Musical Chairs

Quote
Anonymous said:
Lots of folks (mostly S-P) notified in November and out officially after January 1. Merck plays musical chairs very frequently in all areas and at all levels. In fact plays so frequently that re-org layoffs have become like any other seasonal event.

No young person with half a brain would come here and believe that they would be retiring from Merck. Working at Merck is like getting a holiday from looking for work. One will stop for a little bit but pretty soon one will begin again. If someone is clever or lucky they can enhance their resume while they are here. But never should they be so silly as to think that staying a long time is optimal for their career.
Click to expand...

Youthfulness is another word for having options.

Bring older is now another word for you're out of luck......

....unless of course, you have a sweet 10-30 years in. For them some safety and assurance for the road.
 






Anonymous said:
The "qualified ones" ( I was a Merck Hall of Famer), which means the well-paid ones, are either being forced out or forced to retire. There are no options; they send in a new manager with direct orders to get rid of you. Merck is spiraling downward and management is showing its desperation in the lowest way---by biting the very hands that made them successful in the first place. What a pathetic company.
Click to expand...

same thing happened to me so I know you have it right...these young reps don't understand what is like to have a target on your back. What sucks is there is almost nothing you can do about it...Try fighting Merck legally, and they will almost always win or stonewall you foreever...

All I can say about being forced out, is that when it is happening, you know it...

the managers are rewarded for getting older, higher paid reps out...

Merck is a shameful place...that is why it will keep benefitting a few folks, and everybody else be damned...
 


















Anonymous said:
What I'm picturing is a room full of overpaid nimwits, absent even one person with any semblance of honesty, saying, "OK, how can we minimize the perception of what we're about to do? Let's do the same thing we've done the last three times we've let people go. That confused the reps enough to ensure that they didn't appreciate the full scope of the layoff."

This isn't about drama, Asshole, it's about a company that won't be honest with its reps. You management types just don't get it.
Click to expand...

OK all you folks that have been convinced by your culture that having any sort of collective bargaining for your respective organizational group or level must by now realize that one of the features of such a system would be to have a representative at these so-called rooms full of nimwits. Whether or not they can keep people employed is not all that they can do. They will also maintain a form of transparency. And the number of workers that will be screwed by their formerly loyal employers relative to those that would profit by screwing their colleagues increases every year and creeps very far up the organizational ladder. So white-collar America might want to decide again whether they wish to get over their conception that having professional worker representation in their companies is somehow demeaning to their "professional" status or collectively means they are filthy socialists or lazy parasites. As is pointed out elsewhere on this site, even those up the ladder at manager or director level, the winners at the top are pulling the rugs out from under all of them. Lots of folks in Europe that aren't on their company's Executive Committee still do have themselves represented at that committee by a collective bargaining or social agreement rep. Having a voice and a pair of ears at least restores some honesty and open communication to the workforce. As we all can attest, there is precious little long-term benefit to running a company that will not and can not be honest with its employees. At the end of the day, it seems that today workers are treating their companies better than their companies are treating them.
 






Anonymous said:
OK all you folks that have been convinced by your culture that having any sort of collective bargaining for your respective organizational group or level must by now realize that one of the features of such a system would be to have a representative at these so-called rooms full of nimwits. Whether or not they can keep people employed is not all that they can do. They will also maintain a form of transparency. And the number of workers that will be screwed by their formerly loyal employers relative to those that would profit by screwing their colleagues increases every year and creeps very far up the organizational ladder. So white-collar America might want to decide again whether they wish to get over their conception that having professional worker representation in their companies is somehow demeaning to their "professional" status or collectively means they are filthy socialists or lazy parasites. As is pointed out elsewhere on this site, even those up the ladder at manager or director level, the winners at the top are pulling the rugs out from under all of them. Lots of folks in Europe that aren't on their company's Executive Committee still do have themselves represented at that committee by a collective bargaining or social agreement rep. Having a voice and a pair of ears at least restores some honesty and open communication to the workforce. As we all can attest, there is precious little long-term benefit to running a company that will not and can not be honest with its employees. At the end of the day, it seems that today workers are treating their companies better than their companies are treating them.
Click to expand...

Representation won't help. Merck is running out of products to sell and people must be pushed off the payroll...by any means necessary. The party is over, people.
 












Anonymous said:
Lots of folks (mostly S-P) notified in November and out officially after January 1. Merck plays musical chairs very frequently in all areas and at all levels. In fact plays so frequently that re-org layoffs have become like any other seasonal event.

No young person with half a brain would come here and believe that they would be retiring from Merck. Working at Merck is like getting a holiday from looking for work. One will stop for a little bit but pretty soon one will begin again. If someone is clever or lucky they can enhance their resume while they are here. But never should they be so silly as to think that staying a long time is optimal for their career.
Click to expand...

I don't agree. Staying a long time could very well be optimal for one's career. Huge pension, benefits, etc. The problem is that almost no one gets the CHANCE to stay a long time to get all of that. Tired of the BS that is pushed out: Gee, if you retire at 65, you will get a billion dollars in benefits.... but almost NOBODY (at least in the field) gets to stay that long! If you don't leave on your own, they cut you with the another downsizing that you barely avoided last time around....
 






Think of it: Of all of the thousands of Merck reps out in the field tomorrow morning, how many are going to retire at age 65 from Merck? Or even at age 62? Go ahead, toss out a number or percentage. Oh, don't know? I will be anyone a $100 bill that HR can access that number. Anyone wonder why they won't let YOU know?
 












Top Bottom
Back
Quote