- Joined
- Sep 8, 2012
- Messages
- 429
- Reaction score
- 214
Will working conditions improve in any way if pharmacists get provider status?
Will provider status improve working conditions?
- Thread starter Lexington2012
- Start date
You'll probably be required to prescribe X amount of antibiotics per day or be punished. Also tech hours will be cut, there will be no pharmacist overlap, all of your other duties will remain, and you will not receive additional pay.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2013
- Messages
- 771
- Reaction score
- 1,739
Yes, you get a 2 hour lunch, get to make mistakes without consequences, and the drug reps give you lap dances.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using SDN mobile
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using SDN mobile
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2015
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 105
Provider status itself does nothing for pharmacists. All it does is provide legal framework. What pharmacists do with it will be up to pharmacists, and that will have to be worked for. Don't view provider status as a magic fix to issues in the profession.
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2013
- Messages
- 712
- Reaction score
- 478
Working conditions are largely a function of need/desire to squeeze out profits. There are many strong headwinds in pharmacy on profitability and the way the chains mitigate that is lowering operating expenses. Unless provider status is coupled with some lucrative reimbursements, I'd say no. The even scarier part is pushing for it without reimbursement gives opportunity for others to expect more out of us since we have the legal capability but don't need to be paid for it. Someone, somewhere will likely start acting like a provider for free/dirt cheap in exchange to win more scripts or a network or something and we will continue down the path of doing more and more for less.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 695
- Reaction score
- 499
The answer is no. Some states are now prescribing birth control. My friend said that the birth control is adding a lot of stress to his day. He has to add prescribing birth control to his normal daily retail duties with no extra compensation. Each of those birth control counsels takes about 10-15minutes.
I'm not really sure how I feel about the possibilities. The cynic in me wants to say that there is no way you'll earn a pharmacist salary as a mid-level practitioner while NPs and PAs are already doing that for less money. Working in a hospital has led me to believe that the average pharmacist knows a whole lot more than the average PA/NP about medication usage, but we are kidding ourselves if we think we know anything about physical assessment or any of the non-medication aspects of healthcare. The training just isn't there, and I don't see it happening without a radical overhaul of pharmacist education.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2010
- Messages
- 226
- Reaction score
- 78
In my opinion, the only that will improve working conditions is state boards prohibiting verification metrics
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2011
- Messages
- 1,368
- Reaction score
- 1,004
I think even providers who already have provider status are seeing deteriorating work conditions. Primary care is continually being corporatized and practices bought out. Many are being made to see more patients with stagnant or less reimbursement and more of an administrative burden.
The only way I see it improving work conditions is if it opens up more jobs to where retail pharmacists would be scarce and have alternative options, prompting employers to try and retain people.
In my opinion, I think most fields in general are seeing deteriorating work conditions.
The only way I see it improving work conditions is if it opens up more jobs to where retail pharmacists would be scarce and have alternative options, prompting employers to try and retain people.
In my opinion, I think most fields in general are seeing deteriorating work conditions.
Provider status will provide a convenient excuse to push retail residencies by pretending to prepare you to work in an ambulatory care clinic.
I can't wait until a batch of students graduates thinking you aren't fit to staff a CVS without at least two years of residency under your belt.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 695
- Reaction score
- 499
Good post. Chain retail residency requirement is probably coming but it will likely take 10-15 years to get there. There are still far too few retail residencies out there to train everyone.
Retail pharmacy has more room to grow and evolve than any other kind of pharmacy. Residency trained pharmacists will help to enable this trend. We are already seeing some of these pieces being laid out. Birth control prescribing, Outcomes MTMs, Theranos lab testing at some Walgreens, other point of care lab testing services, more integration with on-site urgent care, expanding travel immunization clinics (the future may include more prescriptive rights for travel medications), expansion into childhood vaccine series, specialty medicine services, injections of many depot medications (Vivitrol, depo provera, Invega, etc).
Pharmacists can actually take over a great deal of business from MDs and mid-levels. All we need is more legislative change and provider status.
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2011
- Messages
- 1,368
- Reaction score
- 1,004
I think at least in my state. A pharmacist license authorizes you to administer any prescription medications. Nothing legally stops you from giving a depo shot or any other IM medication prescribed to someone. Heck it's within scope to give IV meds from what I understand. We wouldn't get paid an "administration" fee like others would though, so no sense in doing it.
I think if pharmacists can get reimbursed for expanded stuff on their own license that will be a good thing. If chains get reimbursed they'll want you to do more for less.
I think if pharmacists can get reimbursed for expanded stuff on their own license that will be a good thing. If chains get reimbursed they'll want you to do more for less.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- Messages
- 350
- Reaction score
- 205
Started with immunizations, then health testing, then MTM, while trying to crank out 300 scripts a shift. #aintgotnotimeforthat
seriously....all this without any increase in pay. I applaud the efforts and progress but i'm only one person...I cannot be an all-in-one stop for all your shopping needs.
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2014
- Messages
- 5,440
- Reaction score
- 2,923
Increase in pay? How much do you think pharmacists should make?
We should get commission for each shot we give or something
Especially for shingles shot
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2009
- Messages
- 1,037
- Reaction score
- 219
with every change that will result in increase script volume comes with less support from district management. for example, when other 24 hr cvs around the area closed at 9pm. our store gets increased workload and foot traffic after hours. particularly weekends when all other pharmacies close at 6pm. we get heavier workload. we get increase script volume. yet, district management gave us less and less tech hours. ...this has been repetitive year after year.
Says the guy that thinks pharmacists conned the big chains into paying them their current salaries.
Every prescription you dispense makes your company a profit. Every vaccine you give makes a profit. If provider status leads to billable services that are profitable, your company will push them because it will make them a profit. How much of a corporate apologist are you to think you don't deserve a part of that income? Walgreens isn't doing you a favor by employing you. They are making money off of you, and you deserve an equitable share for any service you provide.
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2014
- Messages
- 5,440
- Reaction score
- 2,923
Hmm is it just me or is this what every company out there does? Should Starbucks baristas get paid more as the company continues to expand and make even more profit?
You get paid what you're worth and its not more then what its currently at. If you don't like it someone else will do it.
It's not uncommon to expect a raise when you take on more responsibility. In fact, that is a common expectation with most businesses. I'm sorry you think so little of your own worth and the value that you provide. I'm sorry that you don't see how this attitude hurts you and your profession as a whole.
edit: just to add, if the baristas suddenly took on a new job duty that exposed them to increased liability while increasing the profits of the company, hell yes they deserve increased compensation for it.
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2013
- Messages
- 712
- Reaction score
- 478
Not true. There are unprofitable prescriptions that many chains dispense. You are also not the reason the company makes what it makes on prescriptions. You do not enable them to get drugs cheap and you (most likely) don't negotiate the rate in which you'll receive for that prescription. We can also beg that we think we deserve something but it's not ours to give, it's our employers. If you don't like the terms they set, and you can't negotiate for what you think you deserve then accept what's givin or find a different job.
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2014
- Messages
- 5,440
- Reaction score
- 2,923
This has nothing to do with my opinion, the only thing that matters is supply and demand. Every single pharmacist has the training to do your job, some may suck at it but there's no reason to increase your wage.
I hope you two gladly accept being paid $20/hr while CVS and Walgreens rake in record profits off of your labor. The only thing that matters is supply and demand. Meanwhile, hospital pharmacists in California will be making >$70/hr in a state with far more schools than is needed. It's almost as if the collective bargaining power of the Kaiser pharmacist union allowed them to be paid what they are worth, not what their corporate masters are able to squeeze them down to.
There really is nothing more sad to me than someone who is willing to sacrifice themselves for the well-being of a corporation. Just let them use you and throw you away.
There really is nothing more sad to me than someone who is willing to sacrifice themselves for the well-being of a corporation. Just let them use you and throw you away.
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2014
- Messages
- 5,440
- Reaction score
- 2,923
And what would you have me do?
Oh and there's no way hospitals will pay $70 if retail significantly falls.
Do I think I should be paid more if I have more responsibilities? Of course I do, but like I said before that doesn't matter. I may agree with you 100% but I'm not going to complain about it.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- Messages
- 350
- Reaction score
- 205
They could pay me more per hour, but not sure where I can physically do more per hour
California is the one state where hospitals pay significantly more than retail, and it just so happens to be a state with a strong hospital pharmacist union. I'm glad you agree with me about being paid more for additional duties, and I agree with you that complaining won't change the issue. The problem is complacency. Ideally we would unionize across the nation and establish standards of safety for dispensing, proper pay, etc. There is middle ground between the current situation and my optimistic vision. The sad thing is that this won't happen, and that the oversupply of pharmacists will likely lead to more work and less pay for everyone, while CVS and Walgreens make bank.
