How Many Pregnant Women got severed ?

Anonymous

Guest
READ THIS:
(BET THIS TIME NO PREGNANT CHICK IS GETTING FRIED)

JURY VERDICT AGAINST NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS FOR RETALIATING AGAINST DRUG SALES REP WHO TOOK MATERNITY LEAVE

-- Washington, DC

On March 5, 2010, a jury in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia rendered a verdict in favor of pharmaceutical sales representative Mary Kate Breeden, awarding $289,669 against Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation on her claim of retaliation for taking maternity leave covered by the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Under the FMLA’s liquidated damages provision, this amount is automatically doubled to $579,338. The District Court has yet to decide the amount front pay, attorney fees, and costs to award.

Mary Kate Breeden worked as a pharmaceutical sales representative for Novartis for over seven (7) years. After announcing that she was pregnant, Novartis cut her sales territory in half leaving her with fewer and smaller accounts. When she objected to the change, her supervisor said it was temporary and that she would be made “whole.” Upon returning from maternity leave, Breeden was informed that the change was permanent. Novartis reorganized the sales territories again, at which time they consolidated Breeden’s territory with another and eliminated her position. Novartis claimed that an outside consulting firm coordinated the original realignment and did not take Breeden’s FMLA leave into account. However, Breeden’s maternity leave was mentioned in a PowerPoint presentation that the consulting firm prepared about the realignment.

The jury found that Novartis retaliated against Ms. Breeden by cutting her sales territory when she announced that she was going to take leave and when Novartis refused to make her “whole” after she returned to work from FMLA leave, ultimately damaging her career and leading to her termination. Adam Augustine Carter, a Principal at The Employment Law Group® law firm, a premier employment law firm based in D.C., stated, “The jury of 12 believed Ms. Breeden and disbelieved the executives of Novartis in arriving at this verdict. She was committed to her job, but her employer questioned her commitment. No employee should have to choose between having a family or keeping their job, and this jury verdict will help teach that lesson to all employers covered by the FMLA.”

The Employment Law Group® specializes in representing employees in whistleblower, wrongful termination, and discrimination cases. To contact them regarding questions or comments, call R. Scott Oswald or Adam Augustine Carter at 202-331-3911.
 


















Wrong...

I know of at least 2 pregnant 'chicks' who were displaced. Granted, there are many female reps, but in my area 90% of those displaced were female.

Doubt that is true. Losing millions in a settlement stings and it sets a precedent. They always have their best interest in mind and would probably want to avoid losing more. Would think that any pregnant employees who were displaced/fired would have a pretty easy time getting retribution.
 






Doubt that is true. Losing millions in a settlement stings and it sets a precedent. They always have their best interest in mind and would probably want to avoid losing more. Would think that any pregnant employees who were displaced/fired would have a pretty easy time getting retribution.

I promise you, it is true (as far as the 2 pregnant displaced employees). As far as the precedent, the law firm is already looking into the fairness of the layoff, number of female employees vs the rest, etc. Hard to say whether females were truly discriminated against as far as the displacement. I will say this, though...Novartis knows that most if not all will sign rather than wait out another lawsuit. most displaced employees, female or not, need the severance.
 


















If their is some pregnant women that got displace, I will offer my services to them. I will be gentle too so not to disturb or hurt the baby. I hear that the doggy style is best for this. If your horny let me know.
 






Again under Federal law its a violation to displace a pregnant person.

Get a good atorney as a Novartis already has been sued for this practice and judgment for plaintiffs is a plus in your case
 






Without warning, a person can sue you for discrimination on the basis of race, color, gender or age, among other things. Someone can sue you for retaliation, wrongful termination, sexual harassment, hostile work environment or violation of whistleblower laws. Even if the claim is groundless or fraudulent, you must spend time and money in defense or settlement.
 






I am pregnant and displaced. I wonder if they would consider doing something a little bit more for a pregnant person since we cant actually go out and start looking for jobs until well after the severance period is up. who is going to hire a pregnant woman knowing that she will need to take off for leave for the baby. Makes me sick to my stomach the way Nvs handled this whole reorg.
 






I am pregnant and displaced. I wonder if they would consider doing something a little bit more for a pregnant person since we cant actually go out and start looking for jobs until well after the severance period is up. who is going to hire a pregnant woman knowing that she will need to take off for leave for the baby. Makes me sick to my stomach the way Nvs handled this whole reorg.

I too am pregnant and displaced! Novartis did not put itself in a very good light with the physicians's in my territory. I almost feel bad for the reps that have to go into my old offices. They let so many good people go and kept the clueless, annoying, & lazy reps. Don't think the customers haven't noticed. Novartis reps are now the least admired and least respected. Novartis is a fucking joke.
 












Again under Federal law its a violation to displace a pregnant person.

Get a good atorney as a Novartis already has been sued for this practice and judgment for plaintiffs is a plus in your case
 






READ THIS:
(BET THIS TIME NO PREGNANT CHICK IS GETTING FRIED)

JURY VERDICT AGAINST NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS FOR RETALIATING AGAINST DRUG SALES REP WHO TOOK MATERNITY LEAVE

-- Washington, DC

On March 5, 2010, a jury in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia rendered a verdict in favor of pharmaceutical sales representative Mary Kate Breeden, awarding $289,669 against Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation on her claim of retaliation for taking maternity leave covered by the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Under the FMLA’s liquidated damages provision, this amount is automatically doubled to $579,338. The District Court has yet to decide the amount front pay, attorney fees, and costs to award.

Mary Kate Breeden worked as a pharmaceutical sales representative for Novartis for over seven (7) years. After announcing that she was pregnant, Novartis cut her sales territory in half leaving her with fewer and smaller accounts. When she objected to the change, her supervisor said it was temporary and that she would be made “whole.” Upon returning from maternity leave, Breeden was informed that the change was permanent. Novartis reorganized the sales territories again, at which time they consolidated Breeden’s territory with another and eliminated her position. Novartis claimed that an outside consulting firm coordinated the original realignment and did not take Breeden’s FMLA leave into account. However, Breeden’s maternity leave was mentioned in a PowerPoint presentation that the consulting firm prepared about the realignment.

The jury found that Novartis retaliated against Ms. Breeden by cutting her sales territory when she announced that she was going to take leave and when Novartis refused to make her “whole” after she returned to work from FMLA leave, ultimately damaging her career and leading to her termination. Adam Augustine Carter, a Principal at The Employment Law Group® law firm, a premier employment law firm based in D.C., stated, “The jury of 12 believed Ms. Breeden and disbelieved the executives of Novartis in arriving at this verdict. She was committed to her job, but her employer questioned her commitment. No employee should have to choose between having a family or keeping their job, and this jury verdict will help teach that lesson to all employers covered by the FMLA.”

The Employment Law Group® specializes in representing employees in whistleblower, wrongful termination, and discrimination cases. To contact them regarding questions or comments, call R. Scott Oswald or Adam Augustine Carter at 202-331-3911.


HOPEFULLY ALL OF THESE CRABBY, CRAMPY, MORNING SICKNESS, WHINING, CAN'T WORK OUTSIDE THE KITCHEN MONKEYS! STAY HOME, STAY IN THE KITCHEN , AND STAY OFF THE REAL MEN IN YOUR LIFE BACK!!