$100 million class action suit































can someone please explain to me the logic in complaining about low wages?

What happens during an interview? The company meets a possible hire and explains the role. The hire then reviews their background and experience. The two parties than have to determine if there's a fit.

If the company is interested, it can offer you a salary for your efforts at what it thinks you are worth. The individual can hear that number and decide if it is enough for them and accept or refuse the amount.

If they offered $20,000....you'd probably refuse it
if they offered $40,000....you'd probably refuse it

They offered $65,000......you accepted it.

Now four years later you decide that it wasn't enough and you'd like more money?


Suppose the company reviewed your last four years of employment and decided they didn't get the return on their investment and they'd like you to pay back some of your salary? They'd like to pay you less now.

How is either case different?


Point is: Regardless of what anyone else is getting paid or not, you were presented a salary to accept or decline. You accepted it. How dare you think you are entitled to anything else after the fact!

Funny how no one has a opposite argument to present

Why is that?
 






























Discriminatring?? The facts speak for themselves......you have Reps working all over the country and they have so called HR Business Partners playing with themselves attending meetings all day in NJ. I don't blame her....why would anyone put someone right out of college handle HR for an Area on the other side of the country. Most pharma have HR at the Area offices, but then again 80% of HR are Managers or above and they hand out promotions like candy. She was out of her league and the Managers did what they wanted to do...hence the accusations in this lawsuit.

It's not her fault....she shouldn't have been put in that position.
 












Will someone please explain to me how one of the "plaintiffs" in this so-called lawsuit still works for our company? AND...... Still has the same manager she makes claims against in the lawsuit? Seriously??? If this isn't grounds for dismissal of this stupid case then I don't know what is.
 






In reading the suit I see that they are complaining about having to attend dinners in smoky environments and then later they are complaining that other reps are "rewarded" with dinners that they weren't invited to attend?

So you are seeking $100 million because you weren't asked to attend a dinner that you wouldn't want to attend?

While the above example is quite humorous, I feel sad because this frivolous lawsuit cheapens the credibility of people who may have actual real discrimination going on elsewhere. So sad.

So lets get his straight with statements from the "complaint"

The reps DID NOT want to be subjected to "smoky" dinners with male doctors = work

The reps DID want to be included for "rewards" dinners from DM = play


Hmmmm. This shows insight to the priorities of the reps, no? They want to go out if it's for fun, but not if they have to work? That doesn't sound like a go-getter, business driven individual does it? I bet that same playtime first attitude comes across in interviews from promotions. Maybe THAT'S why you didn't get promoted? Is that discrimination?
 






























Wow. Imagine that I am just some poor schlub online and I shredded every one of the supposed "offenses" without any valid response from the other side. Just wait until court. I guess you're all banking on a really dumb jury?
 






Wow. Imagine that I am just some poor schlub online and I shredded every one of the supposed "offenses" without any valid response from the other side. Just wait until court. I guess you're all banking on a really dumb jury?

I'm guessing this "poor schlub" is one of the culprits? Actually, it would seem the last couple comments originate with the same scared author.