Locum Salary

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by confused.com

sounds like everyone from goverment to multples are against pharmacists? why am i doing this course

So that you can do a prescribing course at the end and undercut the GP's who are in a similar position.

Jeff

[johnep]

I think we are in the position of horse shoe nail manufacturers 100 years ago.

Or black lead manufacturers etc etc I could provide a long list of what were essential items now long vanished.

It is said we could adopt new roles. However, the Nurses are already sitting in Drs surgeries so much easier for them to take on prescribing etc.

johnep

[ferretmanabu]

If someone were to ask what the single worst thing that can happen to pharmacists is, then the answer would have to be remote supervision. The reason we get our current rates of pay is purely because the law requires us to be present when a pharmacy is open. Once that goes, the profession is effectively in terminal decline.

[johnep]

Absolutely agree, I have long advised youngsters to go into a profession where law says you have to be there, meds, dents, law. accts, pharm etc.
The old rule of who you know still applies. when I was at school we were told we we to enter the professions where entrance was by exam. Stock broking, merchant banking etc required one's father to have the right connections.
johnep

[confused.com]

You know when i talk to pharmacists they sound downbeat about the profession but at uni the teacher practioners they always seem optimistic about the future of pharmacy that its changing and modernising and removal of remote supervising is the way to go forward that we'll get more fulfilling roles by doing more consultations in our own nice little consultation rooms in the pharmacy. That we'll have more time doing medicine management and that is where the profession should be heading. I mean is that just looking at the way the profsn is going, through rose tinted glasses, or would it really be like that?

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by confused.com

You know when i talk to pharmacists they sound downbeat about the profession but at uni the teacher practioners they always seem optimistic about the future of pharmacy that its changing and modernising and removal of remote supervising is the way to go forward that we'll get more fulfilling roles by doing more consultations in our own nice little consultation rooms in the pharmacy. That we'll have more time doing medicine management and that is where the profession should be heading. I mean is that just looking at the way the profsn is going, through rose tinted glasses, or would it really be like that?

We fear change - it's a source of stress and a source of error as we realign our working practices - and we're really paranoid about errors.
If we take on the extended services then we have be able to delegate some of our other roles.
I want the extended roles and I want to delegate, but it's not as easy as me deciding that I trust my dispenser to not dispense anything they are unsure about while I'm in my nice little consultation room with a patient.
My dispenser either has to be accredited in such a way that any pharmacist can similarly trust them or the continuity of the extended service breaks down or a system of remote supervision has to be in place so that someone else can supervise the dispensing process.
Once we accept either of these - we have to ask if the extended services profitable enough to warrant having a pharmacist on the premises at all?
The fear among pharmacists is that the contract is negotiated by contractors, and for a company the bottom line is that pharmacists are expensive.

Change has to come - managing it will be the problem.

Jeff

[lukares]

What is the common practice concerning reimbursement of travel expenses to the place of locum's work? Is it calculated upon receipts/invoices from a filling station? Or is it simply one of the components of locum's hourly rate (which is approx. 25-30 pounds, right?)? I've heard that it might be, for instance, 40p per mile. Can someone confirm it?

Is the time of travel included in the working hours? I mean, when you drive 2 hours TO a pharmacy, work there 9 hours, and drive another 2 hours FROM the pharmacy - are you paid for 9, or 13 hours?

And finally: do you need to have your own vehicle, or is there a possibility of being provided with a company car?

[admin]

Originally Posted by lukares

What is the common practice concerning reimbursement of travel expenses to the place of locum's work? Is it calculated upon receipts/invoices from a filling station? Or is it simply one of the components of locum's hourly rate (which is approx. 25-30 pounds, right?)? I've heard that it might be, for instance, 40p per mile. Can someone confirm it?

Is the time of travel included in the working hours? I mean, when you drive 2 hours TO a pharmacy, work there 9 hours, and drive another 2 hours FROM the pharmacy - are you paid for 9, or 13 hours?

And finally: do you need to have your own vehicle, or is there a possibility of being provided with a company car?

I am just paid by the mile. One big chain even takes off the first 40 miles, so it's not even worth travelling any more. A couple of years ago some companies paid you two hours pay, plus 40p per mile for travelling, but I'm personally finding that cheap imports are taking over.

The first company I worked for (only had 8 shops) provided all the store managers with a company car, but I've never heard of that since. The only people I know now that have company cars are area managers, and they spend half their working day driving round in them. So I'd say yes, you need your own car.

[Pharmanaut]

A locum car would be a diesel that does 60mpg. When doing long distance the journey in the morning was OK because you set off early. Returning home in the long winter evenings was the worst, being tired and all that. Why not try to get an overnight stay in a lodge hotel with an evening meal out of them?

[johnep]

My son has had his car converted to LPG. reckons paid back cost in three months.
johnep