volunteer severance? why not offer it?

[Anonymous]

Novartis HR ..why won't you start with Volunteer Severance? Seems it would help avoid lawsuits. Also it weeds out those who really don't need or want to work for Novartis. And you would know that those who stay are committed to the new Novartis world?!

 

[Anonymous]

This would be good for me, but for other reasons. I'm taking care of a sick parent who's time is limited and the opportunity to not wrk & take care of him would be good. Quite honestly I'm not very focused when I'm in field anyhow, & this April delay is justed added stress. Lets get it over-with!

 

[Anonymous]

#1 . It would be a mass exodus
#2. You would have the smart/ good reps leaving because they can foresee the future of the industry.

If you ran a company, would you want to be left with the bottom feeders who can't sell if their lives depended on it?

It makes sense not to offer voluntary packages, although it would be nice.

 

[Anonymous]

This was answered very well on town hall call. The good people will find other jobs and the "slackers" would remain. Novartis doesn't need any more slackers. Good business decision!

 

[Anonymous]

#1 . It would be a mass exodus
#2. You would have the smart/ good reps leaving because they can foresee the future of the industry.

If you ran a company, would you want to be left with the bottom feeders who can't sell if their lives depended on it?

It makes sense not to offer voluntary packages, although it would be nice.

I plan to retire latter this year and would accept a severance as an inducement to retire early. I'd do it so somebody can keep their job otherwise I'll just keep going until October as I planned.

I don't know the ratio of those who could retire early with a severance inducement vs those that literally have to work until 65 or older - except those that I've talked to that are eligible for early retirement. They aren't going to retire early because they can't, severance inducement or no inducement.

There must be some law against offering severances as inducements to early retirement.

 

[Anonymous]

I think I heard a mixed message:
- in terms of who will be "displaced"
* based on some selection/some mapping, with criteria coming from mapping first, then selection
(1) distance from customers;
(2) overlap in customers;
(3) performance; and, lastly
(4) tenure; thus, keeping the best is a crap shoot.
*selection would include:
(1) experience
(2) skills
(3) performance
They will look at mapping 1st, and if all is equal, then selection based on experience, skills, performance. Again skills and performance will be the last weight. Also, mapping lessens liability - objective vs. subjective.
- In terms of the severance - the same guy speaking - not doing a volunteer severance for fear of losing skilled/experienced people from key positions, and just too difficult when have such a wide range of positions requiring different skills/experiences. Excuse me, but it more about the money. If retention is based on keeping the best, why wouldn't performance and experience carry more weight.

 

[Anonymous]

This was answered very well on town hall call. The good people will find other jobs and the "slackers" would remain. Novartis doesn't need any more slackers. Good business decision!

Any more?? Thats all thats left after the last two rounds. Way to pay yourself on the sack.

 

[Anonymous]

I think I heard a mixed message:
- in terms of who will be "displaced"
* based on some selection/some mapping, with criteria coming from mapping first, then selection
(1) distance from customers;
(2) overlap in customers;
(3) performance; and, lastly
(4) tenure; thus, keeping the best is a crap shoot.
*selection would include:
(1) experience
(2) skills
(3) performance
They will look at mapping 1st, and if all is equal, then selection based on experience, skills, performance. Again skills and performance will be the last weight. Also, mapping lessens liability - objective vs. subjective.
- In terms of the severance - the same guy speaking - not doing a volunteer severance for fear of losing skilled/experienced people from key positions, and just too difficult when have such a wide range of positions requiring different skills/experiences. Excuse me, but it more about the money. If retention is based on keeping the best, why wouldn't performance and experience carry more weight.

Mapping is done for field reps

Selection is done for office based staff.. Makes sense

 

[Anonymous]

Volunteer would be great! As I'm planning on quiting in September anyways. Its a shame that a rep who really needs this job & wants to be here will be displaced if I get selected to stay.