And so another week ends... Sigh.

[Anonymous]

I seriously wondered what future employers would think about a PIP- Would they have to know? How would they find out? It scared the heck out of me bc I knew I was going to have to look for a job in another industry and I didn't want that on my record- I had been with Merck 15 years- Got along with my co-workers and had decent numbers- Never had a problem before him and the unfortunate vaccine division- It was all based on subjective crap. I bailed before he got the chance to PIP me- But he had already driven me over the edge- I couldn't take another second, minute, hour, week, or year of his BS!
My family wanted me out just as bad as I wanted out! The stress level wasn't fair to them.
Sad thing is that once they get rid of one rep, then they just move on to another victim-

The law allows you, as an employee, to write to Merck HR or Personnel and request a copy of your "Personnel Record". They have to give it to you. But they will charge you for the cost in photocopying them. It is heavily sanitized because they assume you are going to use it in a lawsuit. Some of us have done it. It is so scrubbed clean that it shows when you joined Merck, various pay raises, etc.

 

[Anonymous]

Under the guise of "talent management" your managers and directors review their workforce periodically. Since the company needs to reduce headcount, you can bet that one of the outcomes that is being driven is identification and elimination of the bottom "%". Most normal years the review is once-a-year and the cut figure is around 3-5%. These days it's as frequently as a call for reduction rolls down from the mountain and the % figure is nominally 10%. If the company has really hired well and invested in training and managing its resources, it can ill afford to let 10% go under the guise of poor performance. But PIP-to-firing is the only method that avoids a justified serverance payment. The real reason for letting most people go is that the business changes and the over-hiring under one initiative is exposed by later business reality. Performance is usually secondary during times like these. Car salesmen are subject to this 5-10% rule as a matter of course, but then the car sales companies do not invest huge resources into developing car salesmen. Truly technical industries could never hire and invest in their employees if they used an annual 10% rule. However, making obvious that the company will fire the truly incompetent - at any time - is both proper and serves to motivate those that do perform, especially when they are in their formative years. But this is a process that deals with individuals, not % or manpower budgets. Such a justified termination scheme is for normal, optimistic times and is being abused as an excuse during these wretched times.

The talent hunters need to look at managed care..Bottom percent may really be bottom production by insurance negotiation committees.....Enough Tier 1 and you rock!