Why can't pharmacy unionize?

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

PharmD RPh

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
349
Reaction score
1
Points
4,571
  1. Pharmacist
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
The auto workers wouldn't take some of the crap the pharmacists on this board complain about.... (although no compliance from myself as I have a good store), but why haven't we banded together to have a voice? Our national and state chapters don't do much for us which is why I guess no one joins. I heard recently of a union starting in California. Anyone with insight on this?
 
lets be honest, there is no unity

you dont like your job? with the economy downturn, others will take your position gladly (whether they like it or need it to pay loans)

with 100+k in loans, 6 yrs in school, people are just looking after themselves instead of the betterment of the profession
 
lets be honest, there is no unity

you dont like your job? with the economy downturn, others will take your position gladly (whether they like it or need it to pay loans)

with 100+k in loans, 6 yrs in school, people are just looking after themselves instead of the betterment of the profession

Sigh... I know there is truth to this and I do like my job, and want to protect it just like everyone else. But why no talks of pharmacists unionizing? We have no loud voice!?!?
 
How will union help?
 
For the record, Z dislikes unions. And having worked around a few, I can see his point.

But even in cases like we are about to embark on where it appears some pharmacists are being thrown to the wolves wi 14 hour days, no lunch and do this, this and this all on half the help you used to have?
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
No I don't see how union can help other than make the union leaders fatter. Trust me.....there will be a load non union pharmacists who will gladly work your shift and do a better job.
 
No I don't see how union can help other than make the union leaders fatter. Trust me.....there will be a load non union pharmacists who will gladly work your shift and do a better job.

I dunno about the do a better job part...
 
But even in cases like we are about to embark on where it appears some pharmacists are being thrown to the wolves wi 14 hour days, no lunch and do this, this and this all on half the help you used to have?


Well, if they don't like it, they can quit. There will be 20 other pharmacists who'll gladly that that 14 hours shift. It's not like they're forced to work like that at gun point. They can quit if they don't like it.
 
I dunno about the do a better job part...


I do know. I've been around many many... and many more unionized pharmacies. They're the worst performing group of workers in a most disorganized and inefficient orgnaizations because they can't get any cooperation or work out of their workers.
 
Well, if they don't like it, they can quit. There will be 20 other pharmacists who'll gladly that that 14 hours shift. It's not like they're forced to work like that at gun point. They can quit if they don't like it.

Agreed, but I don't think that is ethical nor safe to make someone do that which I guess thats why we have so much cvs bashing.
 
People are lazy by nature and will take the path of least resistance. When given an opportunity to do 2 hours worth of work in 8 hours, they'll take 9 hours to do it especially when they know they can't get fired. That's what unionization breeds. There are other ways to improve the profession. The problem is... we have too many schools and nothing that I can think of will change the path we're on. Therefore, you can only do what's necessary to protect yourself and your chance at a long and properous career.
 
I have a friend who's wife will be finishing her residency in a few years to practice internal medicine. He is tired of all the Corp bs that goes on in his company and plans to get his MBA and run her practice when she graduates so he can get out of pharmacy altogether because he doesn't like the way the future is heading and its not the same field as when he first went into the profession.
 
I have a friend who's wife will be finishing her residency in a few years to practice internal medicine. He is tired of all the Corp bs that goes on in his company and plans to get his MBA and run her practice when she graduates so he can get out of pharmacy altogether because he doesn't like the way the future is heading and its not the same field as when he first went into the profession.



That's stupid. His wife will barely be able to get by if she opens her practice.... then to hire an office manager (hubby) who's going to have to take a massive pay cut instead of just hiring a $40,000 year office manager... and on top of that he's going to do an MBA and manage a small internal medicine clinic??

Man..I tell you... people lose common sense when they get angry.
 
And then since they'll both be self employed.. good luck on the health insurance.
 
That's stupid. His wife will barely be able to get by if she opens her practice.... then to hire an office manager (hubby) who's going to have to take a massive pay cut instead of just hiring a $40,000 year office manager... and on top of that he's going to do an MBA and manage a small internal medicine clinic??

Man..I tell you... people lose common sense when they get angry.

He still wants to just work part-time in pharmacy if they let him. But I think they are banking on the practice really taking off. She plans to go outside the major city to an area that is underserved. He thinks the mba will be valuable to help with the practice and thinks that after a few years it should be booming.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
He still wants to just work part-time in pharmacy if they let him. But I think they are banking on the practice really taking off. She plans to go outside the major city to an area that is underserved. He thinks the mba will be valuable to help with the practice and thinks that after a few years it should be booming.
A general MBA will not help manage a small practice in a small underserved area. At least, not nearly enough to justify paying for it.
 
A general MBA will not help manage a small practice in a small underserved area. At least, not nearly enough to justify paying for it.

I think he said it was a professional mba program. Price of the program is around 25k total. You don't think it would help given that his wife doesn't know anything about business?

Btw. While the underserved area is considered small it would serve a population radius of about 100-150k people
 
I think he said it was a professional mba program. Price of the program is around 25k total. You don't think it would help given that his wife doesn't know anything about business?

Btw. While the underserved area is considered small it would serve a population radius of about 100-150k people

By "professional" MBA does he mean "executive MBA"? Those programs are kind of gimmicky in nature. For those who need a piece of paper rather than the knowledge, IMHO.

MBA programs don't teach you how to run a business. They teach general management strategies and finance principles and tend to be theoretical rather than practical in nature. That's kind of like someone having learned all about drugs' mechanisms of action in pharmacy school (all by generic names, of course) coming into retail pharmacy and being very surprised that real world doesn't care about mechanisms of action but cares about you knowing brand vs generic, major side effects, and more importantly, how to be fast and how to process insurance claims. If there is one complaint I have heard about MBA programs, is that they don't teach one how to be an entrepreneur or run one's own business. They are more for different corporate roles.

I would suggest he speaks to actual office managers to learn what knowledge they need on a daily basis. Probably basic accounting 101 from the local college and a mentor would do more for him at the fraction of the cost of the MBA program. And speak to the MBA program(s) he is considering to see what they actually teach in terms of practical skills and knowledge. And speak to the current students, too, because program officials will probably tell him what he wants to hear and/or spin it in such a way he will believe it's exactly what he needs.
 
Forget medical office management and exec MBA. He needs to go to school to learn coding, billing, and collections.....that's the life blood of a medical practice. That dood has no idea....just talking out of his ass.
 
Forget medical office management and exec MBA. He needs to go to school to learn coding, billing, and collections.....that's the life blood of a medical practice. That dood has no idea....just talking out of his ass.
Ever so kind, saying everything I tried to say in far fewer words. 😀
 
You don't need an MBA to run a medical practice and getting one just to do so is like throwing money away. If I was starting my own practice (medical, law, whatever) I'd want an experienced office manager who actually knows about coding, billing, collections, scheduling, etc. Not an MBA who knows a lot about management theory but nothing about the practicalities of running a small business.
 
Forget medical office management and exec MBA. He needs to go to school to learn coding, billing, and collections.....that's the life blood of a medical practice. That dood has no idea....just talking out of his ass.

Not talking out of my ass, true story. Whether right or wrong I'm sure they'll figure it out. I'm sure they know they'll have to have someone that does billing etc. I thought that was an unspoken fact. How many medical practices have you ran Z?
 
Was talking bout ur buddy. I owned a dme company but done enough assessment of medical practice with rx service to know what's important. Why you ask?
 
Was talking bout ur buddy. I owned a dme company but done enough assessment of medical practice with rx service to know what's important. Why you ask?

Oh, just seemed like you had previous knowledge.
 
Back to the original topic of this thread... unions suck. I work in a unionized workplace but have opted out b/c of exorbitant dues and little to no benefit for me. About the only thing I can say about the union is that it protects the lazy and disinterested while the rest of us make up for them so the workday doesn't suck. Oh and people love to whine to their union stewards all the time about stuff that isn't protected by the contract such as what work station they are assigned to, etc. Lame.

My husband is a manager for a large shipping company that is unionized and the union sucks there too. Especially when the union forces you to rehire someone who was fired for safety violations, walking off the job, being habitually late or having sex in the bathroom during their shift. Etc. 🙄

Unions blow.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I see where you guys are coming from, but it just seemed like in theory they would nice in certain circumstances but I guess you can't have the best of both worlds.
 
I see where you guys are coming from, but it just seemed like in theory they would nice in certain circumstances but I guess you can't have the best of both worlds.

Ask the UAW why the Big 3 have solvency issues. Doubt they'll say anything about overpaid, underperforming union workers with benefits that would rival the best in the US. All union negotiated. Ask the union retirees what their benefits look like now.
 
I'd rather not cede more of my hard earned money to a corrupt organization that may or may not "improve" my working conditions while simultaneously bankrupting my parent company.

Yeah unions = 👎, they often produce lazy/entitled workers that would perish in the real world.

SO glad they are on the way out...I think we're at the lowest union membership rate in 100 years? woohoo!
 
I worked for a union grocery store in Colorado. Now that I have worked for non-union grocery stores I see the benefit. I miss the union and wish we were unionized here in Texas.

The whole all union workers are lazy is a bunch of right wing tea party hyperbole. A union can offer many benefits especially in times of over supply. A union can work for pharmacists very similar to how it worked for coal miners a 100 years ago.
 
Ask the UAW why the Big 3 have solvency issues. Doubt they'll say anything about overpaid, underperforming union workers with benefits that would rival the best in the US. All union negotiated. Ask the union retirees what their benefits look like now.

If you think the big three automakers failed because of union workers you are sadly mistaken. They failed because of poor leadership, poor business planning and greed. Blaming the failure on union workers is akin to saying prescription drugs cost so much because Pharmacist make 100k a year.
 
I worked for a union grocery store in Colorado. Now that I have worked for non-union grocery stores I see the benefit. I miss the union and wish we were unionized here in Texas.

The whole all union workers are lazy is a bunch of right wing tea party hyperbole. A union can offer many benefits especially in times of over supply. A union can work for pharmacists very similar to how it worked for coal miners a 100 years ago.

i worked at a grocery store as a scab/strike relief worker, i'm sorry but i don't see how doing that entitles someone to massive benefits and an inflated wage.

someone has to pay, it's either a) taxpayers, b) consumers via higher wages, c) non-union workers as described above, d) shareholders through lowered profits.

i take the macro view. unions are great for individuals in certain respects (as you described), but again someone has to pay for it.
 
i worked at a grocery store as a scab/strike relief worker, i'm sorry but i don't see how doing that entitles someone to massive benefits and an inflated wage.

someone has to pay, it's either a) taxpayers, b) consumers via higher wages, c) non-union workers as described above, d) shareholders through lowered profits.

i take the macro view. unions are great for individuals in certain respects (as you described), but again someone has to pay for it.

Is it okay for a corporation to make massive profits at the expense of its work force? It is the workforce who is responsible for creating the profit. Why shouldn't they expect to make a living wage and have decent benefits?

Do I think a cashier at a grocery store should make a 100k a year? No. Do I think this person should be able to make a living wage? Yes.
 
Is it okay for a corporation to make massive profits at the expense of its work force? It is the workforce who is responsible for creating the profit. Why shouldn't they expect to make a living wage and have decent benefits?

Do I think a cashier at a grocery store should make a 100k a year? No. Do I think this person should be able to make a living wage? Yes.

The phrase "living wage" is just a euphemism for "entitlement." Essentially, someone says "I worked X hours therefore I deserve Y compensation." Fair enough, but it's not their call, they should be paid what the market will bear and not via blackmail or extortion. If you want more money/benefits, work more or change professions. If I made $25/hr w/ great benefits, I probably wouldn't be in pharm school right now.

As for the question of whether it's ok for a corp. to make massive profits at the expense of its work force, the answer is yes...that's the whole point of starting a corporation. The expectation is you maximize it, if not...you're better off starting a non-profit.

If working conditions are bad enough, people will leave, and wages will rise accordingly. I believe this is why retail salaries have historically trended higher than inpatient.

But anyway, like I mentioned above, I don't wanna pay for someone's decision to work a job with an artificially high wage. Further, our lack of ability to compete worldwide would hurt us more in the long run.
 
i worked at a grocery store as a scab/strike relief worker, i'm sorry but i don't see how doing that entitles someone to massive benefits and an inflated wage.

someone has to pay, it's either a) taxpayers, b) consumers via higher wages, c) non-union workers as described above, d) shareholders through lowered profits.

i take the macro view. unions are great for individuals in certain respects (as you described), but again someone has to pay for it.

I am sure everyone here is completely fine with the idea of shareholders "paying for it". :laugh:

I don't mind the idea of a union that fights for our wages or working conditions. I wouldn't want to be part of a union that simply collects dues and has no benefit. I also don't love the idea of lazy/incompetent staff being able to hide behind them. I have never been a part of a union, I would be interested in seeing how this works in practice.
 
...
But anyway, like I mentioned above, I don't wanna pay for someone's decision to work a job with an artificially high wage. Further, our lack of ability to compete worldwide would hurt us more in the long run.

Umm, are you refering to the pharmacy field in particular or are you making a more global point? I don't think unions would hurt pharmacist's ability to compete worldwide. I think I am misunderstanding your point.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
If you think the big three automakers failed because of union workers you are sadly mistaken. They failed because of poor leadership, poor business planning and greed. Blaming the failure on union workers is akin to saying prescription drugs cost so much because Pharmacist make 100k a year.

It's not the only reason, but it's certainly on the list of many. Rick Wagoner is probably the worst thing that happened to General Motors. UAW is on the list though.
 
Umm, are you refering to the pharmacy field in particular or are you making a more global point? I don't think unions would hurt pharmacist's ability to compete worldwide. I think I am misunderstanding your point.

I'm making a global point...but it could apply to pharmacy. Unionized pharmacists would make R&D into robot replacements even more plausible. C3PO, PharmD ftw!

and you don't mind shareholders paying for it until you're a shareholder yourself...i look at my stocks/funds and wish for every single company in there to squeeze as much profit out as possible. haha
 
Why can't pharmacy unionize? Because it is polarized.

(yes, this is supposed to be a chem joke)
 
Why can't pharmacy unionize? Because it is polarized.

(yes, this is supposed to be a chem joke)

kobe-10.gif
 
I do know. I've been around many many... and many more unionized pharmacies. They're the worst performing group of workers in a most disorganized and inefficient orgnaizations because they can't get any cooperation or work out of their workers.

Agreed. I've seen plenty of worthless employees who were practically impossible to fire thanks to the union.
 
Agreed. I've seen plenty of worthless employees who were practically impossible to fire thanks to the union.

My ex's father was a coal mine operator. He caught someone smoking in the mine (very very dangerous). He was required to report it and pay a fine b/c it's a safety violation and the operator is responsible. He fired the person but the UMWA forced him to rehire them. You can bet if that idiot had blown himself or others up the operator would have been on the hook for all damages, even though it's impossible to physically search everyone when they enter the mine. I doubt the UMWA would allow strip searches anyway, which would be the only way to find out if someone was concealing smokes on their person.

I think at one point unions were useful in this country but at this point they serve no useful purpose other than making themselves rich from the dues and driving up the cost of doing business.
 
My ex's father was a coal mine operator. He caught someone smoking in the mine (very very dangerous). He was required to report it and pay a fine b/c it's a safety violation and the operator is responsible. He fired the person but the UMWA forced him to rehire them. You can bet if that idiot had blown himself or others up the operator would have been on the hook for all damages, even though it's impossible to physically search everyone when they enter the mine. I doubt the UMWA would allow strip searches anyway, which would be the only way to find out if someone was concealing smokes on their person.

I think at one point unions were useful in this country but at this point they serve no useful purpose other than making themselves rich from the dues and driving up the cost of doing business.

You know, the sad thing is a dangerous profession like coal mining is one of the areas where you could really see a union being beneficial. You would think the union would be doing everything is its power to keep the mines safe for their workers. Thinking about the issues they face really puts the minor daily problems pharmacists deal with in perspective.
 
You know, the sad thing is a dangerous profession like coal mining is one of the areas where you could really see a union being beneficial. You would think the union would be doing everything is its power to keep the mines safe for their workers. Thinking about the issues they face really puts the minor daily problems pharmacists deal with in perspective.

I agree. Way back in the early 20th century unions were truly needed b/c of unsafe working conditions, etc. But now, labor is so highly regulated that I think they aren't needed.

I got hurt on the job b/c a janitor mopped the floor and didn't put up wet floor signs. I took a bad fall and had a serious knee injury. I am the THIRD person this janitor has injured in this exact manner, yet she still has a job, thanks to the union! God Bless America! LOL
 
NO 2 Pharmacists think alike. One is too clinical, one could be too retail, too money-driven, or too many other factors that can't make us think as one. I believe Illinois is the only state with a Union for RPh's that in itself says something. If only 1 in 50 agrees to be a team, those aren't good odds.
 
The death of unions is part what is causing the slow destruction of the middle class and bankrupting our country via a stratification of wealth that stagnates the economy.

They are successful in places like Scandinavia and Germany. The German unions are kicking the ****ing **** out of American mostly non-union labor right now.

It cracks me up to hear people claim that unions kill their parent companies. The reason that is is because they have to compete against third world labor that gets paid pennies to the dollar American labor gets paid. You are basically saying that the labor class should just be content with being abused and paid the same rate borderline fascist economies with lower cost of living like China pay their workers.

If the unions were actually strong and people were nationalistic enough to only buy American goods, our economy would be hella strong. Like in Germany.

Unfortunately, we are a stupid, stupid ass country that buys foreign cars, foreign plungers, foreign technology, foreign help desk people...just keep sending money overseas...keep driving down American wages...keep diluting the money base in the US...keep increasing trade deficits. And people blame the workers. Pretty pathetic, really.

Stupid ass country of borderline sociopathic people...America in a nutshell...
 
Last edited:
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Top Bottom