$100 million class action suit

Quote
I look forward to seeing the actual details of this case. The press release is just filled with "leagalease" language trying to paint the company in the worst light possible. I see women were asked to " wine and dine with male physicians" but didn't mention that male reps were asked to do also. I am sure female physicians were also part of that. it's a sales position and wining and dining are part of the job. I'd like to know specifically where the "smoke filled" meetings are being held. You can't smoke in public places where I am from. Sounds like a law firm trying to murky the waters to gain sympathy and that's why I hate lawyers.
 






First of all, the men proactively were talking about their salaries without any questioning. Like I said, we were all around 22 years old so no one realized it was an inappropriate practice. It's people like you who always assume the woman is stupid or at fault that create these types of lawsuits. I wonder how you treat your wife, that's is, is you're married. Also, you an find the actual court document of the details of the lawsuit, not just the press release if you google it. I believe there's a link to it on the pharmalot website, approx the 8th search result down. It's about 60 pages long.
 






Anonymous said:
I look forward to seeing the actual details of this case. The press release is just filled with "leagalease" language trying to paint the company in the worst light possible. I see women were asked to " wine and dine with male physicians" but didn't mention that male reps were asked to do also. I am sure female physicians were also part of that. it's a sales position and wining and dining are part of the job. I'd like to know specifically where the "smoke filled" meetings are being held. You can't smoke in public places where I am from. Sounds like a law firm trying to murky the waters to gain sympathy and that's why I hate lawyers.
Click to expand...

Then maybe we should consider filing one on behalf of all males. I have been to meetings in Vegas when we have to walk through smokey casinos, in AZ and CA where we have dinner meetings after meetings in restaurants where there's been smoking. You don't have an option to attend or not. I agree with the suit on this.
 






Anonymous said:
How quickly do you think one of them will be promoted? Then a female will go into that spot, a female will go into the DM spot and another female will be hired!
Because of the lawsuit there will be 2 RD spots open and DM spots open that will be filled by women then the others by women. Soon this company will be full of women in leadership spots.
If the ABDs were aware of these complaints they should be fired too as well as HR!
So women not ready for promotion will be be because of this lawsuit! Nice real nice!
Click to expand...

Are there any openings for RDs or ABDs? What's open at HQ?
 












Anonymous said:
I have a feeling what sexist Sr. DM wrote this. Look for another position. This would be the most rewarding thing you could do for DSI. Oh and your name was on the list. Just saying.
Click to expand...

No BH is in northeast now- so south is open. Which 1 of the 2 female RDs will get it? One will be hired, company is watching their steps to prove lawsuit is wrong!
 












Anonymous said:
There are only two female RDs watch them get promoted quickly and then females would be taking the vacated RD spots
Click to expand...

Managed Markets is trying to "help". Just promoted 1 Female to National Director, CAMs when there were three men who wanted the position. Shes highly qualified and well respected.

BUT- DSI needed in addition to one white female- a African-American Female- granted theres very little to choose from- in fact there is only ONE. So, of course, the ONE minority female person gets promoted- Absolutely doesnt deserve the promotion and she even knows it! What we need is real career pathing and develop the talent we have and put the right people ( Men and Women) into the right jobs.

ALL the men promoted in MM this time except one in the West are a bunch of incompetent boys that kiss the National Director's (BA's )axx!

I dont approve of lawsuits BUT something has to get the Sr. Leaderships attention- it not just the women who are getting shafted. There's plenty of men who arent getting what they deserve BECAUSE they are not part of the Boy's Club- any man who has any integrity, self-respect and real ability to do his job wouldnt join the Boy's Club even if he was invited!

We have a lot of remarkable talent- Men and Women. The Boy's Club MUST be taken down- all of them including our CEO. Anybody know how we can speak with Japan?
 






Anonymous said:
Actually that's exactly what people did. We were all brand new to the industry, less than two years out of college but got offered drastically different base salaries. Besides, if you actually read the lawsuit you'd realize it has to do with a lot more than salary. Every single woman who has been on maternity leave at this company who I have spoken to has mysteriously owed the company money upon returning from leave. And we're talking about thousands of dollars here, not pennies.
Click to expand...

I just read the entire lawsuit and in my opinion it seems quite weak. A rep offered the mid 60s for a few years experience in 09 sounds pretty accurate to me. Funny how they listed salaries for a few of the people, but not others? My guess is that they made more and would dilute their attempt at swaying the opinion. I saw a complaint about not being able to switch territories becuause they filled it with an outside hire. That makes perfect business sense to me. Why take a rep who has already shown success in a territory and put them in a new territory to start over? That makes two territories with new people in them instead of the one? Sorry if that's not the best situation for the current employee but they've already proven they can work that territory and this was during a pretty serious economic time when success for company survival was to have all territories running at top speed.

I do find the maternity leave issue odd. However, if YOU read the lawsuit, you would see that they did not "mysteriously owe" the company money. They were in fact OVERpaid while on leave. It was money they should have never received in the first place. Curious that they were so clearly aware to know when they were being UNDERpaid, but oblivious to being OVERpaid? Don't you get a paystub every two weeks? Don't you receive paperwork when you go on leave?

Aside from a couple of dumb comments from some DMs and RDs, some of which weren't even heard by the people in the lawsuit and only informed after the fact second hand, I just don't see a smoking gun here. Sorry. maybe it wil end up like the AZsettlement where a bunch of reps got about $1,500 each. I don't knowif that would be worth it to me to attach my name to a suit that essentially will ban me from ever getting hired by another pharma.

But this is all just my opinion.
 






It's not only women, it's anyone over 45. I wouldn't be surprised if they were slapped with a class-action lawsuit for age discrimination. Replacing someone female, over 45 with a younger man is not the way to go, especially if you're already being sued for gender discrimination. Makes you wonder what they're thinking.
 
























Every press release has the same salacious line in the beginning of the article, "female reps made to wine and dine male doctors". We all know it should read "ALL reps made to wine and dine ALL doctors". That 's the truth and that's what sales is. You have to wonder the validity of the suit when the maniplations of the truth are obvious by their own words. It sounds like a money grab to me.
 






Anonymous said:
I just read the entire lawsuit and in my opinion it seems quite weak. A rep offered the mid 60s for a few years experience in 09 sounds pretty accurate to me. Funny how they listed salaries for a few of the people, but not others? My guess is that they made more and would dilute their attempt at swaying the opinion. I saw a complaint about not being able to switch territories becuause they filled it with an outside hire. That makes perfect business sense to me. Why take a rep who has already shown success in a territory and put them in a new territory to start over? That makes two territories with new people in them instead of the one? Sorry if that's not the best situation for the current employee but they've already proven they can work that territory and this was during a pretty serious economic time when success for company survival was to have all territories running at top speed.

I do find the maternity leave issue odd. However, if YOU read the lawsuit, you would see that they did not "mysteriously owe" the company money. They were in fact OVERpaid while on leave. It was money they should have never received in the first place. Curious that they were so clearly aware to know when they were being UNDERpaid, but oblivious to being OVERpaid? Don't you get a paystub every two weeks? Don't you receive paperwork when you go on leave?

Aside from a couple of dumb comments from some DMs and RDs, some of which weren't even heard by the people in the lawsuit and only informed after the fact second hand, I just don't see a smoking gun here. Sorry. maybe it wil end up like the AZsettlement where a bunch of reps got about $1,500 each. I don't knowif that would be worth it to me to attach my name to a suit that essentially will ban me from ever getting hired by another pharma.

But this is all just my opinion.
Click to expand...

The person who wanted to switch territories was NOT even given an interview. Reguardless of what would have happened, she deserved an interview. Then if you go on and read her complaint, she was not promoted in a territory she was already in, and instead they promoted someone LESS qualified from an outside territory so that makes your arguement of not wanting 2 territories with new people in them a moot point. I think you need to READ a little more closely.

But that is just my opinion.
 






About the maternity leave thing: after I came back from leave they "docked" my pay for over two months taking out about $325 per pay period. When I looked at the stubs from when I was being paid while out on leave-none of the checks were even for the same amount but I certainly wasn't getting paid more than my salary. No one could explain what the "overpayment" was so I just had to let it go. All I have to say is I don't understand how they can make something so complicated. You get paid 9 weeks for c-section, 7 for vaginal delivery so why are all the paycheck a completely different amounts?? And on top of it, if you stay out a few weeks longer they send you debit cards in the mail as a form of payment. I feel like they make it intentionally confusing so there's no way you can figure out what the real deal is. Just my two cents. This should all be automated, don't understand why it's not--just like our regular paycheck a while not on leave.
 






Thanks for sharing the info. I am calling tomorrow. My manager was new at the 2006 merger kept saying things about my kids and threading to fire me. The story gets much worse. RD pressured him to get rid of me but he couldn't because I knew everything illegal he did as a rep. So he just harnessed me to the point of a nervous break down. So glad to be laid off by DSI. Best day
 






Every company--DSI or whoever "docks" pay while out on disability to cover the health insurance, car allowance, etc. The benefits still cost the same, regardless of what you have available for vacation, and paid time off. That is just how any disability system works. There is no such thing as full pay for the full leave. What is protected is the job while out. Before you start thinking that I am an evil man, or a corporate in-house person, I am actually a female field person. What I wish is that regardless of what your gender is, is to do your job, do it well, and you will get noticed in the right way. Complaining that things aren't fair, well nothing is fair. It just isn't. We don't all make the same amount, we don't get the same performance evaluations, and we don't get the same territories making the top dollar quarter over quarter. I'm thankful we don't. It would be pretty boring to have everything be the same for all.
 






This may be the wrong thread for this but ever since I started working for this company I have a bulge at the base of my tailbone, right above and a little left of the top of my butt crack. It is the size of a ping pong ball, under the skin and hard. It hurts from time to time, I think its from sitting in my car so much. Anyone else have this disgusting deformation?
 






The last poster is truly an idiot. Our company doesn't even have a maternity leave policy. It's short term disability you moron. And last time I checked, having a c-section is a major surgery so the 8 weeks of pay is for physical recovery--not to take care of your baby. Anything you take after that is UNPAID. Why don't you take the time to even know what the hell you're talking about before opening your big stupid mouth.
 






Top Bottom
Back
Quote