I hope what I heard isn't true. And yet, I think it is probably spot on. What I'm about to tell you is unconfirmed, of course, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is the exact truth.
The RPM that quit felt compelled to do so because she wasn't getting along with the director. One of the things that bothered her was that each year in June the director asked the RPMs to rank the pharmacists in their area... based not only on metrics, but also on customer complaints and "write ups."
Now here's the bad part... the RPMs were asked to come up with an action plan to eliminate the BOTTOM THREE on their lists... to come up with a strategy to either get them fired or force them to quit.
When she asked why they couldn't come up with an action plan to move them up the list, the director told her the bottom three weren't worth the trouble.
"We have plenty of graduating students we can hire to replace them," she was told.
If this really is true, it sucks. I've known some really bad pharmacists over the years, but to strategically plan to eliminate someone? These are people with families and house payments and responsibilities. I think that's just dirty and rotten. I've seen employees let go at other companies only as a last resort after being given every opportunity (and then some) to improve. This isn't like that. If true, this is horrible.