Job satisfaction of public sector pharmacists in the Nelson Mandela Metropole

There is a severe shortage of pharmacists in the Nelson Mandela Metropole with a current vacancy rate of over 50 percent on the approved posts for pharmacists (PERSAL 31 December 2007). The metropole has struggled to retain pharmacists in spite of the urban setting. The aim of this research was to measure the level of job satisfaction amongst pharmacists working in the public sector of the Nelson Mandela Metropole. The research objective was to conduct a questionnaire-based survey of pharmacists working in public sector facilities in the Nelson Mandela Metropole in order to assess their levels of job satisfaction, and report the findings with appropriate recommendations to management. For this study, the modified JDI Index survey was used focusing on the subscales; work, pay, promotion, supervision, co-workers and patient interaction. Possible retention strategies were also investigated through the use of open ended questions. The questionnaire was administered to 30 pharmacists in full time employment within the public sector in the Nelson Mandela Metropole. A total of 25 questionnaires were returned giving an 83.3 percent response rate. The pharmacists were generally satisfied with the job, their pharmacy co-workers, patient interaction and supervision but were not satisfied with salary and promotion opportunities in the public sector. Using a score from 1 to 5, with 5 indicating a level of high satisfaction, the mean scores for the six subscales were, job (3.2), income (2.1), patient interaction (3.3), promotion (2.0), co-workers (3.4) and supervision (3.7). Financial packages (23, n=25) and fringe benefits (22, n=25) were indicated as the most effective strategies in attracting and retaining pharmacists into the public service. The majority of respondents (15, n=25) agreed that the favourable working hours, flexibility of work, regular working hours with no weekend duties were the most vii positive aspects about their job. The negative aspects mentioned by the majority of the respondents (15, n=25) included poor remuneration, unrealistic notch increases and salaries that were not market-related and uncompetitive