The CCA has responded to the GPhC’s consultation on changes to the Initial Education and Training (IET) standards for pharmacy technicians.
CCA warn that pharmacy technician training proposals could prevent access to professional careers for thousands of workers and cost the community pharmacy sector up to £150m per year.
The Company Chemists’ Association (CCA) has warned that proposals to change the initial education and training (IET) standards for pharmacy technicians could have significant unintended consequences. The proposals will exacerbate workforce shortages by creating a block for many of the people currently looking to begin training as a healthcare professional and increase costs for employers and the Government by up to £150 million each year.
The CCA has highlighted these concerns in their response to the General Pharmaceutical Council’s (GPhC) consultation on proposals for raising the minimum qualification level for Pharmacy Technicians from Regulated Qualifications Framework (RQF) Level 3 to Level 4.
The CCA and its members recognise that pharmacy technicians play a vital role within community pharmacy and we support efforts to develop their skills. Our members employ over 2,700 pharmacy technicians across Great Britain, which is over a third of the total community pharmacy technician workforce. In addition, our members employ approximately half of all trained dispensing assistants and medicines counter assistants who are undertaking training to become a Level 3 pharmacy technician.[i]
We are very concerned that raising the minimum qualification level will create considerable barriers to many of the people who would normally successfully train to become Pharmacy Technicians in community pharmacy. The proposed changes will therefore significantly worsen the current workforce shortages, increasing costs at a time when pharmacy businesses are already on their knees financially.
The financial impact of increasing qualification requirements would be significant. Training costs could rise by £75–100 million annually, and this is against a backdrop of underfunding, which would likely lead to employers reducing training places. On top of this, technicians qualified at Level 4 would reasonably expect around 12% higher pay, adding an estimated £50 million per year in additional costs to community pharmacy employers.
The CCA believe that current Level 3 training meets the needs of core pharmacy technician roles, with any advanced skills able to be developed through targeted post-qualification training.
There is limited need for Level 4 advanced skills in the core community pharmacy technician role. This presents two challenges.
Firstly, Department for Education data shows that nearly a third (30%) of pharmacy technician apprentices would either fail their end-point assessment or leave the course before taking the assessment. A more rigorous course, with little benefit to community pharmacy technician roles, may also increase the dropout rate.
Secondly, there is a real concern that this would lead to a ‘brain-drain’ with technicians leaving community pharmacy altogether after they have qualified for settings where they can use their advanced skills more fully. All these factors would severely impact the number of pharmacy technicians available to community pharmacy employers, exacerbating the significant workforce shortages already found across the sector.
These changes could also negate the positive impact of changes to pharmacy supervision. Regulatory changes, soon to be enacted, aim to free up pharmacists to deliver more patient-facing care. As part of the changes, technicians will be given more responsibility over dispensing.
The proposed changes to pharmacy technician training will reduce the capacity for changed ways of working. Such a retrograde step runs contrary to the ambitions outlined for the sector in the Government’s 10-Year Health Plan for the NHS. Instead of raising the minimum qualification, the CCA proposes:
- Strengthening Level 3 learning outcomes to ensure robust preparation for core roles.
- Encouraging targeted additional training for technicians taking on advanced responsibilities.
Chief Executive of the Company Chemists’ Association, Malcolm Harrison said:
“We absolutely support efforts to enhance standards across the profession. But there are better ways to raise standards than simply increasing the minimum entry level for pharmacy technicians.
These proposals make little sense at a time when the sector should be harnessing the benefits of employing pharmacy technicians.
We must be allowed to raise standards without pulling up the ladder for those looking to start a professional career. We must protect access, diversity, and progression while strengthening training where it matters, and we must ensure the sustainability of the profession within community pharmacy.”
[i] Community Pharmacy Workforce Survey 2024.