700 pharmacies withdraw from community drug schemes

bleg

Irish Pharmacy Union calls on the Minister for Health and Children to enter talks to avoid a medicines crisis

Wednesday, 1 July 2009: The Irish Pharmacy Union has been informed by over 700 individual pharmacists that they have written to the Health Service Executive (HSE) giving 30 days notice of their intention to discontinue providing services on the community drugs schemes.

The means that to date effectively half of all pharmacies across the country will cease dispensing medicines on behalf of the HSE under the Medical Card Scheme and the Drugs Payments Scheme effective from 1 August next. Many other pharmacists are also reviewing their position. The pharmacies involved are from all parts of the country, but in particular from Donegal, Sligo, Leitrim, Cavan, Roscommon, Galway and Kerry. The Irish Pharmacy Union (IPU), the representative body for community pharmacists in Ireland, is today calling on the Minister for Health and Children to enter talks with its members as soon as possible to avoid a medicines crisis.

Liz Hoctor, President of the Irish Pharmacy Union said “I have no doubt that each pharmacist did not take this decision lightly. However, the Minister for Health and Children has dropped a bombshell on the pharmacists by imposing a 34 per cent cut in payments for providing medicines and advice to patients under the community drugs schemes. This cut is excessive and unsustainable. These cuts will damage pharmacy services, patient care and lead to up to 5,000 job losses.

Ms Hoctor also said “Pharmacists are calling on the Minister for Health and Children to engage with us immediately on how savings can be achieved without having a catastrophic impact on pharmacy services, patient care and employment. We recognise the seriousness of the country’s economic situation and back in March made proposals to the Minister which would save the State €83m. Our proposals included enabling pharmacists to offer patients the choice of a cheaper generic medicine where it is safe to do so and the acceptance of an 8 per cent cut in pharmacy fees which is in line with cuts imposed on all other healthcare professionals. However, our proposals, which are practical and reasonable, were ignored by the Minister and instead a 34 per cent cut in payments was announced.

Ms Hoctor continued “Ireland has one of the most liberal pharmacy markets in Europe. The Minister seems determined to push small independent pharmacies out of business and to hand the community pharmacy sector on a plate to a small number of large international players. It would be a great shame to decimate a sector that has over the years provided a personal and professional service that is highly valued by patients.

from www.ipu.ie


edit: gone above 1000, can't believe it. at 700 it was very very dodgy but now about 2/3 of all pharmacies have pulled the plug something will have to happen. pretty embarrassing for Harney and the HSE coming less than a year after the Hickey case.

deepimpact

I got a text from a mate that the contingency plans are going under the spotlight on Liveline today...hooray :rolleyes:

A balanced piece awaits...:mad:

bleg

scanlant wrote: »

I got a text from a mate that the contingency plans are going under the spotlight on Liveline today...hooray :rolleyes:

A balanced piece awaits...:mad:

wasn't too bad. the 1st pharmacist that was on was absolutely useless and lost his temper. the second one was absolutely excellent and made her points calmly and well.


as far as i see it the choice is simple: either a pharmacy can go out of business and put their patients at risk or they can make a stand now for themselves and their patients to ensure continuity of supply.

holly1

All in my town have pulled out,I was under the impression it was well over a 1000 now.My daughter works in a pharmacy in the midlands and there is three pharmacys and they pulled out today.I think people power will help their cause also we have to protest.

Kurtosis

scanlant wrote: »

I got a text from a mate that the contingency plans are going under the spotlight on Liveline today...hooray :rolleyes:

A balanced piece awaits...:mad:

Balanced indeed. Sure Joe only operates in 2 modes: the sympathetic ear to people in need or jumping down the throat of anyone else - it was never going to reflect the real situation. I must say though, the second pharmacist was very cool and calm and clearly put across her points.

EDIT: Looks like over 1000 pharmacies now

skooterblue

This is a purely selfish act by pharmacists. They are paid well above and beyond their counter parts in Europe. We all have to take our medicine in the economic crisis, why should they be any different. Maybe the pharmacist may not be able to buy a new BMW every January but everyone has to take their cut. It shouldnt be all the ones on lower pay scales to take all the cuts

bleg

It's gone over 1100 according to the IPU website. They also have a list available.

IPOS and Sam McCauley's are with the pharmacists.

Boots are with the government.

Unicare Ireland are with the pharmacists but their head office in Germany is with the government.

Anybody know anything about the independent pharmacies that haven't pulled out yet? I know the one in my home town would be extremely busy and could probably take this hit.

holly1

I dont think they can take the hit,if they are the only pharmacy in atown not pulling out it will leave them extremely busy ,take on more staff for less money.I just dont know how it would pay.

deepimpact

skooterblue wrote: »

This is a purely selfish act by pharmacists. They are paid well above and beyond their counter parts in Europe. We all have to take our medicine in the economic crisis, why should they be any different. Maybe the pharmacist may not be able to buy a new BMW every January but everyone has to take their cut. It shouldnt be all the ones on lower pay scales to take all the cuts

Yeah, protecting their businesses, families, staff, customers/patients, very selfish indeed.

I think a modest cut would be accepted by most if not all, but 34%? When the "norm" for cuts seems to be around 8% for professional fees? Fees for services have already been reduced by 8%, so why take a further cut?

I always find it funny that 7 billion was given to the banks, and yet the HSE cut back on basic services.

I hope you don't live in a rural area, because that's where the closures will affect the most. Added to that the amount of extra people on the dole (what's 5000 x 204?...and that's weekly).

and wrt the BMW remark, I bloody well wish I could afford a new car every year, it took me years to save for a 4 year old Golf.

onetrueone

skooterblue wrote: »

This is a purely selfish act by pharmacists. They are paid well above and beyond their counter parts in Europe. We all have to take our medicine in the economic crisis, why should they be any different. Maybe the pharmacist may not be able to buy a new BMW every January but everyone has to take their cut. It shouldnt be all the ones on lower pay scales to take all the cuts

Net margins are around 6% comparable profit margins with other European countries plus No other Eu country has an unrestricted Pharmacy market like Ireland's
We have never said that we won't accept cuts, we will accept cuts the same as other Health professionals (8% of fees)
Tell me Is anyone in the Public Sector taking a 35% cut in income?

bleg

yup and there are plenty of other ways to save money for both the exchequer and the consumer such as: generic substitution, supplementary prescribing, administration of travel vaccines in pharmacies, BP and cholesterol monitoring in pharmacies etc...

all of these services could be safely achieved, causing less hassle than the proposed cutbacks, if the political will existed. Pharmacists have already indicated such schemes would be favorable to them. It is times like this we need real leadership from the HSE/DoHC/Minister instead of random and disproportionate cuts without any consultation.

angeldelight

Approximately 70% of pharmacies have now indicated their withdrawal from the community drug schemes as of August 1st. I think it's great that everyone is standing together and seeing the bigger picture (apart from Boots but who's surprised by that...)

Bottle_of_Smoke

From the level headed female pharmacist on Joe Duffy it seems Harney's making pharmacists pay for her poor negotiating with drugs companies.

I'm not saying the male one was a liar he just seemed to be overly emotional and possibly got overly irritated by Joe's line of questioning

bleg

Holy ****ing ****:

As an illustration of the kind of decisions that might have to be taken, Ms Harney told them that one of the recommendations of An Bord Snip Nua may involve the establishment of a tendering process for the distribution of subsidised drugs by pharmacists.

If adopted, just one pharmacy in each locality would dispense drugs and medicines to GMS patients and those involved in the refund of drugs schemes.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0703/1224249968901.html

DrIndy

Its a case once again of targetting the frontline services and leaving the bloated beaurocracy intact.

Disgraceful.

RobFowl

bleg wrote: »

Holy ****ing ****:

As an illustration of the kind of decisions that might have to be taken, Ms Harney told them that one of the recommendations of An Bord Snip Nua may involve the establishment of a tendering process for the distribution of subsidised drugs by pharmacists.

If adopted, just one pharmacy in each locality would dispense drugs and medicines to GMS patients and those involved in the refund of drugs schemes.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0703/1224249968901.html

Can't see that getting past the competition authority :rolleyes:

No matter how much she want's Boots as sole provider !!

deepimpact

RobFowl wrote: »

Can't see that getting past the competition authority :rolleyes:

No matter how much she want's Boots as sole provider !!

it's a massive policy change if she pushes it through.

How many years was she bemoaning the lack of competition in pharmacy, now she wants to create a monopoly.

When are we going to see redundency in the bloated middle-management? Should save a bit, what with all the "performance bonuses" granted over the last few years.

onetrueone

RobFowl wrote: »

As an illustration of the kind of decisions that might have to be taken, Ms Harney told them that one of the recommendations of An Bord Snip Nua may involve the establishment of a tendering process for the distribution of subsidised drugs by pharmacists.

If adopted, just one pharmacy in each locality would dispense drugs and medicines to GMS patients and those involved in the refund of drugs schemes.


Can't see that getting past the competition authority :rolleyes:

No matter how much she want's Boots as sole provider !!

Rob It won't get past the Dept of Health either, even they know what's pragmatic. This system would effectively be a return to the old dispensary system in the days before the GMS scheme was born. Think Russian style queues for medications, massive waste, no consultation time with a Pharmacist etc. How would old age pensioners living in remote areas without a Pharmacy(because there is only one covering an area) get access to their meds?
Giving the tender to one super Pharmacy still doesn't significantly reduce costs to the state, More staff and massive dispensaries would have to be invested in and the Pharmacy investing in such a set up would make sure such a venture was worth investing in (rememeber Harney would just continue to reduce margins to next to nothing).
The tendering process could take months to complete -What good is this when there are no schemes after Aug 1st?

Expect ever more bluff and hot air from Harney and her PR machine over the next few weeks.
She has no ideas and is a spent entity, The only question is the amount of time it takes before FF realise she is a Political Liability rather than someone they can easily point the finger at.
Could be an interesting cabinet re-shuffle come Autumn time, Come FF backbenchers fearing constituents long memories and subsequent lost seats.
Tick,tick,tick for Harney

Carsinian Thau

scanlant wrote: »

When are we going to see redundency in the bloated middle-management?

At this stage, you'd probably need to replace the whole HSE.

RobFowl

Carsinian Thau wrote: »

At this stage, you'd probably need to replace the whole HSE.

If it disappeared tomorrow would anyone notice ?

onetrueone

RobFowl wrote: »

If it disappeared tomorrow would anyone notice ?

The Irish stock market would probably rise.

International investors: "Jimmy lay down some Options On the ISEQ - Ireland is finally tackling it's parasitic public sector waste"

onetrueone

Just in realtion to the Red Herring tendering process as outlined in the Irish times today

Recent Letter from an FF TD to a Pharmacist:

A chairde,

Many of you have been in touch with me about the Minister for Health's proposals in relation to your contracts.

I fully understand that this will impact seriously on your business and your staff (many of whom are also in touch) and I personally am very concerned about a threat to small community pharmacies, which Meath East is full of, from the larger chains.

We as a Fianna Fail parliamentary party met last evening with the Minister for Health where we outlined our concerns, your concerns, your staff's concerns and the concerns of the community.

It does not appear that the Minister proposes to change the proposal in any way. The Taoiseach has backed her publicly and, indeed, to us as deputies.

It was also indicated to us that the famous "An Bord Snip Nua" report will recommend ending individual contracts with pharmacists, instead tendering the contracts. However, it was indicated that this action was highly unlikely to take place as there were doubts about whether it would realise savings.

You will probably also be interested to know that the Minister proposes to introduce reference pricing shortly.

I will continue to raise the issues and concerns that you have addressed to me but repeat what I stated in previous correspondence that the IPU must also come forward with proposals, probably at a higher level than what has been put forward recently.

Signed TD xxxxx

"Doubts about whether it would realise savings" - That same point was in one of my earlier posts here.

Harney is clutching at straws again, what an incredibly dangerous embecile she is.

Carsinian Thau

RobFowl wrote: »

If it disappeared tomorrow would anyone notice ?

People may suffer paradoxical heart attacks at being able to access efficient health care.

Fortunately, most of them would survived due to the aforementioned efficiency.

cool dude

:mad:

skooterblue wrote: »

This is a purely selfish act by pharmacists. They are paid well above and beyond their counter parts in Europe. We all have to take our medicine in the economic crisis, why should they be any different. Maybe the pharmacist may not be able to buy a new BMW every January but everyone has to take their cut. It shouldnt be all the ones on lower pay scales to take all the cuts

:mad:

this is not a selfish act. this is a survival act. my local pharmacist could lose his house. harney has disregarded reports that she and her department have commissioned, reports recommending the phasing in of cuts and assessing the impact of each cut before the next phase. i'm waiting 3 hrs at the gp (who is stressed out), i sure don't want to be waiting 3 hours for my subsequent prescription at some hse pharmacy that i might have to travel to. harney is making a BAGS of the hse. read the papers. she has no other progressive democrat members to stop her. her coalition fianna fail are saying "yes ma'am" to her. the pharmacist have to take cuts but not 34%. that's not a cut...that's annihilation of a complete sector. 34% is not a spin by the pharmacists. ispoke to an accountant at a social do and 34% is only the beginning!!! would you accept 34% cut in your income?

locum-motion

skooterblue wrote: »

They are paid well above and beyond their counter parts in Europe.

Any evidence for this please, Skooterblue?

skooterblue wrote: »

We all have to take our medicine in the economic crisis, why should they be any different. Maybe the pharmacist may not be able to buy a new BMW every January but everyone has to take their cut. It shouldnt be all the ones on lower pay scales to take all the cuts

That is exactly the point that pharmacists are trying to get across. We will take the hit, as long as it's a fair hit. GPs, dentists, opticians were all hit with 8% cuts under FEMPI* Section 9. Pharmacists are being hit with 32-34%.

By the way, I don't know any pharmacists who drive BMW's. I know 2 who drive (2nd hand) Mercs. I drive a 7 year old Renault. I finished paying for it last month.

*: FEMPI= Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Act, 2009.

greenwell

DrIndy wrote: »

Its a case once again of targetting the frontline services and leaving the bloated beaurocracy intact.

Disgraceful.

Surely the point the HSE have is that they have paid 50% margins for years and years...is this not why pharmacies were exchanging hands for huge money?
I hear that Pharmacists make over 70% discounts on generic medicines which they are now advocating as an alternative

locum-motion

greenwell wrote: »

Surely the point the HSE have is that they have paid 50% margins for years and years

Again!:

1. A 50% mark-up is equivalent to a 33.33% margin. 'Margin' and 'mark-up' are not the same thing. Don't say one when you mean the other!

2. There is a 50% mark-up on 26% of prescriptions. There is a 0% mark-up on 74% of prescriptions. (In both cases, a fee is payable on top.)

€74.....x.....1.0.......= €74
€26.....x.....1.5.......= €39
Total
€100.....................=€113, equivalent to a mark-up of 13% (or a margin of 11.5%.)

HSE spin docs are great at putting out the 50% figure. (Did you hear Joe Duffy last week?) They never mention the 74% that attracts 0% mark-up.

locum-motion

greenwell wrote: »

I hear that Pharmacists make over 70% discounts on generic medicines which they are now advocating as an alternative

Greenwell,
I believe it is customary to disclose an interest. I have stated many times on www.boards.ie that I am a pharmacist..
Why don't you just state outright that you work or used to work for a generics manufacturer? I suspect Clonmel Labs, but perhaps not.
Now, maybe there's no conflict of interest, but if you disclose it, then there's less chance of there appearing to be one, if you know what I mean.
L-M.

Odysseus

Just wondering what the pharmacists where think of the following quote from an ungered user, it was taken from a similar discussion on the same topic in the LTI forum. The thread is no locked so I couldn't respond, but TBH I thought it was appalling:


"Another example is the methadone scheme, local pharmacist is 13 times cheaper per patient than local HSE clinics (independently verified by PWC or similar). When 40% of pharmacies close and you have on high volume shop per town, do you believe methadone patients will continue to be treated by the local pharmacy. Not a hope due to workload and they'll be back to clinics where dealers hang around outside preying on them. Another current saving that isn't factored in"

Of course its a cheaper option, there are significant support staff available at an Addiction treatment unit. I see the benefits of meth clients being treated in the community and think its a great scheme, but lets not forget to acknowledge that pharmacis get a higher rate for meth clients. The above seemed to be put forward in terms of saving money, and it was noted the various cost cutting suggesting put forward by pharmacists, if this was the case how about reduceing the fee to the standard fee.

I don't see how you can compare a community pharmacy to an addiction clinicw where on average 8-10 disciplines are required to supply a full service.

However, my point was a fellow profession putting down another service, when in my understanding pharmacists are paid very well for the service they provide under this scheme. Meth patients where singled out the last time pharmacists took action, and to be honest whilst it was all hands on deck at my unit to deal with the added numbers it was done quite effectively.

So if the dispute goes ahead will it also effect meth patients? I thought it was apalling the last time, and tbh we where suprised at some of the practices we noticed during this time, i.e. patients not being supervised.

However, the pharmacists I know who take part in the scheme have said to me that the money in so good, that they would be mad not to deal with meth patients.

Don't get me wrong I believe that the HSE is trying to rip you, however, I was annoyed at the HSE reference in the above quote, and whilst in this case you are supplying a great service, it is also a well paid one in my understanding.

Maybe I'm just having a rant, but its a topic close to my heart.

RobFowl

Odysseus wrote: »

Just wondering what the pharmacists where think of the following quote from an ungered user, it was taken from a similar discussion on the same topic in the LTI forum. The thread is no locked so I couldn't respond, but TBH I thought it was appalling:


"Another example is the methadone scheme, local pharmacist is 13 times cheaper per patient than local HSE clinics (independently verified by PWC or similar). When 40% of pharmacies close and you have on high volume shop per town, do you believe methadone patients will continue to be treated by the local pharmacy. Not a hope due to workload and they'll be back to clinics where dealers hang around outside preying on them. Another current saving that isn't factored in"

Of course its a cheaper option, there are significant support staff available at an Addiction treatment unit. I see the benefits of meth clients being treated in the community and think its a great scheme, but lets not forget to acknowledge that pharmacis get a higher rate for meth clients. The above seemed to be put forward in terms of saving money, and it was noted the various cost cutting suggesting put forward by pharmacists, if this was the case how about reduceing the fee to the standard fee.

I don't see how you can compare a community pharmacy to an addiction clinicw where on average 8-10 disciplines are required to supply a full service.

However, my point was a fellow profession putting down another service, when in my understanding pharmacists are paid very well for the service they provide under this scheme. Meth patients where singled out the last time pharmacists took action, and to be honest whilst it was all hands on deck at my unit to deal with the added numbers it was done quite effectively.

So if the dispute goes ahead will it also effect meth patients? I thought it was apalling the last time, and tbh we where suprised at some of the practices we noticed during this time, i.e. patients not being supervised.

However, the pharmacists I know who take part in the scheme have said to me that the money in so good, that they would be mad not to deal with meth patients.

Don't get me wrong I believe that the HSE is trying to rip you, however, I was annoyed at the HSE reference in the above quote, and whilst in this case you are supplying a great service, it is also a well paid one in my understanding.

Maybe I'm just having a rant, but its a topic close to my heart.

I actually work in both HSE and community based meth systems and have worked in HSE dispensing clinics.
IMO community pharmacies treat clients with far more respect and dignity then the dispensing clinics.
Also it is actually quite labour intensive and difficult work for reasons I won't go into.
As with Odesseus I have a vested interest

Odysseus

RobFowl wrote: »

I actually work in both HSE and community based meth systems and have worked in HSE dispensing clinics.
IMO community pharmacies treat clients with far more respect and dignity then the dispensing clinics.
Also it is actually quite labour intensive and difficult work for reasons I won't go into.
As with Odesseus I have a vested interest

Its interesting you said that Rob, I aware of the cases where HSE staff can let the service down, and in most cases I find that appalling too. However, I also work with clients who are in the community and TBH hear similar stories there too.

I understand why you don't want to go into some areas here, no probs I respect that. However, I disagree with you on the community vs HSE clinics, I'm sure you have some valid experiences to back up your view [I won't doubt that] but I do think the lack of respect can occur on both sides.

locum-motion

Quote:
Originally Posted by skooterblue
They are paid well above and beyond their counter parts in Europe.

Any evidence for this please, Skooterblue?


Above is a question I asked a week or so ago. There was no response from Skooterblue, so I PM'ed him asking if he was ready to answer. This is the reply I got:

skooterblue It was pointed out in a government report. Do you deny that pharmacist are not well paid?


Skooterblue,
What government report?
I ask because your original comment was very inflammatory, and yet you don't seem willing to stand over what you said; no response (until prompted) to any of the questions/comments about your post, and when you did respond all you can say is "it was pointed out in a government report".
As for your follow up question - "Do you deny that pharmacist are not well paid?" - firstly your grammar is so bad that I don't know whether to answer yes or no, and secondly it is irrelevant to your original assertion. You were not asked "Are pharmacists well paid?" You were asked to back up your claim that pharmacists are paid "well above and beyond their counter parts in Europe." All I'm asking for you to do is stand up, with evidence, over what you have said. If you're not willing to do that, then I for one will not engage any further with you.

However, I will on this occasion extend to you the courtesy that you didn't extend to me, and I will answer your question.

Pharmacists are quite well paid. Better than chefs, teachers, Guards and nurses, but not as well as GPs, accountants, solicitors, barristers, airline pilots...

Do you think that pharmacists don't deserve to be well paid?

pharmstar

Hear hear locum-motion! so glad ur setting people straight
We work just as hard as any other profession.
I really feel that harney comes out with these 'clangers' with no thought put in to it what so ever :rolleyes:

blueyedson

The number of pharmacies withdrawn from scheme is now 1156 ,the list was updated today on the pharmacy union web page.

It just goes to show how much of a blunder Harney has made of the sector. More people are standing together on this , hopefully an intelligent compromise can be made before too much damage is done. The cuts proposed are absurd, the knock on effect of more job losses and unpaid mortgages will be more blood on Harneys hands.

I would be interested to hear from more views from people in this sector ,my own family could be impacted by this ignorance. What more can be done to make a stand ?

jeepers

Carlow52 wrote: »

Is this list available to the public or only to the profiteering members of this cartel?

Its time joe consumer organized a boycott of these self serving leeches

A 35% cut is pretty severe despite your opinion of them.

However, no need to worry the HSE has published the list of 12 replacement pharmacies that will take over from the 1200 that have withdrawn.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0719/pharmacy.html

deepimpact

The IPU have attempted to negotiate, only to be met with silence. No other professional fees have been cut to this extent, is that equitable?

People will have to travel miles to collect their medicines, this is the fault of Mary Harney and the HSE. not the pharmacies that withdraw from the state schemes. If the HSE and IPU were to negotiate, this would be over very quickly, but that's my own opinion.

jeepers

scanlant wrote: »

If the HSE and IPU were to negotiate, this would be over very quickly, but that's my own opinion.

The last time Mary Harney left the HSE negotiate something they came back with the consultants contract; would you let them out again?

deepimpact

oh yes, that contact...my bad.

The IPU have put a fair alternative to the cuts which provide the HSE with a viable alternative to the present cuts. But they will not listen. It says a lot.

Although their spin machine seems to be well oiled from last year, and the more gullible are believing it.

Don't worry folks, the HSE has 4 pharmacies to cover the workload of 150. Yes, you'll have to travel three times the distance to get your regular meds, and will have to wait in line for an indeterminable amount of time in a hospital (I wonder where the waiting will be accomodated...), it's alright, People of Ireland, you can all go back to sleep. The HSE have a plan.

Vorsprung

Carlow52 wrote: »

Its time joe consumer organized a boycott of these self serving leeches

I'm not a pharmacist but I'd be interested to hear how to came to that conclusion.

Kristopherus

locum-motion wrote: »

Again!:

1. A 50% mark-up is equivalent to a 33.33% margin. 'Margin' and 'mark-up' are not the same thing. Don't say one when you mean the other!

2. There is a 50% mark-up on 26% of prescriptions. There is a 0% mark-up on 74% of prescriptions. (In both cases, a fee is payable on top.)

€74.....x.....1.0.......= €74
€26.....x.....1.5.......= €39
Total
€100.....................=€113, equivalent to a mark-up of 13% (or a margin of 11.5%.)

HSE spin docs are great at putting out the 50% figure. (Did you hear Joe Duffy last week?) They never mention the 74% that attracts 0% mark-up.

Locum, would you please indicate the mark-up levels in Vetinary supplies, Cosmetics, Photography supplies, Contraceptives and the host of other products that pharmacy shops retail. In that way we can all have a chance to see how the land lies.

deepimpact

Kristopherus wrote: »

Locum, would you please indicate the mark-up levels in Vetinary supplies, Cosmetics, Photography supplies, Contraceptives and the host of other products that pharmacy shops retail. In that way we can all have a chance to see how the land lies.

what? list ALL of them? you could be referring to thousands of products.

As has been explained before by Locum-motion and many others, the thing to watch out here for is the difference between mark-up and margin. The margin is used to cover wages, electricity etc, NOT the mark-up. Mark-up has been thrown around by the HSE to cover up for many of the inconsistencies of their proposals.

Pharmacy operates as a business that provides a (valuable) service to those who need it, and if there is no cashflow, then there is no pharmacy. No business can survive without a margin. End of story.

locum-motion

Quote:
Originally Posted by locum-motion
Again!:

1. A 50% mark-up is equivalent to a 33.33% margin. 'Margin' and 'mark-up' are not the same thing. Don't say one when you mean the other!

2. There is a 50% mark-up on 26% of prescriptions. There is a 0% mark-up on 74% of prescriptions. (In both cases, a fee is payable on top.)

€74.....x.....1.0.......= €74
€26.....x.....1.5.......= €39
Total
€100.....................=€113, equivalent to a mark-up of 13% (or a margin of 11.5%.)

HSE spin docs are great at putting out the 50% figure. (Did you hear Joe Duffy last week?) They never mention the 74% that attracts 0% mark-up.

Kristopherus wrote: »

Locum, would you please indicate the mark-up levels in Vetinary supplies, Cosmetics, Photography supplies, Contraceptives and the host of other products that pharmacy shops retail. In that way we can all have a chance to see how the land lies.

I'm sorry, I don't understand the relevance of your question to the matter at hand.
Or are you seriously suggesting that the entire country's prescription medicine requirements should be met by pharmacies - in many cases on a loss-making basis - just because other people buy veterinary supplies, cosmetics and photographic products?
Sure in that case, why should a pharmacist bother stocking prescription medicines at all, when there's apparently so much money to be made on photographs?
Kristopherus's solution to the problem = let the nation's make-up wearers subsidise the nation's prescriptions.
Nice one.

jeepers

Kristopherus wrote: »

Locum, would you please indicate the mark-up levels in Vetinary supplies, Cosmetics, Photography supplies, Contraceptives and the host of other products that pharmacy shops retail. In that way we can all have a chance to see how the land lies.

It sounds like you think the supply of medicines should be cross-subsidised. If that really feels right then why don't you contribute some of your salary to your local pharmacy and offer some of your time for free at the weekends.

However the big flaw is that for most community pharmacists dispensing is 80-90% of their business. The margin on the remaining 10-20% is between 15 & 30% (someone can correct me if I'm way-off)

tallaght01

Carlow52, your post has been deleted. Don't post here again unless you have something constructive to add.

Soapy Joe

A lot of the focus here is on pharmacists pay and mark up. That deabte is valid - but it is best done so round the table with the Minister for Health & Children. So where is she?

The HSE's contingency plans are totally inadequate. We have a problem. Pharmacists will stand by, slowly going out of business unless they accept a 35% cut in reimbursements. Meanwhile people will be put at risk by the HSE's new pharmacy model - stretching already stretched community hospitals. So where is Mary Harney?

Why will she not communicate with pharmacists?

locum-motion

Last edited by tallaght01; Today at 12:58. Reason: Personal abuse edited out by tallaght01. Don't do that again locum-motion, or you'll be banned from the forum.


Sorry!!
It gets very frustrating from time to time!

tallaght01

locum-motion wrote: »

Last edited by tallaght01; Today at 12:58. Reason: Personal abuse edited out by tallaght01. Don't do that again locum-motion, or you'll be banned from the forum.


Sorry!!
It gets very frustrating from time to time!

I do feel your pain :P But we do try and keep it civil in here, as much as is possible anyway

Heated argument is great, just try and knock the direct abuse on the head. Cheers for that.

tallaght01

Locum-motion, that's your very final warning. Even a hint of that again, and you're gone, permanently.

Vorsprung, I only deleted your post, because it would make no sense in isolation :P

Vorsprung

tallaght01 wrote: »

Locum-motion, that's your very final warning. Even a hint of that again, and you're gone, permanently.

Vorsprung, I only deleted your post, because it would make no sense in isolation :P

That's twice now!

bleg

Contingency Pharmacies illegal?

Madam, – The Health Service Executive (HSE) has announced the opening of a number of “contingency pharmacies” as part of its effort to replace the services of a thousand community pharmacies that will be withdrawing from government schemes from August 1st.

In order to supply medication to the public, these pharmacies must be legally registered as Retail Pharmacy Businesses under the Pharmacy Act 2007. Under that legislation, any person wishing to open a new Retail Pharmacy Business must apply to register that Retail Pharmacy Business at least 60 days before it is opened and have that application processed (including inspection) and registered in accordance with statutory rules before it may operate.

Can the HSE confirm that its contingency arrangements will be in compliance with the law of the land? – Yours, etc,

TIM DELANEY,

Gordon Street,

Ringsend,

Dublin 4.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/0721/1224250994056.html

deepimpact

and don't forget the 2,500 charge to put these "pharmacies" on the PSI's retail pharmacy register.

The sites are going to be completely overwhelmed, and I think the HSE know this, so the spin campaign should kick off over the next few days.