[SolomonQ]

so what your saying is more work ,more responsibilites less pay, but it does sound good

everything that shines isnt gold

Also would the pay be the same even though a pharmacist isnt required at a pharmacy at all times wouldnt it go down beacuse of this reason.

the pharmacist would be away in such case say at a care home or at a patient clinic, or conducting say MURs in the counselling room, so the pay will not go down because of this reason, also note the pharmacist may still be held responsible for any mistakes that happen in the dispensing, somehow they'l find a way to dicipline pharmacists for this,

but the pay may go down say if one pharmacist is deemed sufficient to be responsible for more than say one or two pharmacies as the pharmacy multiples wudnt require many pharmacist and would hire hire cheaper ACTs or qualified dispensers. Research the terms responsible pharmacist ans ACTs on the PJ website, see what you make of it.

peace out
A-Town!!!