What do you think will happen with pharmacy as a profession?

[samurai361]

I just wanted to conduct a psuedo-scientific poll and see how many think pharmacy is headed in a bad direction. I read many threads about this but I see the same people responding.

ps, sorry for the shorthand in the second option, I ran out of room Thanks for responding!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[297point1]

The first choice makes no sense at all.

If it's hard to find a job regardless of where you are, doesn't that increase the competitiveness of the profession?

 

[IrishHammer]

The first choice makes no sense at all.

If it's hard to find a job regardless of where you are, doesn't that increase the competitiveness of the profession?

I think the OP meant the competitiveness of admittance. If there are 250 schools with a class size of 150, suddenly it's a lot easier for anybody to get in.

 

[Passion4Sci]

That had to be what he meant...

 

[Its Z]

Those choosing option 2 are delusional.

In hindsight, 10+ years of pharmacist shortage from the mid 90's to last few years has been the worst event for the pharmacy profession. It led to greedy educators opening up diploma shops (irreversible damage) along with greedy pharmacists jumping on the signon bonuses and 6 figure salaries.

Of course hospital pharmacists enjoyed the ride as well.

Call it tipping point or boiling point. The impact of oversupply of pharmacists isn't going to happen gradually over the years. I suspect it will happen dramatically depending on the region. Using an analogy, it takes a while to bring a pot of water to boil. It doesn't boil until it reaches 100 degrees. But when it gets there, it boils vigorously. If your region is saturated today, then the c/o 2011 will take the blunt of the impact of pharmacist oversupply. Unless something drastic happens that will increase the demand of pharmacist services, we're in for a rough ride of decline.

 

[Passion4Sci]

I'll just throw some salt in, baby. Van't hoff of 2, we got some action.

 

[Its Z]

I'll just throw some salt in, baby. Van't hoff of 2, we got some action.

That's like some schools not getting the funding hence decision to not open a pharm school.

 

[Passion4Sci]

That's like some schools not getting the funding hence decision to not open a pharm school.

I'm OK with that.

If I throw an entire kilo of salt into the water, does that mean NAPLEX would be as hard as CPJE? Because that'd work too.

 

[Its Z]

I'm OK with that.

If I throw an entire kilo of salt into the water, does that mean NAPLEX would be as hard as CPJE? Because that'd work too.

Yup. And make residency a requirement for licensure for all new grads..

As we slowly increase our residency slots to 5,000 over next 10 years and no more.

 

[womp]

OP needs a lesson on supply and demand.

 

[p-rog]

I'm OK with that.

If I throw an entire kilo of salt into the water, does that mean NAPLEX would be as hard as CPJE? Because that'd work too.

Yup. And make residency a requirement for licensure for all new grads..

As we slowly increase our residency slots to 5,000 over next 10 years and no more.

Not sure if you guys are joking or what, but I wouldn't think either of those two things will actually help in the long run. Once they graduate,they will eventually make it into the pharmacist job market.

 

[Passion4Sci]

Not sure if you guys are joking or what, but I wouldn't think either of those two things will actually help in the long run. Once they graduate,they will eventually make it into the pharmacist job market.

Wait, so you don't think closing schools / stopping new schools from opening will at all help the prognosis for our ailing profession?

 

[VCU07]

The job market is rough as of right now, especially in my region. It is very difficult to find a job, especially in hospitals. We have applicants with residencies begging for staff positions at this point. They are opening another pharm. school here in GA and with the way the economy and job market is right now, it isn't going to help. Nothing against the new pharm. school as I think it will provide a great education...just not sure how it will impact those pharmacists working in this area when their first class graduates in 4 yrs. There is speculation both ways on pharmacy demand with the baby boomers coming to age and more med. usage on the horizon.

No profession is without question as to its future, but pharmacy is one in which I think much will change either for the better or worse. Only time will tell. I think the pharmacy organizations do what they can, but with bigger and more powerful organizations against us on some aspects of pharmacy practice, we can't win. Nurses and PAs wants to expand their scopes, physicians want to limit aspects of it, and pharmacists want more. Who will win? Where will be the compromise? It is my hope that pharmacists will be able to obtain their goals and I fully support that.

 

[IndustryPharmD]

Ask a wrong question, get a wrong answer... But I am feeling serious, for a change.

The profession of pharmacy in 50 years will probably have little in common with what it is today. Just like the profession of pharmacy today is very different from what it was back in 1930s, say. How it will affect the demand curve still remains to be seen as there are so many arbitrary factors going into play, including legislation (think how pharmacy profession would be different if FDCA was NOT passed in 1939), and legislation is always political rather than realistic.

As far as the supply side... my experience taught me that if you are just the person the employer needs - it doesn't matter whether your competition is one person or one hundred people, it will go to you. Same thing, if you are not a good fit for the position - it doesn't matter how much competition you have, they may even go without for a while rather than go with you. So find your niche... And always have at least three solid back-up plans.

 

[UNMorBUST]

I stopped reading the poll when OP used b and u to fill in for words.

 

[womp]

my experience taught me that if you are just the person the employer needs - it doesn't matter whether your competition is one person or one hundred people, it will go to you. Same thing, if you are not a good fit for the position - it doesn't matter how much competition you have, they may even go without for a while rather than go with you. So find your niche... And always have at least three solid back-up plans.

You have a mindbogglingly naive perspective on job hunting.

To illustrate, here is 700 job applications for a single janitor position:

http://www.cantonrep.com/news/x1569321039/Stark-s-hottest-job-Janitor

Do you honestly think that out of those 700 applications, there is only 1 lucky chap who is capable of janitorial work and fits these requirements of the school:

• "Enjoys student interaction, even if the position is for after-school hours. So if you don't like children, your chances are slim."

• "Plans to stay in the position for long time. An applicant who sees this position as a short-term solution until the economy improves could be out."

At some point, other arbitrary criteria come into play as a screener (think the crapshoot nature of med school apps). And worse, for most lucrative jobs, the spot has already been predetermined to an acquaintance or connection, and the listing was just CYA formalities.

Chances are, the person who actually gets the job is neither the most capable nor has the best fit. That's life.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

Yup. And make residency a requirement for licensure for all new grads..

As we slowly increase our residency slots to 5,000 over next 10 years and no more.

Great idea. Seriously. It's sad that this is what its going to come down to, but that would work.

Go take over the ACPE.

 

[StriveForGlory]

It will most likely get bad. But it is just impossible to speculate at this point, and it annoys me that so many people are willing to do so. We have no idea what is going to happen when the economy lifts up again. We have no idea what will happen once more people realize that there is a surplus. We have no idea how the role of the pharmacists will change. Those three things are tremendous forces in determining what will happen and how it will affect pharmacists.

There will most likely be a surplus just because of the current status of the economy and the number of new school and new grads coming out of these schools. But honestly what can you really say about this? That wages are going to go down? Are you sure? Maybe there will just be more competition for the same positions. Maybe they will go down. And what about the people thinking about college realizing that there is no longer a surplus? Do you know how that will affect their decision? And what happens when the economy goes back up and all these huge chains see all the profit that they can make once more. Maybe they'll open more stores. Maybe they wont. And what about the exponential increase in the population? New pharmacist roles? Collaborative practice? Possible prescribing rights?

There are soooo many things to consider that I cant even begin to fathom how people are making any kinds of judgments so prematurely. I understand there might be a need to speculate and I respect those who do so reasonable. But dont say absurd things based on nothing.

Chances are, the person who actually gets the job is neither the most capable nor has the best fit. That's life.

Absolutely. And chances are the person that gets the job also knows people. Thats how it always was and thats the way it will remain especially if there is a potential surplus looming.

 

[Praziquantel86]

Great idea. Seriously. It's sad that this is what its going to come down to, but that would work.

Go take over the ACPE.

Someone needs to do it. I think it's only a matter of time before a serious push is made, hopefully by AACP.

Between creating new, vague standards that leave vastly different experiential standards between schools, a lack of standardization of admissions criteria (or even general guidelines) and the overall poor ability to create and/or enforce accreditation standards that guarantee students a quality education, the ACPE is completely useless. It seems that the only thing they have a vested interest in is allowing as many schools as possible to become accredited, and therefore, lining their pockets with inspection and review fees.

 

[IndustryPharmD]

You have a mindbogglingly naive perspective on job hunting.

I am a few years and a few ranks out of the random worker bee positions, be it janitorial or pharmacist (retail or hospital staff entry-level). And yes, once you get to a certain level (of expertise and/or career ladder) - it is all about what you are and who you know, and the match between you and your job.

To illustrate, a completely hypothetical example, as I don't want to go into personal stories (I am a bit superstitious ). One of the best transplantation pharmacy specialists in the world would not be competing with the new grads. Therefore, it is completely irrelevant whether there is a thousand of them or ten thousand of them. He would't want the jobs they would be applying for, and they wouldn't be eligible for the jobs he would be applying for.

Though I guess my perception is skewed because of where I am in my life. The developing situation isn't so much endangering those of us already well on track in our careers, it's the poor suckers who are just entering pharmacy profession now and will be entering it in the near future who will suffer.

Of course, easier to bemoan the intense competition for the entry-level jobs everyone is eligible for than to accept that you (hypothetical you, so don't take it personally ) are a lazy arse (or a loser, whichever sounds less grating). But it is also true that getting the magical first step towards being uniquely qualified is often pure luck... so some good people will not get where they maybe deserve to be. That's why those smart enough/driven enough should try to break out from the pack, and the earlier they start, the easier it would be. Success has many more ingredients than luck. Having the right personality and knowing when is the right place and right time to do what helps enormously. Those who don't even try... well, I find it difficult to feel bad that an average joe shmoe isn't going to be getting an easy ride without having to do much at all other than show up.

And in any case, wast majority of people will just play the numbers game that so many posters here are worried about (in most cases, justifiably so). Unique can't be common, that would just defeat the purpose. But it sure is more fun being uniquely qualified. Not just in terms of job prospects, but moreso in terms of job satisfaction.

PS Sorry if the post is a bit disjointed, it has been written in installments over two hour interval interrupted by making homemade tortellini from scratch and a couple phone calls.

 

[type b pharmD]

I am a few years and a few ranks out of the random worker bee positions, be it janitorial or pharmacist (retail or hospital staff entry-level). And yes, once you get to a certain level (of expertise and/or career ladder) - it is all about what you are and who you know, and the match between you and your job.

To illustrate, a completely hypothetical example, as I don't want to go into personal stories (I am a bit superstitious ). One of the best transplantation pharmacy specialists in the world would not be competing with the new grads. Therefore, it is completely irrelevant whether there is a thousand of them or ten thousand of them. He would't want the jobs they would be applying for, and they wouldn't be eligible for the jobs he would be applying for.

Though I guess my perception is skewed because of where I am in my life. The developing situation isn't so much endangering those of us already well on track in our careers, it's the poor suckers who are just entering pharmacy profession now and will be entering it in the near future who will suffer.

Of course, easier to bemoan the intense competition for the entry-level jobs everyone is eligible for than to accept that you (hypothetical you, so don't take it personally ) are a lazy arse (or a loser, whichever sounds less grating). But it is also true that getting the magical first step towards being uniquely qualified is often pure luck... so some good people will not get where they maybe deserve to be. That's why those smart enough/driven enough should try to break out from the pack, and the earlier they start, the easier it would be. Success has many more ingredients than luck. Having the right personality and knowing when is the right place and right time to do what helps enormously. Those who don't even try... well, I find it difficult to feel bad that an average joe shmoe isn't going to be getting an easy ride without having to do much at all other than show up.

And in any case, wast majority of people will just play the numbers game that so many posters here are worried about (in most cases, justifiably so). Unique can't be common, that would just defeat the purpose. But it sure is more fun being uniquely qualified. Not just in terms of job prospects, but moreso in terms of job satisfaction.

PS Sorry if the post is a bit disjointed, it has been written in installments over two hour interval interrupted by making homemade tortellini from scratch and a couple phone calls.

Completely agree. To succeed, market yourself in a specialized niche with expert and unique skills.. and get to know key people.

 

[Its Z]

I am a few years and a few ranks out of the random worker bee positions, be it janitorial or pharmacist (retail or hospital staff entry-level). And yes, once you get to a certain level (of expertise and/or career ladder) - it is all about what you are and who you know, and the match between you and your job.

To illustrate, a completely hypothetical example, as I don't want to go into personal stories (I am a bit superstitious ). One of the best transplantation pharmacy specialists in the world would not be competing with the new grads. Therefore, it is completely irrelevant whether there is a thousand of them or ten thousand of them. He would't want the jobs they would be applying for, and they wouldn't be eligible for the jobs he would be applying for.

Though I guess my perception is skewed because of where I am in my life. The developing situation isn't so much endangering those of us already well on track in our careers, it's the poor suckers who are just entering pharmacy profession now and will be entering it in the near future who will suffer.

Of course, easier to bemoan the intense competition for the entry-level jobs everyone is eligible for than to accept that you (hypothetical you, so don't take it personally ) are a lazy arse (or a loser, whichever sounds less grating). But it is also true that getting the magical first step towards being uniquely qualified is often pure luck... so some good people will not get where they maybe deserve to be. That's why those smart enough/driven enough should try to break out from the pack, and the earlier they start, the easier it would be. Success has many more ingredients than luck. Having the right personality and knowing when is the right place and right time to do what helps enormously. Those who don't even try... well, I find it difficult to feel bad that an average joe shmoe isn't going to be getting an easy ride without having to do much at all other than show up.

And in any case, wast majority of people will just play the numbers game that so many posters here are worried about (in most cases, justifiably so). Unique can't be common, that would just defeat the purpose. But it sure is more fun being uniquely qualified. Not just in terms of job prospects, but moreso in terms of job satisfaction.

PS Sorry if the post is a bit disjointed, it has been written in installments over two hour interval interrupted by making homemade tortellini from scratch and a couple phone calls.

Very well said. No way I could have said it any better. Completely agree.

 

[p-rog]

Wait, so you don't think closing schools / stopping new schools from opening will at all help the prognosis for our ailing profession?

no that would obviously work and I wish the ACPE would/could do that. I was referring to making the NAPLEX harder and requiring residencies for all new grads without increasing spots accordingly. In either case, you are only delaying the inevitable and it will only make things worse in the long run. At least with the current situation, we are more likely to see a surplus that will become evident before too many schools open up and admit 100 students each.

 

[p-rog]

Nevermind, I just realized that 5000 residency spots is a **** load. It still feels like degree inflation though.

 

[womp]

I am a few years and a few ranks out of the random worker bee positions, be it janitorial or pharmacist (retail or hospital staff entry-level). And yes, once you get to a certain level (of expertise and/or career ladder) - it is all about what you are and who you know, and the match between you and your job.

To illustrate, a completely hypothetical example, as I don't want to go into personal stories (I am a bit superstitious ). One of the best transplantation pharmacy specialists in the world would not be competing with the new grads. Therefore, it is completely irrelevant whether there is a thousand of them or ten thousand of them. He would't want the jobs they would be applying for, and they wouldn't be eligible for the jobs he would be applying for.

Though I guess my perception is skewed because of where I am in my life. The developing situation isn't so much endangering those of us already well on track in our careers, it's the poor suckers who are just entering pharmacy profession now and will be entering it in the near future who will suffer.

Of course, easier to bemoan the intense competition for the entry-level jobs everyone is eligible for than to accept that you (hypothetical you, so don't take it personally ) are a lazy arse (or a loser, whichever sounds less grating). But it is also true that getting the magical first step towards being uniquely qualified is often pure luck... so some good people will not get where they maybe deserve to be. That's why those smart enough/driven enough should try to break out from the pack, and the earlier they start, the easier it would be. Success has many more ingredients than luck. Having the right personality and knowing when is the right place and right time to do what helps enormously. Those who don't even try... well, I find it difficult to feel bad that an average joe shmoe isn't going to be getting an easy ride without having to do much at all other than show up.

And in any case, wast majority of people will just play the numbers game that so many posters here are worried about (in most cases, justifiably so). Unique can't be common, that would just defeat the purpose. But it sure is more fun being uniquely qualified. Not just in terms of job prospects, but moreso in terms of job satisfaction.

PS Sorry if the post is a bit disjointed, it has been written in installments over two hour interval interrupted by making homemade tortellini from scratch and a couple phone calls.

All that is good and all, but when 60-70% of a pharmacist class go straight into the anonymous world of retail pharmacy, what niche are we talking about?

It's not as easy as "find a niche, and you'll be fine." There aren't even enough residency spots for those who want to do them.

At some point retail pharmacists will become a commodity and traded like one.

 

[Its Z]

All that is good and all, but when 60-70% of a pharmacist class go straight into the anonymous world of retail pharmacy, what niche are we talking about?

It's not as easy as "find a niche, and you'll be fine." There aren't even enough residency spots for those who want to do them.

At some point retail pharmacists will become a commodity and traded like one.

so stay away from retail pharmacy then

 

[IndustryPharmD]

All that is good and all, but when 60-70% of a pharmacist class go straight into the anonymous world of retail pharmacy, what niche are we talking about?

Remind me again, why I should care about lazy asses who want an easy ride? And why they deserve one in the first place?

It's not as easy as "find a niche, and you'll be fine." There aren't even enough residency spots for those who want to do them.

And to you, finding a nice necessarily includes a residency? There are a lot more things you can do with a pharmacy degree than be a clinical pharmacist, though getthing there does require imagination and persistence, the qualities that people who go into retail do not seem to possess en mass.

At some point retail pharmacists will become a commodity and traded like one.

If you are a pharmacist who just wants to come in, verify scripts for 8 hours, and then go home and not think about anything else - you ARE a commodity, don't kid yourself about being a "valuable healthcare professional". You are just there because one old law says that you have to be there, and if that law was gone, you would be gone too. Those (few and far between, but they exist and I have worked with some of them) retail pharmacists who do go an extra mile to develop additional skills or provide additional value to their employer beyond mandated body count, are very much valued by their district supervisors and would be the last to be let go (and first to be hired, if they are able to articulate their value proposition). The amorphous gray mass of retail pharmacists who are no different from one another... I wouldn't care which one to hire or lay off, you are right on that. Who cares, they are all the same. Geography is always the easiest factor (after coin toss, of course), and the one the easiest to defend in court if an employment discrimination lawsuit is brought up against you.

How about realizing what if you simply aren't making the extra effort required to succeed, you should stop blaming the evil, evil world for not making it easy for you? Last time I checked we weren't living in a utopia where everyone is guaranteed a job with a six-figure salary just for coasting along. You want something? You work for it.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

I'll say it. The above post is bull****. I know people that are successful like to think that their own perceived awesomeness is because of "hard work" or some other self serving garbage, but usually it isn't. "Finding a niche" is more about luck than being clever or having a specific skill. This is America. If hard work accounted for something, we'd have millions of Mexican millionaires. You think the best counseling pharmacists will be the last to go? Ha! The last to go will be the bland worker bees that can keep up maximum efficiency.

And in pharmacy, you can't just wake up and say "I'll go out and carve myself a niche today." The world doesn't work like that. If it did, I'd have one by now. I'd love to have a niche, but, again, in the REAL WORLD, someone has to GIVE YOU an opportunity out of school to develop a specialized skill.

It reminds me some of the ******ed **** Ronald Reagan used to say about "rugged individualism."

 

[MountainPharmD]

Remind me again, why I should care about lazy asses who want an easy ride? And why they deserve one in the first place?


And to you, finding a nice necessarily includes a residency? There are a lot more things you can do with a pharmacy degree than be a clinical pharmacist, though getthing there does require imagination and persistence, the qualities that people who go into retail do not seem to possess en mass.

If you are a pharmacist who just wants to come in, verify scripts for 8 hours, and then go home and not think about anything else - you ARE a commodity, don't kid yourself about being a "valuable healthcare professional". You are just there because one old law says that you have to be there, and if that law was gone, you would be gone too. Those (few and far between, but they exist and I have worked with some of them) retail pharmacists who do go an extra mile to develop additional skills or provide additional value to their employer beyond mandated body count, are very much valued by their district supervisors and would be the last to be let go (and first to be hired, if they are able to articulate their value proposition). The amorphous gray mass of retail pharmacists who are no different from one another... I wouldn't care which one to hire or lay off, you are right on that. Who cares, they are all the same. Geography is always the easiest factor (after coin toss, of course), and the one the easiest to defend in court if an employment discrimination lawsuit is brought up against you.

How about realizing what if you simply aren't making the extra effort required to succeed, you should stop blaming the evil, evil world for not making it easy for you? Last time I checked we weren't living in a utopia where everyone is guaranteed a job with a six-figure salary just for coasting along. You want something? You work for it.

I agree with WVUPharm2007. I am calling BS on this post too. Tell me what your retail friends have done to make them so valuable they would be the last to be fired. If you mean valuable as in they work with poor tech staffing minimal or no pharmacist overlap, no breaks or lunches all the while singing hard work is our reward? I say screw them. If the hard work they do to separate themselves is coming in an hour early and staying an hour late late everyday because there is not enough staff or filling 500 rx's on a 14 hour day as the only pharmacist then **** them they are the problem.

If you classify all this as "the extra effort to succeed" and "finding a niche" then **** you too.

 

[owlegrad]

I'll say it. The above post is bull****. I know people that are successful like to think that their own perceived awesomeness is because of "hard work" or some other self serving garbage, but usually it isn't...

Well said. I agree 100%. Finding a niche is a worthy goal, but this attitude of "if I can do it, so can anyone who tries hard enough" is <insert explenitive>. I am curious if the poster you are responding to helps other pharmacists enter their niche (that is not intended to sound dirty).

 

[MountainPharmD]

You think the best counseling pharmacists will be the last to go? Ha! The last to go will be the bland worker bees that can keep up maximum efficiency.

Exactly. The little pharmacists who keeps their mouth shut and 1000 rxs going smoothly out the door every 14 hour shift will be the "valued" "hard working" "last to be fired" employee. These types of employees are one of the biggest barriers to change we face today. Why? Because they do not want to change or make waves or stand up for what is right.

 

[Its Z]

I'll say it. The above post is bull****. I know people that are successful like to think that their own perceived awesomeness is because of "hard work" or some other self serving garbage, but usually it isn't. "Finding a niche" is more about luck than being clever or having a specific skill.

No it's not. Nothing good is gained without hard work yet hard work is not the only ingredient of success in pharmacy. Luck is involved of course. Yet, luck tends to follow people who take chances and do things beyond what the masses do.

This is America. If hard work accounted for something, we'd have millions of Mexican millionaires. You think the best counseling pharmacists will be the last to go? Ha! The last to go will be the bland worker bees that can keep up maximum efficiency.

Hard work is necessary. But you also have to work smart and have enough foresight to plan a path to success.

And in pharmacy, you can't just wake up and say "I'll go out and carve myself a niche today." The world doesn't work like that. If it did, I'd have one by now. I'd love to have a niche, but, again, in the REAL WORLD, someone has to GIVE YOU an opportunity out of school to develop a specialized skill.

Nobody gives anything to anyone. You have to earn it. Do things others don't want to. Go places where no wants to. Work at places no one wants to. Once you have enough experience, then more opportunities open up to find a niche. Yes you can go out and carve out a niche...I see it being done everyday and I've done it many times. But only because I was willing to take chances and move across country at a lower salary at places no one wanted to work when everyone was out getting signon bonuses at their cushy suburban neighborhoods.

 

[tungsten87]

Well said. I agree 100%. Finding a niche is a worthy goal, but this attitude of "if I can do it, so can anyone who tries hard enough" is <insert explenitive>. I am curious if the poster you are responding to helps other pharmacists enter their niche (that is not intended to sound dirty).

it takes more than hard work. it takes someone with intelligence and innovation to carve their own niche, especially in this economic climate.

 

[Its Z]

Well said. I agree 100%. Finding a niche is a worthy goal, but this attitude of "if I can do it, so can anyone who tries hard enough" is <insert explenitive>. I am curious if the poster you are responding to helps other pharmacists enter their niche (that is not intended to sound dirty).

I've helped many pharmacists and non pharmacists find their niche. Trust me..if I can do it...so can others. But the real issue is how badly are you willing to go out of your comfort zone to achieve your goals?

 

[Its Z]

it takes more than hard work. it takes someone with intelligence and innovation to carve their own niche, especially in this economic climate.

Yup.

 

[type b pharmD]

Remind me again, why I should care about lazy asses who want an easy ride? And why they deserve one in the first place?


And to you, finding a nice necessarily includes a residency? There are a lot more things you can do with a pharmacy degree than be a clinical pharmacist, though getthing there does require imagination and persistence, the qualities that people who go into retail do not seem to possess en mass.

If you are a pharmacist who just wants to come in, verify scripts for 8 hours, and then go home and not think about anything else - you ARE a commodity, don't kid yourself about being a "valuable healthcare professional". You are just there because one old law says that you have to be there, and if that law was gone, you would be gone too. Those (few and far between, but they exist and I have worked with some of them) retail pharmacists who do go an extra mile to develop additional skills or provide additional value to their employer beyond mandated body count, are very much valued by their district supervisors and would be the last to be let go (and first to be hired, if they are able to articulate their value proposition). The amorphous gray mass of retail pharmacists who are no different from one another... I wouldn't care which one to hire or lay off, you are right on that. Who cares, they are all the same. Geography is always the easiest factor (after coin toss, of course), and the one the easiest to defend in court if an employment discrimination lawsuit is brought up against you.

How about realizing what if you simply aren't making the extra effort required to succeed, you should stop blaming the evil, evil world for not making it easy for you? Last time I checked we weren't living in a utopia where everyone is guaranteed a job with a six-figure salary just for coasting along. You want something? You work for it.

one of the best posts ive seen here in a long time

 

[Its Z]

Tell me what your retail friends have done to make them so valuable they would be the last to be fired. If you mean valuable as in they work with poor tech staffing minimal or no pharmacist overlap, no breaks or lunches all the while singing hard work is our reward? I say screw them. If the hard work they do to separate themselves is coming in an hour early and staying an hour late late everyday because there is not enough staff or filling 500 rx's on a 14 hour day as the only pharmacist then **** them they are the problem.

If you classify all this as "the extra effort to succeed" and "finding a niche" then **** you too.

When I graduated, there weren't any retail jobs. I wanted to do retail not as a career but to open my own pharmacy. Instead I got into non pharmacy retail business then eventually a DME business with a closed door pharmacy and other businesses, while working full time as a hospital pharmacist. For 8 years out of pharmacy school, I worked every Saturday...6 days a week...sometimes 7. You know.. I didn't know any other pharmacists who worked harder than I did... they used to ask.."dood..why do you work so much..."

I put in my hard work. But I also put innovation and risk to everything I did. Working retail for someone else as a career never entered my mind. As I see my ole buddies who've floated around retail business, they were at the end of the career ladder on the first day of their pharmacist career. Working hard in that situation is a dead end situation. You have to work hard for something with a larger career reward.

 

[Its Z]

one of the best posts ive seen here in a long time

Quite impressed with her reasoning and writing.

 

[owlegrad]

I've helped many pharmacists and non pharmacists find their niche. Trust me..if I can do it...so can others. But the real issue is how badly are you willing to go out of your comfort zone to achieve your goals?

Then you sir are one of the best. Far too many people reach the top and do everything they can to prevent others from reaching them (I am speaking in hyperbole of course but I think you know what I mean) never remembering how much help they needed to get there themselves. Their exists an attitude that people who fail do so because of laziness/incompetence. That can be case, but not every failure is do to lack of drive/effort. That was manly what I was trying to point out. I wasn't arguing against hard work or specialization (that would be ridiculous) just against this attitude of "people who fail do so because they didn't work as hard as the person who succeeded". That may often be true, but it isn't always the case.

Anyway if you're helping others reach your place/status (giving them the opportunity I mean) then you are an excellent example of what a successful person should be doing, IMO.

 

[PharmaTope]

you have a mindbogglingly naive perspective on job hunting.

To illustrate, here is 700 job applications for a single janitor position:

http://www.cantonrep.com/news/x1569321039/stark-s-hottest-job-janitor

do you honestly think that out of those 700 applications, there is only 1 lucky chap who is capable of janitorial work and fits these requirements of the school:

• "enjoys student interaction, even if the position is for after-school hours. So if you don’t like children, your chances are slim."

• "plans to stay in the position for long time. An applicant who sees this position as a short-term solution until the economy improves could be out."

at some point, other arbitrary criteria come into play as a screener (think the crapshoot nature of med school apps). And worse, for most lucrative jobs, the spot has already been predetermined to an acquaintance or connection, and the listing was just cya formalities.

chances are, the person who actually gets the job is neither the most capable nor has the best fit. That's life.

excellent post!!!!

 

[PharmaTope]

no that would obviously work and I wish the ACPE would/could do that. I was referring to making the NAPLEX harder and requiring residencies for all new grads without increasing spots accordingly. In either case, you are only delaying the inevitable and it will only make things worse in the long run. At least with the current situation, we are more likely to see a surplus that will become evident before too many schools open up and admit 100 students each.

require an undergraduate degree to go into pharmacy. this 6 yr bs should go away then. who knows at age 17 that this is what they want the rest of their life.... they don't. their parents push them bc of the salaries and such.

requiring an undergrad degree would deter some from applying and going but not all.

the requirement of a residency is a possibility but is that really possible? more hoops to jump through will keep a number of people out.

just add some more hoops (sucks that i am even suggesting this)

 

[Its Z]

excellent post!!!!

though high level pharmacist positions aren't quite like the gathering of the janitors.

 

[type b pharmD]

Quite impressed with her reasoning and writing.

you've come across as more reasonable in this thread

props

 

[type b pharmD]

require an undergraduate degree to go into pharmacy. this 6 yr bs should go away then. who knows at age 17 that this is what they want the rest of their life.... they don't. their parents push them bc of the salaries and such.

requiring an undergrad degree would deter some from applying and going but not all.

the requirement of a residency is a possibility but is that really possible? more hoops to jump through will keep a number of people out.

just add some more hoops (sucks that i am even suggesting this)

undergrad degrees are useless.

(community college member here)

but i guess.. putting more inane hoops in front of people would weed out some of the smarter ones, making it easier to compete.. however atm there seem to be plenty of noobs in pharmacy anyway.

 

[SpirivaSunrise]

I'll say it. The above post is bull****. I know people that are successful like to think that their own perceived awesomeness is because of "hard work" or some other self serving garbage, but usually it isn't. "Finding a niche" is more about luck than being clever or having a specific skill. This is America. If hard work accounted for something, we'd have millions of Mexican millionaires. You think the best counseling pharmacists will be the last to go? Ha! The last to go will be the bland worker bees that can keep up maximum efficiency.

And in pharmacy, you can't just wake up and say "I'll go out and carve myself a niche today." The world doesn't work like that. If it did, I'd have one by now. I'd love to have a niche, but, again, in the REAL WORLD, someone has to GIVE YOU an opportunity out of school to develop a specialized skill.

It reminds me some of the ******ed **** Ronald Reagan used to say about "rugged individualism."

Mmmm...then I'll pull the BS card on your luck mantra again. You do this with sports too...the world doesn't conspire against us with some pre-planned vengeance. Luck is all about taking calculated risk.

You say you’d have your niche carved out if determination and hard work paid off? What exactly have you tried yet? Trust me... if you’re waiting for something to fall into your lap and someone to “give” you something, you’re going to be sitting around that wooden house for a looong time.

Mike...I want to see you really succeed in our profession, but you’re going to have to take chances not everyone is willing to take. Heck, I haven’t been doing this much longer than you...and I’m definitely not going to pretend that I have. But I knew what I wanted to specialize in, I moved out to a city where I didn’t know a single person within 200 miles...then I showed’em where relentless hard work and ambition can get you. I realized fast that no job is "below" anyone, the duties no one wants to do are the ones where you learn the most...and once you learn how the entire pharmacy operation works, you can start to manage it better than anyone did before.

But keep playing the woe is me card, and no one is going to give you a chance!

 

[Its Z]

Mmmm...then I'll pull the BS card on your luck mantra again. You do this with sports too...the world doesn't conspire against us with some pre-planned vengeance. Luck is all about taking calculated risk.

You say you’d have your niche carved out if determination and hard work paid off? What exactly have you tried yet? Trust me... if you’re waiting for something to fall into your lap and someone to “give” you something, you’re going to be sitting around that wooden house for a looong time.

Mike...I want to see you really succeed in our profession, but you’re going to have to take chances not everyone is willing to take. Heck, I haven’t been doing this much longer than you...and I’m definitely not going to pretend that I have. But I knew what I wanted to specialize in, I moved out to a city where I didn’t know a single person within 200 miles...then I showed’em where relentless hard work and ambition can get you. I realized fast that no job is "below" anyone, the duties no one wants to do are the ones where you learn the most...and once you learn how the entire pharmacy operation works, you can start to manage it better than anyone did before.

But keep playing the woe is me card, and no one is going to give you a chance!

I'm not going to say you worked harder than others... but despite the harrassment of me calling you a drug rep, you've probably taken more life changing chances and training and sacrifices beyond a typical pharmacy graduate.

 

[PharmaTope]

undergrad degrees are useless.

(community college member here)

but i guess.. putting more inane hoops in front of people would weed out some of the smarter ones, making it easier to compete.. however atm there seem to be plenty of noobs in pharmacy anyway.

undergrad is worthless imo. look at the number of people in medicine, dentristry, etc with undergrad degrees. not required although required for residency.

more hoops weed out smarter ones? there are some brilliant people in every field. every field has hoops to jump through bc of the politics behind it all. even becoming a nurses aid requires a certification to do the job.

a physician cannot just become a nurse if they wanted to. they would have to jump through the hoops ofr that as well.

 

[PharmaTope]

though high level pharmacist positions aren't quite like the gathering of the janitors.

define a high level pharmacist position.

jobs are jobs. you'd be surprised on how people get promoted or those positions in the first place.

 

[Its Z]

define a high level pharmacist position.

jobs are jobs. you'd be surprised on how people get promoted or those positions in the first place.

jobs arent jobs..i had 9 pharmacists jobs.. you? and no im never surprised of how and who get promoted. and no i wont define high level pharmacy jobs. if you dont already know, no sense in trying to explain any of this.

 

[ucrx]

require an undergraduate degree to go into pharmacy. this 6 yr bs should go away then. who knows at age 17 that this is what they want the rest of their life.... they don't. their parents push them bc of the salaries and such.

requiring an undergrad degree would deter some from applying and going but not all.

the requirement of a residency is a possibility but is that really possible? more hoops to jump through will keep a number of people out.

just add some more hoops (sucks that i am even suggesting this)

I knew, but I did start working in an independent pharmacy when I was 16. And I worked my *** off to get into the pharmacy school (a 2+4 program). I know many people who didn't work hard enough or couldn't handle taking all of the prerequisites in two years so they didn't get in. I think taking the prerequisites over two years is tougher than getting many BS degrees. You can space out the sciences and the general ed classes over four years instead. Taking them over such a short period helped prepare my class for the amount of time-intensive courses in pharmacy school.

Requiring a bachelor's degree doesn't necessarily improve the candidates, but it might increase the amount of debt when you graduate. It would only make people who want to be pharmacists take an extra two years of school. They'll still go to pharmacy school if it is what they really want. If you know you really want to be a pharmacist at 17, you'll work hard enough to get there.