Pharmacist Recruitment

[Pharmanaut]

Most pharmacist receive recruitment information from various places.
Here are a few of my pet peeves:

Peeve: Asking that applicants have an MPharm.
Reason: There are probably still a lot of BPharm or BSc Pharmacists in the market with many years of experience. If you specify an MPharm these people will not apply.
Some ask for MPharm or equivalent - explain what the equivalent is.
Make your recruiter aware - you could be indirectly accused of age discrimination.
Best just to say what you must be GPhC registered?

Peeve: Offering to pay GPhC Fee's.
Reason: it is Fees not Fee's.
You are recruiting people with an eye for detail.
"Will the use of apostrophe's be one of your interview question's?"

Peeve: Competitive Salary.
Reason: Be up-front about the salary, hours, annual leave etc.

Peeve: No indication of workload.
Reason: How many items per month, MDS and what services you offer, with what staff you have to provide them.

Finally, if you want to attract a vocational pharmacist who will put all their energy and vitality into your business you must be prepared reciprocate.
If you are a large group, look at what the T&C are for your office based staff and the office work ethic compared with what you expected from the 'front of house'.
There is often such a difference and the approach to 'front of house' is often very strict and draconian.

Good luck with your recruitment.

[PotionRx]

The first mistake is Community Pharmacists seeing themselves as "employees". It helps to think contextually here!

It is an irreparable damage that has essentially traded Professionalism & Autonomy for a paycheck -- given the responsibility that's at stake.

Rather than make that case, it seems the idea is to both have the cake and eat it -- or some such formality anyway.

The Role of a Pharmacist is cut and dry and is basically defined by indemnity insurance and what can be professionally justified by the individual Pharmacist to be ethical and within the best interest of their Patient -- NOT an "employer".


More than that, the first duty of the Pharmacist is to the Patient within what scope is provided by legal and professional bounds -- NOT an "employers" wishes.

Michael Jackson's dr, failed to (or chose not to?) distinguish between his "employer's" wishes and his patient's needs.

Sweeping these under the rug has led to the perpetual charade where "employers" and the "system" pretend Pharmacists have any serious discretion whilst Pharmacists pretend they are not constantly putting patients and the public at risk whilst collecting their paychecks.

Fix the system!

[Pharmanaut]

If an employer wants to employ vocational pharmacists they should be acquainted with the code of ethics, rules and regulations, professional standards and all the rest if they want to hang up the sign "Pharmacy" over the door. The employer and employee relationship needs to be open, honest and two-way.

[PotionRx]

Or, such dubious 'alliances' are inherently flawed to begin with -- especially if they are the majority of 'options'. (A systems view).

[Hello]

Peeve: competitive salary

Peeve of mine too, you can get get a competitive salary anywhere so this does nothing to attract candidates. Needs to be excellent salary to get noticed.

[jzd4rma]

Peeve: competitive salary

Peeve of mine too, you can get get a competitive salary anywhere so this does nothing to attract candidates. Needs to be excellent salary to get noticed.

Its amusing to receive 30+ text for locum shifts these days and a few unsolicited e-mails from recruiters wondering if I would be prepared to consider employment for a 'competitive salary'. The only problem is the pandemic has been a wake up call for many pharmacists. Life is too short to be stressed about work, colleagues and irresponsible public i.e. the refusal to wear masks at the height of the pandemic.

I think given the treacherous treatment pharmacists have received most don't care about the salary they realise its better to enjoy life by working in a more humane conditions.