chuckle of the day 02032023

Posted on February 3, 2023 by Pharmaciststeve

Lawyers should never ask a Georgia grandma a question if they aren’t prepared for the answer.
In a trial, a Southern small-town prosecuting attorney called his first witness, a grandmotherly, elderly woman to the stand. He approached her and asked, ‘Mrs. Jones, do you know me?’ She responded, ‘Why, yes, I do know you, Mr. Williams. I’ve known you since you were a boy, and frankly, you’ve been a big disappointment to me. You lie, you cheat on your wife, and you manipulate people and talk about them behind their backs. You think you’re a big shot when you haven’t the brains to realize you’ll never amount to anything more than a two-bit paper pusher. Yes, I know you.’
The lawyer was stunned. Not knowing what else to do, he pointed across the room and asked, ‘Mrs. Jones, do you know the defense attorney?’
She again replied, ‘Why yes, I do. I’ve known Mr. Bradley since he was a youngster, too. He’s lazy, bigoted, and he has a drinking problem. He can’t build a normal relationship with anyone, and his law practice is one of the worst in the entire state. Not to mention he cheated on his wife with three different women. One of them was your wife. Yes, I know him.’
The defense attorney nearly died.
The judge asked both counselors to approach the bench and, in a very quiet voice, said,
‘If either of you idiots asks her if she knows me, I’ll send you both to the electric chair.

No alternative text description for this image

Filed under: General Problems | 7 Comments »

what does the DEA consider standard of care and best practice when prescribing controlled substances ?

Posted on February 1, 2023 by Pharmaciststeve

I asked this question to ChatGPT  https://chat.openai.com/chat one of the new AI BOTS and here is the answer that I got back. I am surprised that it mentioned regulations & guidelines… which the SCOTUS recently ruled in June 2022 that agencies like ATF & EPA cannot make new interpretations/regulations from the laws they are charged with enforcing. Apparently somewhere out there on the world wide web this AI BOT has identified that the DEA has stated or implied that they are in charge of enforcing regulations & guidelines. Does this suggest that the DEA has adopted the 2016 CDC opiate dosing guidelines as the standard of care and best practices, that any prescriber dosing a pt above the 90 MME/day is  without a valid medical necessity and thus the prescriber is providing opiates ILLEGALLY and violating the CSA ?

what does the DEA consider standard of care and best practice when prescribing controlled substances

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) considers the following to be standards of care and best practices when prescribing controlled substances:

  1. Thorough evaluation of the patient’s medical history and condition, including a review of any relevant records and tests.
  2. Use of the lowest effective dose of controlled substances for the shortest duration necessary to treat the patient’s condition.
  3. Monitoring of the patient’s response to treatment and adjusting the treatment plan as necessary.
  4. Regular assessment of the patient’s risk for abuse, addiction, and overdose.
  5. Maintenance of accurate and complete medical records, including all prescriptions for controlled substances.
  6. Implementation of proper security measures to prevent theft, loss, or diversion of controlled substances.
  7. Staying current with relevant laws, regulations, and guidelines related to controlled substance prescribing.

These standards are intended to ensure that controlled substances are used safely and responsibly, and to prevent the abuse, addiction, and overdose associated with these drugs.

Filed under: General Problems | 2 Comments »

magistrate characterized the prosecutors’ conduct as “deplorable.” Shockingly, the magistrate’s findings were ignored by the trial judge

Posted on January 31, 2023 by Pharmaciststeve

It is claimed that 90%+ of people taken to trial in a FEDERAL COURT is found GUILTY…  This story is just one example pointing out the illegal shenanigans of  a federal prosecutor to get a conviction and now our judicial system is trying to REVERSE a presidential pardon on this same person/case.  This just seems to point out the SOP of federal prosecutors to get a conviction.  If anyone followed Dr Pompy’s case,  the federal prosecutor in that case even tried to get witnesses to perjure themselves to get Dr Pompy convicted, but fortunately those witnesses told the truth when they were on the stand and Dr Pompy was found innocent… https://www.pharmaciststeve.com/in-the-trial-of-lesly-pompy-md-prosecution-rest-testimony-of-detective-marc-moore-michigan-blue-cross-fabricated-case-and-targeted-dr-pompy/

 

Biden’s Justice Department changes presidential pardons for the worse

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/bidens-justice-department-changes-presidential-pardons-worse

The Biden administration has been working overtime to erase Donald Trump’s legacy and now wants to nullify a clemency decision

The Biden administration has spent the last two years reversing almost every decision, executive order, or regulation put in his place by Donald Trump.  This comes as no surprise on issues that largely break along partisan lines, such as climate change, gender identity and immigration. Elections have consequences, after all. But the Biden team has now taken their crusade to erase Trump’s legacy to absurd lengths, going so far as to nullify one of Trump’s clemency decisions. 

Nowhere do presidents have more authority than when granting pardons and commuting prison sentences. Presidents turn to the clemency process to right a prosecutorial wrong, as President Trump did in the case of Philip Esformes. Now, the Department of Justice is trying to undo his clemency.

Esformes was indicted on 32 counts related to his healthcare business.  During the trial, a magistrate judge strongly criticized the prosecutors’ unethical moves to uncover and utilize information that was clearly covered by the attorney-client privilege. 

It’s easy to win a criminal case when you know the other side’s strategy.  And that is exactly what happened. Pointing out that the Justice Department blatantly broke the rules and then tried to cover it up, the magistrate characterized the prosecutors’ conduct as “deplorable.” Shockingly, the magistrate’s findings were ignored by the trial judge. 

With the advantage of having illicit, insider information, the Justice Department was able to convict Esformes on 20 counts. The jury was unable to reach a verdict, however, on six of the charges.  Phillip Esformes was then sentenced to two decades in prison. 

Faith groups brought the Esformes case to Trump’s attention.  Former Attorney-General John Ashcroft – certainly not a person who could be characterized as ‘soft on crime’ – called the prosecutorial misconduct in Esformes’ trial “amongst the most abusive” he has ever seen.

Trump was asked to grant clemency to Esformes on the recommendation of numerous respected legal figures, including former Attorneys-General Edwin Meese, Alberto Gonzales, and Michael Mukasey, as well as former Deputy Attorney-General Larry Thompson. These former law enforcement officials saw the prosecutorial misconduct as fundamentally tainting Esformes’ conviction. 

Looking to right a wrong, Trump commuted Philip Esformes’ sentence to time served. But that’s not the end of the story. 

Still stinging from the criticism of prosecutorial misconduct two years later, the Justice Department is working feverishly to reverse Trump’s clemency decision.  DOJ intends to re-try Esformes on the six counts where the jury couldn’t reach a verdict. 

Prosecutors hate when presidents exercise their clemency powers. They view a grant of clemency as implicit criticism of their work. In the Esformes case, that is exactly what it was. This is an extraordinary move by government lawyers whose pride is hurt. In the annals of American history, no prosecutor has ever tried to reverse a presidential commutation in this manner.

The fact is Trump’s granting of clemency was intended to end the government’s prosecution of Phillip Esformes, according to those who understand the process. But with the Biden administration looking broadly to erase Trump’s record, those burrowed in at the Justice Department saw a three-pronged opportunity.  

By retrying Esformes, partisan operatives at DOJ could further erode the legacy of the prior administration.  They could rewrite the history of the case to cover up the misconduct identified by the magistrate.  And they could set a precedent that fundamentally weakens Presidential clemency powers going forward. 

The Justice Department’s move is audacious.  But for those who believe in a strong chief executive, it represents an alarming attempt to undercut presidential authority to review criminal cases and address unfairness, overzealousness, and other miscarriages of justice. 

Filed under: General Problems | 2 Comments »

the DEA told Newsweek it’s not responsible for pts inability to get prescriptions

Posted on January 30, 2023 by Pharmaciststeve

DEA Says It Doesn’t ‘Regulate Practice of Medicine’

Amid Patient Backlash to Proposed Opioid Prescription Cuts’

https://www.newsweek.com/dea-responds-chronic-pain-victims-opioid-prescriptions-1465090

After hundreds of chronic pain patients begged the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to reconsider its proposed cuts to opioid production,

the agency told Newsweek it’s not responsible for their inability to get prescriptions.

If the DEA adopts the cuts, they would reduce production of some of the most commonly prescribed opioids in the United States for the fourth year in a row, drastically cutting fentanyl and oxymorphone, by 31 percent and 55 percent, respectively, as well as hydrocodone (19 percent), hydromorphone (25 percent) and oxycodone (9 percent).

These cuts should have no bearing on the decisions made by caregivers and their “legitimate pain patients,” according to the DEA.

It’s possible patients are getting caught in the crossfire from a flurry of recent federal policies aimed at culling illegal abuse of the drugs, but it’s not clear which policy, if any, is at fault for their reported lack of access.

Millions of Americans Addicted
Tablets of oxycodone from a prescription. A recent DEA proposal would reduce production of some of the most commonly prescribed opioids in the United States for the fourth year in a row. Eric Baradat/Getty images

In proposing the aggregate production quota, the DEA looks at the total amount of substances needed to meet the country’s medical, scientific, industrial and export needs for the year, including dispensed prescriptions, the DEA told Newsweek in a statement. That means the agency’s production limits should match, not control, demand.

The DEA “does not regulate the practice of medicine. We do not get between a doctor and his or her patient,” a DEA spokesperson said. “We also want legitimate pain patients, their families and caregivers to know that DEA does not seek to limit or take away their vital prescriptions.”

The cuts over the past few years are an attempt to change course after the DEA allowed drugmakers to ramp up opioid production between 2003 and 2013, the same period when more than 140,000 people perished from overdoses in the United States.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the surgeon general have implemented their own agenda to combat the opioid epidemic, issuing strict guidelines for doctors prescribing the drugs in 2016. On October 10, the Trump administration told physicians to use more caution in applying the guidelines, following widespread reports that people were cut off their prescriptions or even turned away, according to The New York Times.

It’s possible the guidelines, or the general stigma now associated with prescription painkillers, have led to the tapering off of supply reported by many chronic pain patients to the DEA. One patient, a stroke survivor, said he took prescription opioids without problems until 2017, when he said federal regulations made the drugs too hard to obtain. Since then, medical cannabis has helped but became less effective when his condition deteriorated. Now, he can’t travel or leave his home much because of the pain.

In 2018, an investigation by former Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill exposed financial ties between some of the world’s biggest producers of painkillers and third-party advocacy groups. Purdue Pharma, Mylan, Janssen Pharmaceuticals and other major drugmakers donated more than $10 million to patient advocacy groups like the National Pain Foundation, the American Geriatrics Society and the American Chronic Pain Association.

 

 

Filed under: General Problems | 9 Comments »

NY Times reporter looking for pts having trouble getting controlled med Rxs filled

Posted on January 30, 2023 by Pharmaciststeve

ellen.gabler@nytimes.com

 

Filed under: General Problems | 9 Comments »

Putting artificial intelligence to work for you

Posted on January 29, 2023 by Pharmaciststeve

Here is a link to a interesting program… it is called ChatGPT and here is a explanation on WIKIPEDIA   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChatGPT

Basically you click on the link below and ask (type in ) a question and it will give you back a answer to your question. It is free to use and it has only been around for a few months.  It is not PERFECT, but I posted below the question that I “asked it” and its response.

https://chat.openai.com/chat

filing an appeal with Medicare denial of payment ?

o file an appeal with Medicare denial of payment:

  1. Review the Explanation of Medicare Benefits (EOMB) statement and determine the reason for denial of payment.
  2. Follow the instructions on the EOMB for appealing the decision.
  3. Prepare a written request for a redetermination of payment, stating the reason for the appeal and any supporting documentation.
  4. Submit the appeal within 120 days of the date on the EOMB.
  5. Wait for a response from Medicare, which will be in the form of a revised EOMB or a notice of additional review.

Filed under: General Problems | Leave a Comment »

Correcting the misperception of palliative care

Posted on January 29, 2023 by Pharmaciststeve

Correcting the misperception of palliative care

https://www.mcknights.com/blogs/guest-columns/correcting-the-misperception-of-palliative-care/

Compared to other medical subspecialties, palliative care is relatively young, but it has grown substantially in the last 20 years. As of 2019, 71.5% of US hospitals with more than 50 beds have a palliative care program, compared to just 7.0% in 2001 (Morrison & Meier, 2019). More recently, palliative care outside of the hospital setting has increased in popularity.

But palliative care is an often-misunderstood term. Even for patients and providers who believe they understand what it is, there is evidence that many misconceptions exist. Recurrent misunderstandings and misrepresentations of palliative care prevent patients from getting the care that they need when they need it. We must, therefore, correct the record for all clinicians treating seriously ill patients.

Palliative care is specialized medical care for people living with serious illness. Focused on providing relief from the symptoms and stress of serious illness, the goal is to improve quality of life for both the patient and the family.

Provided by a team of specialists who work together with a patient’s other doctors to provide an extra layer of support, palliative care is based on the needs of the patient, not on the patient’s prognosis. It is appropriate at any age and at any stage, and it can be provided along with curative treatment.

How do we do this? We do this by providing complex pain and symptom management, and in-depth communication geared to quality of life. We acknowledge that our patients are humans with feelings, emotions, and lives outside of the exam room. We view the whole person, provide the facts – and we listen. We allow space for silence and we validate feelings. We do all of this while our patients receive disease-targeted treatment.

Palliative care provides an extra layer of support while people get the best of what medicine has to offer in terms of cure. It is recommended that palliative care be provided all the way upstream, even upon diagnosis, if the need to mitigate complex symptoms and stress is there. Patients who are mothers, fathers, daughters and sons deserve this.

Filed under: General Problems | 7 Comments »

Minnesota bill: states that EVERY INDIVIDUAL has a fundamental right to make individual autonomous health decisions

Posted on January 28, 2023 by Pharmaciststeve

This post is not about Roe v. Wade or Doe v. Gomez or Abortion rights in general. Our Declaration of Independence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life%2C_Liberty_and_the_pursuit_of_Happiness states the following: We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness

Is this just one more example of bureaucrats at numerous levels of city/county/state/federal – slicing & dicing the sacred & undeniable rights granted to each and everyone of the citizens of the USA. I wonder if any of these women who are seeking an abortion in MN, would also have individual autonomous health decisions about her PAIN MANAGEMENT ?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/minnesota-senate-passes-abortion-bill-opponents-call-most-extreme-nation

Abortion rights advocates said Minnesota bill is necessary to make it more difficult for a judge to erode abortion rights in the future

After 15 hours of contentious debate, the Minnesota Senate passed legislation early Saturday morning that guarantees the right to abortion, a bill pro-life Republicans have called the “most extreme” in the nation. 

The Protect Reproductive Options (PRO) Act passed the state Senate 34-33, after Republicans had unsuccessfully tried to amend the bill 35 times. The bill states that “every individual has a fundamental right to make autonomous decisions about the individual’s own reproductive health.” 

Democrats had fast-tracked the legislation in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last summer to overturn Roe v. Wade – ending federal protections for abortion. While the right to abortion was previously guaranteed in a 1995 decision by the Minnesota Supreme Court, Doe v. Gomez, abortion rights activists and Democrats said the PRO act was necessary to codify abortion rights into state law, as well as rights to contraception, fertility treatment, and pregnancy. 

“What Minnesotans are afraid of is to see, potentially, that what happened at the federal level with our U.S. Supreme Court could eventually, in some future time, happen here in Minnesota,” said bill sponsor state Sen. Jennifer McEwen, a Democrat from Duluth. “The decisions of our courts, the upholding of our fundamental human rights, are only as strong as the judges who uphold them.”

Abortion protesters on both sides pack the halls outside the Minnesota Senate chamber on Friday, Jan. 27, 2023, at the State Capitol in St. Paul, Minnesota. (AP Photo/Steve Karnowski)

Pro-life and pro-choice protesters flocked to the Minnesota State Capitol building to voice their opinions on the PRO Act Friday. (AP Photo/Steve Karnowski)

Supporters of the bill say it will not change the status quo in Minnesota. 

“The PRO Act solidifies Minnesotans’ human rights into state law and is an insurance policy that our rights won’t be taken away by politicians or judges,” said Dr. Sarah Traxler, chief medical officer at Planned Parenthood North Central States. 

“All I want, and doctors across Minnesota want, is to provide the best care we can to our patients. And by passing the PRO Act into state law, the Minnesota Legislature will allow us to do just that,” she added in a statement. 

The Minnesota Senate passed a bill Saturday to write broad protections for abortion rights into state statutes, which would make it difficult for future courts to roll back. (AP Photo/Steve Karnowski)

Opponents disagree, arguing the bill establishes a right to abortion up until the moment of birth. Republicans had attempted to amend the bill with “guard rails” that would restrict abortions in the third-trimester, but the newly-elected Democratic majority blocked their amendments. 

“Today we are not just codifying Roe v. Wade or Doe v. Gomez, as the author has indicated, we are enacting the most extreme bill in the country,” said Republican Senate Minority Leader Mark Johnson, of East Grand Forks during debate. 

The PRO Act now heads to Democratic Gov. Tim Walz’s desk for his signature. He has said he supports the bill and will sign it into law. 

Filed under: General Problems | 3 Comments »

It is Time for Policymakers to Protect Patients from Predatory Practices of Insurers and PBMs

Posted on January 27, 2023 by Pharmaciststeve

It is Time for Policymakers to Protect Patients from Predatory Practices of Insurers and PBMs

https://www.acsh.org/news/2023/01/17/it-time-policymakers-protect-patients-predatory-practices-insurers-and-pbms-16816

Policymakers often talk about protecting patients against the predatory practices of insurers and PBMs. It is about time for state and federal legislators to support such legislations to ensure that ONLY patients benefit from such patient assistance programs and to stop PBM and insurers from profiteering on the backs of patients.

The following is a snippet of a 1/15/23 article written by Dr. Robert Popovian (American Council on Science and Health advisor) and Louis Tharp for Healthcare Business Today,

Although per capita patient out-of-pocket (OOP) spending on prescription medications has dropped, averages are deceiving. In the U.S., a modest percentage of patients are burdened with unsustainable OOP biopharmaceutical spending. These are the patients who depend on brand-name medicines that have no generic or biosimilar equivalents. The primary contributor to the OOP burden is the changing of pharmaceutical benefit design. Such evolution from fixed-cost co-payments to percentage-based coinsurance and the expansion of high-deductible plans has dramatically increased the OOP share of drug costs paid by those patients. 

In addition, pharmacy benefit management companies (PBMs) and insurers have devised a payment model in which patients do not directly benefit from multi-billion-dollar concessions, rebates, and fees collected by PBMs and insurers from biopharmaceutical companies. In contrast to physician or dentist visits, where a patient’s coinsurance or deductible is based on lower prices negotiated by the insurer, patients’ shares of medication costs are based on the inflated list price. Subsequently, biopharmaceuticals are the only segment of the health system in which patients do not realize the benefit of lower prices negotiated on their behalf.

Over the past several years, biopharmaceutical companies have offered assistance to eligible patients to help offset OOP costs. The monetary value of these manufacturers’ patient assistance programs (PAPs) places the pharmaceutical companies among some of the largest U.S. charities. To devalue PAPs, PBMs and insurers have instituted accumulator and maximizer programs. These initiatives prohibit the patient assistance funds provided through pharmaceutical companies from counting toward the insured individual’s deductible or maximum OOP spending. Consequently, accumulator and maximizer programs force patients to double-pay. The insurer and PBM collect the patient assistance funds provided by the biopharmaceutical industry meant for the patient, while patients must continue making OOP payments until they meet their maximum requirements. Simply put, PBMs and insurers increase profitability on the backs of patients.

Filed under: General Problems | 2 Comments »

CVS, Walmart to Cut Pharmacy Hours as Staffing Squeeze Continues

Posted on January 27, 2023 by Pharmaciststeve

CVS, Walmart to Cut Pharmacy Hours as Staffing Squeeze Continues

Operating schedules remain ‘pain point’ as chains seek to improve work environment

https://www.wsj.com/articles/cvs-walmart-to-cut-pharmacy-hours-as-staffing-squeeze-continues-11674796388

CVS says most of its reduced hours will be when there is low patient demand or when a store has only one pharmacist on site.Photo: GABBY JONES for The Wall Street Journal

CVS Health Corp. CVS 0.14%increase; green up pointing triangle

and Walmart Inc. WMT 0.77%increase; green up pointing triangle

are cutting pharmacy hours in the midst of a pharmacist shortage that has plagued the nation’s biggest drugstore chains throughout the Covid-19 pandemic.

CVS, the largest U.S. drugstore chain by revenue, plans in March to cut or shift hours at about two-thirds of its roughly 9,000 U.S. locations. Walmart plans to reduce pharmacy hours by closing at 7 p.m. instead of 9 p.m. at most of its roughly 4,600 stores by March.

Walgreens Boots Alliance Inc. previously said it was operating thousands of stores on reduced hours because of staffing shortages. Combined, the three chains operate some 24,000 retail pharmacies across the U.S. 

Walmart last year raised pay for pharmacy technicians.Photo: Ryan David Brown for The Wall Street Journal

Earlier in the pandemic, CVS and Walgreens struggled to meet demand for Covid shots and vaccines. The chains cut hours and, in some cases, closed pharmacies for entire weekends. Walmart, which sells a wider variety of goods, cut overall store hours, in part, to cope with Covid-related labor shortages and make time to restock empty shelves as demand for basics such as toilet paper surged.  

CVS, in a recent notice to field leaders, said most of its reduced hours will be during times when there is low patient demand or when a store has only one pharmacist on site, which the company said is a “top pain point,” for its pharmacists. 

CVS said in a statement it periodically reviews pharmacy operating hours as part of the normal course of business to ensure stores are open during high-demand times. “By adjusting hours in select stores this spring, we ensure our pharmacy teams are available to serve patients when they’re most needed,” the company said, adding that customers who encounter a closed pharmacy can seek help at a nearby location. 

At Walmart, the shorter hours offer pharmacy workers a better work-life balance and best serve customers in the hours they are most likely to visit the pharmacy, said a company spokeswoman. “This change is a direct result of feedback from our pharmacy associates and listening to our customers,” she said. Some Walmart pharmacies already close before 9 p.m., which will become standard across the country after the change.

An online community message board for Holliston, Mass., a small town about 30 miles outside Boston, was populated with messages last month from locals venting about the unpredictable hours of the CVS in town, said resident Audra Friend, who does digital communications for a nonprofit. Ms. Friend said she struggled for a week in November to refill a prescription for a rescue inhaler at the store because the pharmacy was sporadically closed.

“I would go in, and there was a note on the door saying, ‘Sorry, pharmacy closed,’” said Ms. Friend, who switched her prescriptions to a 24-hour CVS about 5 miles away. She said it would be better to have consistently shorter hours if that meant fewer unexpected closures. “At least that way we’re not just showing up at CVS to find out the pharmacist isn’t there,” she said.

A CVS spokeswoman said that in recent weeks the Holliston store has had no unexpected closures.

The drugstore chains have been working to stop an exodus of pharmacy staff by offering such perks as bonuses, higher pay and guaranteed lunch breaks. Pharmacists were already in short supply before the pandemic, and consumer demand for Covid-19 shots and tests put additional strains on pharmacy operations. Walgreens recently said staffing problems persist and remain a drag on revenue. 

Retail pharmacies, which benefited from a bump in sales and profits during the pandemic, are now reworking their business models as demand for Covid tests and vaccines decline and generic-drug sales generate smaller profits.

CVS and Walgreens are closing hundreds of U.S. stores and launching new healthcare offerings as they try to transform themselves into providers of a range of medical services, from diagnostic testing to primary care.  

This past summer, Walgreens was offering bonuses up to $75,000 to attract pharmacists, while CVS is working to develop a system in which pharmacists could perform more tasks remotely. The median annual pay for pharmacists was nearly $129,000 in 2021, according to Labor Department data, which also projected slower-than-average employment growth in the profession through 2031. 

In the past year, the chains have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into recruiting more pharmacists and technicians but staffing up has proven difficult. Pharmacists remain overworked, pharmacy-chain executives have acknowledged, and fewer people are attending pharmacy schools. The number of pharmacy-school applicants has dropped by more than one-third from its peak a decade ago, according to the Pharmacy College Application Service, a centralized pharmacy-school application service.

Meanwhile, many pharmacists who aren’t quitting the field are leaving drugstores to work in hospitals or with other employers. 

Walmart raised wages for U.S. pharmacy technicians in the past year, bringing average pay to more than $20 an hour. Walmart said it planned to raise the minimum wage for all U.S. hourly workers in its stores and warehouses to $14 next month, from $12.

CVS and Walgreens last year raised their minimum wages to $15 an hour.

 

Filed under: General Problems | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »