6517

Quote
Anonymous said:
I concur! Sorry couldn't help myself. This is not that hard to do, it's just easier not to and think it will get overlooked by your QM. Not anymore ladies, those days are gone. Getting fired because you can't do expense reports on time or as they should be done is well, both stupid and sad. It's not that we have not had enough training, Learning curve studies and the like when we all started this gig. I do mine properly as I don't want to take any more of these crazy courses. Besides, i like my job and the money it brings in, looks easy enough for me.
Click to expand...

Bullshit.

Concur doesn't even contain a spell-checker. Do you mean to tell me that I could lose this job over a misspelling? A keystroke error (like putting in PHysicians instead of Physicians)?

If you are able to catch the tiniest such error on your reports, you're in the wrong job.

I've said it before. If all this is so important, down to capitalization and punctuation details, then a SOFTWARE system that automatically catches such things is an IQ-65 (mentally retarded) level fix.

If Janssen is going after this to this level, in my opinion there's only ONE explanation: They're looking for loopholes through which to cancel or renegotiate the terms of the entire contract. Given how poorly X and N are selling (they're miles below the fantasy-level forecasts of Marketing), Janssen setting up to reduce head count on the cheap should surprise NO ONE.
 






Anonymous said:
Bullshit.

Concur doesn't even contain a spell-checker. Do you mean to tell me that I could lose this job over a misspelling? A keystroke error (like putting in PHysicians instead of Physicians)?

If you are able to catch the tiniest such error on your reports, you're in the wrong job.

I've said it before. If all this is so important, down to capitalization and punctuation details, then a SOFTWARE system that automatically catches such things is an IQ-65 (mentally retarded) level fix.

If Janssen is going after this to this level, in my opinion there's only ONE explanation: They're looking for loopholes through which to cancel or renegotiate the terms of the entire contract. Given how poorly X and N are selling (they're miles below the fantasy-level forecasts of Marketing), Janssen setting up to reduce head count on the cheap should surprise NO ONE.
Click to expand...

Listen, you are exactly right. Some you may not know that several Q managers on this contract are getting let go at the end of the month, reps will be next!
 






Anonymous said:
Listen, you are exactly right. Some you may not know that several Q managers on this contract are getting let go at the end of the month, reps will be next!
Click to expand...

Q managers are consolidating. Thank Heaven! Perhaps we'll be spared the ignominy of having TWO DM's tell us what we're doing wrong (and how we can "move to the next level," pardon me, I just puked a little into my mouth again.)

So each Q DM will have 50 or so expense reports to wade through at the end of each month. Let the good times roll!

The consulting company Janssen employed to assign territories (and headcounts) a year ago was phenomenally incompetent. Sooner or later Janssen will have no choice but to reduce redundancy where call activity targets can't possibly be met.

The Big Problem is that this will reduce Janssen DM headcounts. That's where the real issue lies.

Trust me. In the Janssen universe, reps are numbers, not persons. Only the managers attain personhood. On Animal Farm, all animals are equal. Some are just more equal than others.
 


















Q managers will do anything to keep their jobs and keep the contract - that's their job. Shift blame to the reps. that's also the reason why JNJ has this contract in place - they can afford to hire us directly, but that is a reason why they don't.
 












I agree, it's not about intelligence it's about being a human being and making a simple mistake even AFTER checking it three times, that's what happens when you are HUMAN. I'm sure EVERYONE on this post has made a mistake on a report, paper, email and or expense report throughout their life time. IF it is really that crucial that people be perfect then the system needs to be set up that way, while you're cutting management invest a little of that money improving this prone to fail infrastructure that keeps reps out of the field and disengaged.
 






Anonymous said:
It certainly does blow.....
-delayed hiring us
-put too many reps in a territory to create competition with JNJ rep
-JNJ reps really don't want you in their territory and don't follow-through with their responsibilities to you
-DM favors JNJ reps (self-preservation for their jobs and failure to perform)
-lazy JNJ reps 'in hiding' to preserve their jobs at the expense of products not getting the pull-through necessary from CV and hosp reps
-not enough targets to call upon
-Q doesn't care about U - you are just filling a spot for the contract which will end and most likely you won't get selected for another position (cattle call of other reps applying)
Click to expand...

This post is 100% true
 






Anonymous said:
Listen, you are exactly right. Some you may not know that several Q managers on this contract are getting let go at the end of the month, reps will be next!
Click to expand...

Seriously, does anyone know what is going on with this contract?? I just don't see this lasting very long.....xar and nuc just aren't doing what was initially expected when we were brought on board. My J mgr seems to be feeling some heat....intense heat, and I know this isn't unique to my mgr!
I am relatively new to contract sales/new to Q and I really don't know how contracts like this usually wind up, given these circumstances.
 












We were just told that this contract is "strong". Now I'm having the same jitters as everyone else, but I just wonder: If the contract was really in jeopardy they probably just wouldn't say anything at all. Would they really say it was "strong" if they thought it was going to end soon? Just looking for some re-assurance.
 






Anonymous said:
We were just told that this contract is "strong". Now I'm having the same jitters as everyone else, but I just wonder: If the contract was really in jeopardy they probably just wouldn't say anything at all. Would they really say it was "strong" if they thought it was going to end soon? Just looking for some re-assurance.
Click to expand...

It's fine, there are no hiring freezes, no PIPs, just a little belt tightening coming from Janssen. If you're truly concerned then now is the best time to start looking when you have the security of a current paycheck.
 






Anonymous said:
We were just told that this contract is "strong". Now I'm having the same jitters as everyone else, but I just wonder: If the contract was really in jeopardy they probably just wouldn't say anything at all. Would they really say it was "strong" if they thought it was going to end soon? Just looking for some re-assurance.
Click to expand...

Yes. They would lie.
 






Anonymous said:
How does this figure? Loopholes? A contract w/ a contract company doesn't come w/ loopholes.
Click to expand...

If Janssen can cite that Q is not fulfilling a term of the contract (a concept that is subject to interpretation, that's what lawyers are for and J&J legal is the most important department in the corporation), then Janssen has leverage to get the headcount revisited or other arrangements might be made.

The contract might read, "execute expense reporting to J&J standards" and Concur doesn't do it, or misspellings lead to duplication, or some of baloney, that's what is in play here.

Get with the program.
 






Anonymous said:
If Janssen can cite that Q is not fulfilling a term of the contract (a concept that is subject to interpretation, that's what lawyers are for and J&J legal is the most important department in the corporation), then Janssen has leverage to get the headcount revisited or other arrangements might be made.

The contract might read, "execute expense reporting to J&J standards" and Concur doesn't do it, or misspellings lead to duplication, or some of baloney, that's what is in play here.

Get with the program.
Click to expand...

This company sucks, dont believe anything they say!@
 






FDA issues complete response letter for Johnson & Johnson’s Xarelto for ACS
Ref: Washington Post, Yahoo!News, Bloomberg, Bayer)
June 21st, 2012 By: Lianne Dane

The FDA issued a complete response letter regarding Johnson & Johnson and Bayer’s application to expand use of Xarelto (rivaroxaban) for the reduction of the risk of secondary cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

In May, an FDA panel voted 6-4 with one abstention not to recommend approval of the therapy in this indication, noting that too much information was missing from company studies to assess the drug's benefit. According to the panelists, more than 2400 of the approximately 15 500 patients enrolled in the Phase III ATLAS ACS 2-TIMI 51 study dropped out before completion, though Johnson & Johnson argued this is not unusual for a large, long-term drug trial.

Bloomberg noted that the decision by the FDA may benefit Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb, which is awaiting a decision by June 28 from US regulators on their anticoagulant Eliquis (apixaban) for patients with atrial fibrillation. The companies would then be able to apply for use with ACS, Bloomberg suggested.


WILL THIS IMPACT THIS CONTRACT?
 






Anonymous said:
FDA issues complete response letter for Johnson & Johnson’s Xarelto for ACS
Ref: Washington Post, Yahoo!News, Bloomberg, Bayer)
June 21st, 2012 By: Lianne Dane

The FDA issued a complete response letter regarding Johnson & Johnson and Bayer’s application to expand use of Xarelto (rivaroxaban) for the reduction of the risk of secondary cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

In May, an FDA panel voted 6-4 with one abstention not to recommend approval of the therapy in this indication, noting that too much information was missing from company studies to assess the drug's benefit. According to the panelists, more than 2400 of the approximately 15 500 patients enrolled in the Phase III ATLAS ACS 2-TIMI 51 study dropped out before completion, though Johnson & Johnson argued this is not unusual for a large, long-term drug trial.

Bloomberg noted that the decision by the FDA may benefit Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb, which is awaiting a decision by June 28 from US regulators on their anticoagulant Eliquis (apixaban) for patients with atrial fibrillation. The companies would then be able to apply for use with ACS, Bloomberg suggested.


WILL THIS IMPACT THIS CONTRACT?
Click to expand...

I hope the impact will be that this contract ends so we can apply for other contracts Q is getting. I hate this contract but we are held hostage at Q once you are with a contract.
 






Anonymous said:
I hope the impact will be that this contract ends so we can apply for other contracts Q is getting. I hate this contract but we are held hostage at Q once you are with a contract.
Click to expand...

Lacking experience here: Are you saying that employment as a contractor with Quintiles is not always like this?

Of course, anytime you're working for a company that is in chaos (Janssen) is nasty.
 






Anonymous said:
Lacking experience here: Are you saying that employment as a contractor with Quintiles is not always like this?

Of course, anytime you're working for a company that is in chaos (Janssen) is nasty.
Click to expand...

That is exactly what I am saying. This is my third contract with Q and by far the worst from call plan,to micro everything, to crappy bonus payouts (when they decide to pay you). Please ends this contract before labor day!!
 






Top Bottom
Back
Quote