SCS Next Positions to go!

[Anonymous]

Shire has been planning over the past 3 years to move as much leadership to other parts of the company or out the door. Change can't happen quickly but it is happening...Has anyone noticed that we now have no old Shire Zone Directors with the company? Has anyone noticed what Zone Directors are currently left with the company? (no white males!) Has anyone noticed who they moved over to the SCS roles close to 2 years ago? (high salary positions, past old Shire RD's, and the big whig Gary Casto)

All I am saying is that I have seen this thing before and when new leadership sees this non-revenue producing part of the business they will be gone quickly. I would be very nervous if I am in those types of roles right now.

There are going to be some certain restructuring soon within the Behavioral Health Business Unit soon and they wanted as many old Shire leadership out the door as possible so that this restructuring would be seamless and smooth. I personally don't think their will be layoffs but with new indications on the horizon there could be a split between adult and pediatric sales force within the company that may make sense.

Any thoughts?

 

[Anonymous]

Shire has been planning over the past 3 years to move as much leadership to other parts of the company or out the door. Change can't happen quickly but it is happening...Has anyone noticed that we now have no old Shire Zone Directors with the company? Has anyone noticed what Zone Directors are currently left with the company? (no white males!) Has anyone noticed who they moved over to the SCS roles close to 2 years ago? (high salary positions, past old Shire RD's, and the big whig Gary Casto)

All I am saying is that I have seen this thing before and when new leadership sees this non-revenue producing part of the business they will be gone quickly. I would be very nervous if I am in those types of roles right now.

There are going to be some certain restructuring soon within the Behavioral Health Business Unit soon and they wanted as many old Shire leadership out the door as possible so that this restructuring would be seamless and smooth. I personally don't think their will be layoffs but with new indications on the horizon there could be a split between adult and pediatric sales force within the company that may make sense.

Any thoughts?

I don't think they will layoff the SCS people since they were some of the best but I do agree that they are getting rid of old Shire in the higher positions so they can make the changes they want to make without a fight. Like this new bonus plan where you can only make like $8k to $12k per qtr on average. I'm probably going to make less money in 2012 than in 2011 & 2010 and that doesn't seem right.
I can't help but wonder how things would be if GC was still in charge. And what's up with this new adderall xr generic? I wonder if that's going to negatively impact our business or if it will be a bad generic and will help us in the end?

 

[Anonymous]

I don't think they will layoff the SCS people since they were some of the best but I do agree that they are getting rid of old Shire in the higher positions so they can make the changes they want to make without a fight. Like this new bonus plan where you can only make like $8k to $12k per qtr on average. I'm probably going to make less money in 2012 than in 2011 & 2010 and that doesn't seem right.
I can't help but wonder how things would be if GC was still in charge. And what's up with this new adderall xr generic? I wonder if that's going to negatively impact our business or if it will be a bad generic and will help us in the end?

One thing remains the same with a true generic xr- that we do not need Vyvanse coupons just the same old vis aid repackaged every quarter, non branded wall clings, and teleconferences. Thanks again Vyvanse team!

 

[Anonymous]

Shire has been planning over the past 3 years to move as much leadership to other parts of the company or out the door. Change can't happen quickly but it is happening...Has anyone noticed that we now have no old Shire Zone Directors with the company? Has anyone noticed what Zone Directors are currently left with the company? (no white males!) Has anyone noticed who they moved over to the SCS roles close to 2 years ago? (high salary positions, past old Shire RD's, and the big whig Gary Casto)

All I am saying is that I have seen this thing before and when new leadership sees this non-revenue producing part of the business they will be gone quickly. I would be very nervous if I am in those types of roles right now.

There are going to be some certain restructuring soon within the Behavioral Health Business Unit soon and they wanted as many old Shire leadership out the door as possible so that this restructuring would be seamless and smooth. I personally don't think their will be layoffs but with new indications on the horizon there could be a split between adult and pediatric sales force within the company that may make sense.

Any thoughts?

Are the Asians taking over?? Or do you mean the Obama cousins?

 

[Anonymous]

Shire has been planning over the past 3 years to move as much leadership to other parts of the company or out the door. Change can't happen quickly but it is happening...Has anyone noticed that we now have no old Shire Zone Directors with the company? Has anyone noticed what Zone Directors are currently left with the company? (no white males!) Has anyone noticed who they moved over to the SCS roles close to 2 years ago? (high salary positions, past old Shire RD's, and the big whig Gary Casto)

All I am saying is that I have seen this thing before and when new leadership sees this non-revenue producing part of the business they will be gone quickly. I would be very nervous if I am in those types of roles right now.

There are going to be some certain restructuring soon within the Behavioral Health Business Unit soon and they wanted as many old Shire leadership out the door as possible so that this restructuring would be seamless and smooth. I personally don't think their will be layoffs but with new indications on the horizon there could be a split between adult and pediatric sales force within the company that may make sense.

Any thoughts?

My thoughts are that you are just trying to stir things up, because while you obviously have some knowledge of the situation, you are also completely clueless in some areas. The last I checked, we currently have 5 or 6 ZD's and at least 2 of them are white males.

If anything were to be changed with the scs group, there is no way they would let those reps go-they are a mix of high performers- old and new. If anything, they would find new roles similar to a traditional rep. Who knows- we may all be scs type reps next year, isnt the entire GSK sales force set up that way? The fact that those high performers may also have higher salaries has nothing to do with anything-thats just trying to stir the pot. I bet you applied for a spot and got beat out didnt you?

 

[Anonymous]

I don't think they will layoff the SCS people since they were some of the best but I do agree that they are getting rid of old Shire in the higher positions so they can make the changes they want to make without a fight. Like this new bonus plan where you can only make like $8k to $12k per qtr on average. I'm probably going to make less money in 2012 than in 2011 & 2010 and that doesn't seem right.
I can't help but wonder how things would be if GC was still in charge. And what's up with this new adderall xr generic? I wonder if that's going to negatively impact our business or if it will be a bad generic and will help us in the end?

Just so you know, i will make more this year than i ever did. i also have bad coverage and tons of bad volume in my territory. There are 5 others in my region in the same scenario. So i guess what im saying is, be glad u have a job and quit whining.

 

[Anonymous]

Just so you know, i will make more this year than i ever did. i also have bad coverage and tons of bad volume in my territory. There are 5 others in my region in the same scenario. So i guess what im saying is, be glad u have a job and quit whining.

I can see you are one of the reps that love this "socialized" bonus plan. If you can't get the weaker reps to step up, then just take away from the performers. Geez. Why not quit tracking results and give everybody the same bonus.

 

[Anonymous]

The SCS Roles are the biggest waste of $ and resources the company is using right now. I think we have struck a chord with the SCS reps on this thread because they are defending their porition. They do not product a profit and they know it. There is no monetary value in what they do and if a new leader is highered and does not really care what is offered here then they will be fired. I have been in 2 separate companies where this has happened before so I am just giving the facts.

 

[Anonymous]

They moved Casto out to allow for these changes to take place. They also made room for a group of old Shire RD's, old Shire reps, and a few new ones and you all have to be nervous.

If anything ever happened to the current leadership within Shire, any new leadership that comes in is not tied to this decision that Yasick has made with the SCS role. If they feel that it is a waste of $ (which everyone does) than they will move them out with some nice severance packages.

I do know they are good reps but they also are some of the highest paid so it would be a smart move for a CFO to make.

 

[Anonymous]

The Asians are taking control!!!

 

[Anonymous]

They moved Casto out to allow for these changes to take place. They also made room for a group of old Shire RD's, old Shire reps, and a few new ones and you all have to be nervous.

If anything ever happened to the current leadership within Shire, any new leadership that comes in is not tied to this decision that Yasick has made with the SCS role. If they feel that it is a waste of $ (which everyone does) than they will move them out with some nice severance packages.

I do know they are good reps but they also are some of the highest paid so it would be a smart move for a CFO to make.

If we ever get to the point that the cost associated with 30 or so SCS reps is going to make a difference -then we have more important things to worry about. I will almost guantee you that you have a greater chance of being "moved out" then someone in the scs role. It seems like lot of people are jealous of those in the scs role. I would have been all over that if one would have been created in my geography.

 

[Anonymous]

There is no jealousy at all here. These are the facts:

1) 8-10 old Shire Zone Directors have either left the company, been fired, or moved to another business unit in the past 3 years. There is all new leadership int hese positions.

2) Brand new National Sales Director with Gary Casto being moved to lead the SCS Positions.

3) These SCS positions were created to bring "value" but there is no monetary proof of their "value" in the business. Yes it may be nice for psychologists and counselors to have our help but if a new leader were to ever come in and see this role they would be the first to go if there were ever cuts.

4) Talk to all the sales reps and we feel a lot safer about our jobs than you guys do with yours.

5) With the new indications coming out there will be major changes in the existing sales force. SCS will be fired and moved out of our way because they just don't bring any monetary value to the company!

 

[Anonymous]

That last post is absolutely false! SCS reps with not go if any changes need to be made. They will move sales reps out of the way and place scs in there. Even if they dont find scs are profitable then they will find a place. Why in the world would they get rid of all their top reps who if in a sales position would and have obviously made more market share and money for the company than other sales force reps??? In million dollar territories high salaries don't mean a thing. That's pocket change. If anything scs roles will be absorbed with the new indications if they do not feel their role is working out.

 

[Anonymous]

That last post is absolutely false! SCS reps with not go if any changes need to be made. They will move sales reps out of the way and place scs in there. Even if they dont find scs are profitable then they will find a place. Why in the world would they get rid of all their top reps who if in a sales position would and have obviously made more market share and money for the company than other sales force reps??? In million dollar territories high salaries don't mean a thing. That's pocket change. If anything scs roles will be absorbed with the new indications if they do not feel their role is working out.

This is possibly true. The absolute fact is that if Vyvanse continues to show a flat MS, changes will be made. It might be re-structuring territories or small layoffs, but one thing is for sure, Shire is accountable to the shareholders. It remains to be seen what effect the reduced Generic ADD XR will have on Vyvanse.

All I can say is changes wil be coming in 2013, that is a fact!

 

[Anonymous]

That last post is absolutely false! SCS reps with not go if any changes need to be made. They will move sales reps out of the way and place scs in there. Even if they dont find scs are profitable then they will find a place. Why in the world would they get rid of all their top reps who if in a sales position would and have obviously made more market share and money for the company than other sales force reps??? In million dollar territories high salaries don't mean a thing. That's pocket change. If anything scs roles will be absorbed with the new indications if they do not feel their role is working out.

You SCS reps are smoking marijuana again! You currently have way higher salaries than the reps in the field, however, are in a non-monetary producing role. Therefore, it would make sense to get rid of the higher salaries when reps with lower salaries can do the same job. Vyvanse is a mature product now and we don't need you.

This market is all what have you done for me lately and as far as the SCS positions go, they have done nothing money-wise for the company these past 2 years. You guys knew it was a risk leaving a sales job but you just thought it would be easier and possibly a challenge. The RD's who left to takes these roles took them because less travel and less hassle. You took a risk and be ready to take your reward in the next 6 months.

Well...2013...changes are coming and you will be pushed out!

 

[Anonymous]

SCS reps also get paid more bonus $'s on average than the field reps...how motivating is that for reps in the field who are actually growing products when the SCS reps call on psychologists, counselors, etc that do not do anything for the companies bottom line. "Value" versus "$" for the stockholders? I think the stockholders would go crazy over the notion that SCS reps get paid more bonus $'s than the field reps. Something is backwards here!

 

[Anonymous]

SCS reps also get paid more bonus $'s on average than the field reps...how motivating is that for reps in the field who are actually growing products when the SCS reps call on psychologists, counselors, etc that do not do anything for the companies bottom line. "Value" versus "$" for the stockholders? I think the stockholders would go crazy over the notion that SCS reps get paid more bonus $'s than the field reps. Something is backwards here!

I would much rather be selling in the SCS role than the traditional pharma rep role. I think the SCS role is very valuable because it allows for others to recognize ADHD before it becomes a problem. This role is all about increasing the volume of ADHD, which therefore increases business for us!

Now if they could just go into schools and talk with teachers/parents then that would be the golden ticket!!

 

[Anonymous]

You are all screwed! Yasick and others are trying tofnd the gap from the new generic. It hits our bottom line. We are screwed! Now comes pentasa ..... G I is killing this company! Let robe and the others go.....

 

[Anonymous]

SCS reps also get paid more bonus $'s on average than the field reps...how motivating is that for reps in the field who are actually growing products when the SCS reps call on psychologists, counselors, etc that do not do anything for the companies bottom line. "Value" versus "$" for the stockholders? I think the stockholders would go crazy over the notion that SCS reps get paid more bonus $'s than the field reps. Something is backwards here!

Stockholders dont give a crap who gets paid what in bonus. All that that they care about is the COMPLETE bottom line- I dont care how big anyone's salaries or bonuses are -they are miniscule in the big picture. And to the poster that says that Vyvanse is mature and we dont need SCS reps- the same argument would hold true for 500 plus reps then right? I'm not going there Einstein! I wish people would use a little bit of logic in their thoughts, especially before they make posts claiming to hold the crystal ball to our future- because they have seen this all before.. If thats the case- then please leave! Yes things will be different in 2013, things are different in 2012. If things arent different in 2013, then we should be worried... We just need to relax and do our jobs- We all have plenty of things to worry about that matter right now.

 

[Anonymous]

The reality is that the traditional pharma sales rep role won't exist in 5 years so Shire is taking its best and putting them into new roles that will survive when the sales positions are gone. It's probably smart to start thinking about a role like SCS for future career opportunities