You will have to travel to more rural areas to build up experience and then move to the urban regions.

Another actually asked if I knew what the job market is projected to look like. I said, “yes, it’s suppose to stagnant.” Again, she reiterated the same point that jobs in the rural sector will be available but in the more saturated urban areas there will be few.

One P4 student was more pessimistic about his answer. He said that most of the areas will be saturated. You will need to work extremely hard in graduate school to stand out among the students - join multiple pharmacy clubs and become a leader, intern as a pharm tech, residency, good grades, conduct research etc...

All in all the professors seemed to think jobs will become available as the scope of pharmacy practice continues to expand. However, all urban areas will become saturated so moving to a rural area is almost a necessity to find a job. The pharmacy students believed jobs are available now, but were a little hesitant and uncertain about the future.

I also asked if primary provider status might become available to pharmacists in 4 years - some thought yes and others no.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Whysoez]

Trust the students more simply because their lives depend on it and you bet they are probably the future you advising the current you. Professors probably quite out of touch regarding current state of the job market simply because they have little to no reason to care.

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

One professor said that there will be jobs, just not a lot in the urban sectors. You will have to travel to more rural areas to build up experience and then move to the urban regions.

Another actually asked if I knew what the job market is projected to look like. I said, “yes, it’s suppose to stagnant.” Again, she reiterated the same point that jobs in the rural sector will be available but in the more saturated urban areas there will be few.

All in all the professors seemed to think jobs will become available as the scope of pharmacy practice continues to expand. However, all urban areas will become saturated so moving to a rural area is almost a necessity to find a job. The pharmacy students believed jobs are available now, but were a little hesitant and uncertain about the future.

People who think that way are going to be in for a rude awakening. Think about it from the rural areas’ perspective: why would you hire some random joe schmoe from out of state with no connections who will leave for an urban area the first chance they get? Every state has a pharmacy school so these “rural” places would rather hire someone local who actually wants to live in that area.

I would say instead that the ONLY types of jobs in the future will be the ones with high turnover— those that are located in the hood, or those that are severely understaffed and have impossible metrics to meet but management doesn’t care. The “rural” places are already saturated, and by definition, there aren’t a lot of people living in “rural” areas so they wouldn’t even need very many pharmacists. So to the 15,000 new grads each year, good luck fighting for the 5 jobs available in rural America.

 

[Hels2007]

I went to school in one of those rural flyover country states. If you think those little county seats, population a couple thousand people, want some desperate grads from the coasts, think again. Even fifteen years ago, they did not. 60% of my class were from rural areas, and many of them went back to their hometowns or nearby areas (and some were actually sponsored to go to pharmacy school so they would come back and work there). Pretty much everyone who left the state went back after a few years to raise their families back home.

 

[Coleorlo]

A lot of them thought the scope of pharmacy was going in expand with more collaboration with physicians - of course, this all depends on primary provider status I would assume. What do you guys think?

 

[Hels2007]

A lot of them thought the scope of pharmacy was going in expand with more collaboration with physicians - of course, this all depends on primary provider status I would assume. What do you guys think?

Unless insurers will pay for pharmacist services, it won't matter. Without coverage, it will be at best like flu shots - something to draw patients in so hopefully they don't switch to mail order - which is extra work piled onto the pharmacist, which does not affect the continued cut to hours and pharmacist pay.

 

[PharmtoCS]

A lot of them thought the scope of pharmacy was going in expand with more collaboration with physicians - of course, this all depends on primary provider status I would assume. What do you guys think?

Unless insurers will pay for pharmacist services, it won't matter. Without coverage, it will be at best like flu shots - something to draw patients in so hopefully they don't switch to mail order - which is extra work piled onto the pharmacist, which does not affect the continued cut to hours and pharmacist pay.

Which is something that has been brought up and beaten to death for the last 10 years with nothing to show for.

 

[Hels2007]

All that provider status, pharmacist prescribing, prescription management, yada-yada-yada has been talked about since before I was in pharmacy school and I have a feeling it will continue to be talked about as long as there are fresh suckers eager to hear it.

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

A lot of them thought the scope of pharmacy was going in expand with more collaboration with physicians - of course, this all depends on primary provider status I would assume. What do you guys think?

The value of a pharmacist has traditionally been tied to a dispensing role and that will never change no matter what title you give them (provider status etc). You are not trained on how to even do basic medical diagnoses in pharmacy school so to say that pharmacists can be “primary care providers” is all just a big hoax. Even if schools started changing the curriculum now, there are hundreds of thousands of pharmacists already in the work force who will not be competent to practice as a “provider.”

 

[Coleorlo]

The value of a pharmacist has traditionally been tied to a dispensing role and that will never change no matter what title you give them (provider status etc). You are not trained on how to even do basic medical diagnoses in pharmacy school so to say that pharmacists can be “primary care providers” is all just a big hoax. Even if schools started changing the curriculum now, there are hundreds of thousands of pharmacists already in the work force who will not be competent to practice as a “provider.”

Good point. But do you think with the looming physician shortage pharmacists will take on a more active role in health care for patient? Pharmacists are the most accessible health care. Again, possible grounds for provider status in the future?

 

[Hels2007]

Provider status has been discussed many, many times on the pharmacy forums. Do a search and read what's already been said.

 

[right500]

Born and raised in a rural area:
1) Many, most, even all of the pharmacies in many of these areas/counties have closed due to reimbursement issues and retirements. Therefore low job density.
2) Many of the rural independents are family businesses or owner-operator. Either way they aren't hiring "some kid from the city."
3) The rural areas are saturated but not as bad as the trendy cities. Still no jobs for the easy taking and the hospitals can require residencies. The contractor firms can be selective because they don't want to send pharmacists who fail when alone in a small hospital.

As far as provider status: NPs and PAs can do more for less. We need to come up with valued services that no one else can provide and then bring pressure upon lawmakers. Coumadin clinics won't cut it. Also, we need to be united and vocal.

 

[Hedgehog32]

Born and raised in a rural area:
1) Many, most, even all of the pharmacies in many of these areas/counties have closed due to reimbursement issues and retirements. Therefore low job density.
2) Many of the rural independents are family businesses or owner-operator. Either way they aren't hiring "some kid from the city."
3) The rural areas are saturated but not as bad as the trendy cities. Still no jobs for the easy taking and the hospitals can require residencies. The contractor firms can be selective because they don't want to send pharmacists who fail when alone in a small hospital.

As far as provider status: NPs and PAs can do more for less. We need to come up with valued services that no one else can provide and then bring pressure upon lawmakers. Coumadin clinics won't cut it. Also, we need to be united and vocal.

I'm a P4 student who has recently been in touch with a few recruiters who work for rural hospital networks. I talked with one on the phone last week, and I was pretty surprised to hear that for the last year or so, every time they've posted a pharmacist job listing, they've received 30-50+ applications, with many of them being submitted by residency-trained pharmacists. These are hospitals that are in locales that most people would consider to be highly undesirable (think rural southwestern border towns).

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

Good point. But do you think with the looming physician shortage pharmacists will take on a more active role in health care for patient? Pharmacists are the most accessible health care. Again, possible grounds for provider status in the future?

The primary care physician shortage is being addressed by the growing number of PAs and NPs, both, like others have mentioned, of which have the actual training to see patients and bill for services. Meanwhile, pharmacists’ “scope of practice” has expanded into ancillary areas in that they can “furnish” certain meds now without a prescription and give flu shots. In other words, we will be able to do everything in primary care except anything related to diagnosing and prescribing which is the whole point of being a “provider.”

Add that on to the fact that pharmacists are the most “accessible” health care provider in that anyone can walk into a pharmacy today and consult a pharmacist for free so why would anyone pay to talk to a pharmacist if they could already do it for free? And why would insurances pay for their services if they have traditionally been done for free too?

 

[mentos]

Good point. But do you think with the looming physician shortage pharmacists will take on a more active role in health care for patient? Pharmacists are the most accessible health care. Again, possible grounds for provider status in the future?

No that's what NPs and PAs are for. If by "most accessible", do you mean it's easy to wait at pharmacy consult, ask them about your rash or strep throat only to be told to go see the NP at the Minute Clinic down the hall since pharmacists can't diagnose or prescribe?

 

[TerryTerry]

They are saying it`s going to suck

 

[Coleorlo]

No that's what NPs and PAs are for. If by "most accessible", do you mean it's easy to wait at pharmacy consult, ask them about your rash or strep throat only to be told to go see the NP at the Minute Clinic down the hall since pharmacists can't diagnose or prescribe?

Not sure what they meant by it. Probably just the consultation part. Honestly though, aren’t pharmacists already too busy to consult 50 people throughout the day and still dispense hundreds of prescriptions?

 

[mentos]

Not sure what they meant by it. Probably just the consultation part. Honestly though, aren’t pharmacists already too busy to consult 50 people throughout the day and still dispense hundreds of prescriptions?

Yes if you go to a pharmacy consult you'll have to wait a few minutes and get the stink eye from the pharmacist. Consult is the last thing they want to do. That accessible stuff is just BS that pharmacy schools tell students.

 

[VictorOfHungerGames]

Provider status has been talked about since the 90s apparently. How it looking now after 30 years of talk? Probably stay the same for the next 30 years.

 

[PharmtoCS]

Provider status has been talked about since the 90s apparently. How it looking now after 30 years of talk? Probably stay the same for the next 30 years.

The schools will repackage the idea as a different name as they have done with “clinical pharmacy,” “pharmaceutical care,” etc. and a new batch pre-pharms will drink the koolaid thinking it’s the best thing since sliced bread.

 

[VictorOfHungerGames]

Yes if you go to a pharmacy consult you'll have to wait a few minutes and get the stink eye from the pharmacist. Consult is the last thing they want to do. That accessible stuff is just BS that pharmacy schools tell students.

Not entirely true. I suppose if you work at a chain then there is no such thing as consultation haha but i consult patients throughout the day. At least 15-20 patients. By law, in Texas youre supposed to consult the patient on all new prescriptions anyways. But not because i have to, i actually think it’s imperative clinically and ethically that pharmacist talk to patients.

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

Not entirely true. I suppose if you work at a chain then there is no such thing as consultation haha but i consult patients throughout the day. At least 15-20 patients. By law, in Texas youre supposed to consult the patient on all new prescriptions anyways. But not because i have to, i actually think it’s imperative clinically and ethically that pharmacist talk to patients.

How many of those 15-20 consults actually involve saying something other than what you can read off the label?

 

[VictorOfHungerGames]

How many of those 15-20 consults actually involve saying something other than what you can read off the label?

15-20. If youre just reading off the label then youre a either a horrible pharmacist or didnt study during school. Or not keeping up with your clinical knowledge.

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

15-20. If youre just reading off the label then youre a either a horrible pharmacist or didnt study during school. Or not keeping up with your clinical knowledge.

80%+ of retail pharmacists are horrible pharmacists then. Once in a while you might find someone who actually takes the time to thoroughly counsel a patient and I believe most of these pharmacists are the ones who actually went into pharmacy for the right reasons/want to practice pharmacy. The others went into pharmacy for money, prestige or some other reason so they care only about meeting their metrics, earning their paycheck, and clocking in and out on time.

 

[VictorOfHungerGames]

80%+ of retail pharmacists are horrible pharmacists then. Once in a while you might find someone who actually takes the time to thoroughly counsel a patient and I believe most of these pharmacists are the ones who actually went into pharmacy for the right reasons/want to practice pharmacy. The others went into pharmacy for money, prestige or some other reason so they care only about meeting their metrics, earning their paycheck, and clocking in and out on time.

Well, i wouldn't call 80% of pharmacists horrible. If you're working for a chain, as I said before, you don't really have a choice. Every time I call cvs for a transfer, the one pharmacist that I've gotten to know abit over the phone is always telling me that he's working on stuff from the day before or even 2 days ago. So i'm sure consultation is the last thing on his mind. Which is why chain pharmacies, along with PBMs and money hungry schools, are killing our profession.

 

[Coleorlo]

Update...
Actually just received my admittance letter into their Pharmacy Program. I guess they liked my suit...

 

[Whysoez]

Update...
Actually just received my admittance letter into their Pharmacy Program. I guess they liked my suit...

I hope you can still return your suit, from now on every penny counts.

 

[Coleorlo]

I hope you can still return your suit, from now on every penny counts.

Haha! It was the cheapest in the store!

 

[right500]

Update...
Actually just received my admittance letter into their Pharmacy Program. I guess they liked my suit...

That was awfully quick! And I feel like this is pretty early for acceptances. Does that school have an early decision option?

 

[VictorOfHungerGames]

Update...
Actually just received my admittance letter into their Pharmacy Program. I guess they liked my suit...

Well congrats. Maybe by the time you get out, pharmacy outlook may be different. Maybe as pharmacists, its our duty to make sure that people like you have a better future. Not just your future but for all pharmacists.

 

[Coleorlo]

That was awfully quick! And I feel like this is pretty early for acceptances. Does that school have an early decision option?

It’s Ferris State University in Big Rapids, Michigan. They do have a early decision option, but I didn’t apply for that. It’s just a rolling admission process so I applied as early as possible. Luckily it just happened to be quick I guess!

 

[Coleorlo]

Well congrats. Maybe by the time you get out, pharmacy outlook may be different. Maybe as pharmacists, its our duty to make sure that people like you have a better future. Not just your future but for all pharmacists.

Dang, I like you my guy haha! Thanks for that!

 

[Hels2007]

I hope you can still return your suit, from now on every penny counts.

Only if it a cheap one. If it is a nice suit, keep it for jobs/residencies/fellowship interview - in four years, you won't even have pennies to count!

 

[rxkrafted]

A lot of them thought the scope of pharmacy was going in expand with more collaboration with physicians - of course, this all depends on primary provider status I would assume. What do you guys think?

They need to stop bringing up this provider status bs... Over the years, ARNPs and PAs have been growing pretty fast and they can do a lot more independently (diagnose, treat, prescribe) so what services do you think pharmacists are going to collect reimbursement on that these professions can't provide? MTMs are gonna save the pharmacy profession? LOL
Majority of our jobs lie in retail and you already know how that's been going over the years... 24-hour stores have been closing down/cutting down hours, cutting down pharmacy store hours, closing of stores too close to each other, etc.

 

[PSOP Student]

That was awfully quick! And I feel like this is pretty early for acceptances. Does that school have an early decision option?

They need to get as many suckers are possible before the suckers catch onto the scam. Sign them up and take their money, early decisions help fill seats faster and the school also scare the students by giving them a weeks time limit. If those seats are empty, the school will lose money, so catch the unaware as early as possible and make them commit their HUGE loan to you.

 

[TerryTerry]

They need to get as many suckers are possible before the suckers catch onto the scam. Sign them up and take their money, early decisions help fill seats faster and the school also scare the students by giving them a weeks time limit. If those seats are empty, the school will lose money, so catch the unaware as early as possible and make them commit their HUGE loan to you.

I don`t think students will ever stop go to pharmacy school as long as government give out money almost unconditionally.
For these kids, promise of doctorate degree and 4 years of independence are worth risking their entire life. They are so proud to present themselves to people around them as pharmacy student more than anything and will not worry about future until future hits them.

 

[VictorOfHungerGames]

I don`t think students will ever stop go to pharmacy school as long as government give out money almost unconditionally.
For these kids, promise of doctorate degree and 4 years of independence are worth risking their entire life. They are so proud to present themselves to people around them as pharmacy student more than anything and will not worry about future until future hits them.

I can see that but as you’re probably aware, there is a student loan debt crisis brewing right now. Not sure how much longer government will play dumb and just hand out loans. This would be another factor for schools down sizing or closing down. Im sure theyre gonna be doing cost analysis and see that pharmacy job market sucks, there is unusual high amount of unemployment among pharmacists and way too many schools. Leading to money being just wasted.

 

[Dred Pirate]

All that provider status, pharmacist prescribing, prescription management, yada-yada-yada has been talked about since before I was in pharmacy school and I have a feeling it will continue to be talked about as long as there are fresh suckers eager to hear it.

yup - I remember hearing it back in 1999 when I was applying.....

 

[Hels2007]

If I remember correctly, it started back in the 70s when PharmD started to be awarded (my alma mater was the third school in the country to award it)… it's just one of the many buzzwords, along with "personalized medicine", "clinical services", etc. So for kids applying to pharmacy school today, discussions about provider status have been going on for more than twice as long as you have been alive. And the worst thing is not that it is likely to continue in the same limbo until the end of your careers, but even if it does not, it won't be any improvement, the moment has passed and it's only talked about because the talking heads need something to talk about.

Here is Lord1999's excellent summary: Pharmacist and Provider Status

 

[spacecowgirl]

Expanded scope have been hearing that recycled tripe for a decade.

 

[DruggieDoRight]

30 years of talking about provider status and a handful of states allow it, and specifically put exclusions for the insurance to not pay pharmacists. What a joke.