Party is over

Quote






this company is not going to be around much longer. Only potential good drug is YEARS away and even docs don’t think it’s needed in market place. People should start looking for a new job and get out while you can......
 
























HA! sooooo funny this was just mentioned because I was just getting ready to send an email to Lori Lyons about all the off label promotion and possible sexual relations between managers and reps going on. Managers are also actively ENCOURAGING reps to get doctors to write it wherever with “anecdotal” aka UNSCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE (I have written proof and so do others) Also WRITTEN documentation of doctors being taken out to lunch yet THAT rep is still with company despite this being insanely illegal. Never have seen such a corrupt company and I know many people getting FDA looking into this. Trust that this company will be done sooner than you think. This is a company that only cares about how long someone has been in the industry, not what someone newer can provide (A TON)
 












I don't know about lay offs, but I know for sure they're putting people at the bottom 10% on performance improvement plans and in most cases only giving them 30 days to show "marked" improvement?? What stable and ethical company puts it's reps on a PIP after not even 6 months in the field?? The answer is an unstable company with nothing in the pipeline that could possibly go under. The handwriting was on the wall when their proposed acne drug failed to get approval. The rest of you can criticize and make fun of those that criticize this company all you want, but the reality for a lot of people is going to an unfair termination of employment without ever even being given a fair chance to establish a failing drug in an obscure disease state with a company that doesn't have a clue. Call me a hater all you want, the truth is the truth.
 






anonymous said:
I don't know about lay offs, but I know for sure they're putting people at the bottom 10% on performance improvement plans and in most cases only giving them 30 days to show "marked" improvement?? What stable and ethical company puts it's reps on a PIP after not even 6 months in the field?? The answer is an unstable company with nothing in the pipeline that could possibly go under. The handwriting was on the wall when their proposed acne drug failed to get approval. The rest of you can criticize and make fun of those that criticize this company all you want, but the reality for a lot of people is going to an unfair termination of employment without ever even being given a fair chance to establish a failing drug in an obscure disease state with a company that doesn't have a clue. Call me a hater all you want, the truth is the truth.
Click to expand...

It’s funny how no one I know in the bottom 10% is on a PIP plan....must be only you. Yes, there are some growing pains with any start up companies, but that’s expected. Who knows if this company will last....that’s just pharma in general. In the meantime, how about actually leaving your house and working for once.
 






anonymous said:
It’s funny how no one I know in the bottom 10% is on a PIP plan....must be only you. Yes, there are some growing pains with any start up companies, but that’s expected. Who knows if this company will last....that’s just pharma in general. In the meantime, how about actually leaving your house and working for once.
Click to expand...

Accurate!
 






anonymous said:
It’s funny how no one I know in the bottom 10% is on a PIP plan....must be only you. Yes, there are some growing pains with any start up companies, but that’s expected. Who knows if this company will last....that’s just pharma in general. In the meantime, how about actually leaving your house and working for once.
Click to expand...
 






anonymous said:
I don't know about lay offs, but I know for sure they're putting people at the bottom 10% on performance improvement plans and in most cases only giving them 30 days to show "marked" improvement?? What stable and ethical company puts it's reps on a PIP after not even 6 months in the field?? The answer is an unstable company with nothing in the pipeline that could possibly go under. The handwriting was on the wall when their proposed acne drug failed to get approval. The rest of you can criticize and make fun of those that criticize this company all you want, but the reality for a lot of people is going to an unfair termination of employment without ever even being given a fair chance to establish a failing drug in an obscure disease state with a company that doesn't have a clue. Call me a hater all you want, the truth is the truth.
Click to expand...


‘when their proposed acne drug failed to get approval’.... you don’t even work here, you terd.

On another note about pipeline..... lebri baby!
 
























The recruiter was blatant in her age discrimination. Blatant. She asked me what year I graduated from college. I told her that could be a discriminatory question. I confirmed my degree and my school. She was pushy and unprofessional about age.
 






anonymous said:
The recruiter was blatant in her age discrimination. Blatant. She asked me what year I graduated from college. I told her that could be a discriminatory question. I confirmed my degree and my school. She was pushy and unprofessional about age.
Click to expand...


Yep, that's blatant. The recruiter should just ask, "did you graduate?". Why is the year necessary unless they want to know how old you are.
 






The recruiter also used another age discrimination technique with me:
She went to the bottom of my resume and asked what did you do before that? and before that? and before that? She wanted to take it all the way back to high school.
I have Derm experience and a great track record.
Age should have been no part of it.
Eye candy with limited experience was hired.
 






anonymous said:
The recruiter also used another age discrimination technique with me:
She went to the bottom of my resume and asked what did you do before that? and before that? and before that? She wanted to take it all the way back to high school.
I have Derm experience and a great track record.
Age should have been no part of it.
Eye candy with limited experience was hired.
Click to expand...

Exact same thing happened to me. I have many years of dermatology experience and someone without dermatology experience or much experience at all was hired.
 






Yes, same thing happened in my geography. Age discrimination.
The youngest person in the room - in her 20's - with the least experience was hired.
Experienced candidates were given no consideration.
Clearly against federal law.
 






Top Bottom
Back
Quote