BONUS FRAUD

So as a rep I lost $1K due to GSK losing money. OK--we did..seems fair...but

THE MANAGERS RECEIVED 100% OF THEIR BONUS FOR THIS SECTION!!!!!

HOW IS THIS FAIR???????

 

It is not - but 2nd and 3rd line leaders make up the rules to make sure they are benefited! This is why they made sure they were not included in pt first model when they set up deal with the federal government. GSK has become a fraud in many respects has it not?

 

This can't be true

 

Who knows what's true. They change the IC rules in the middle of the semester frequently.

 

FLL here- not true..we got same for Operating Profit.
We have a SLL goal as a seperate component, so that payout varied based upon achievement to that.
A lot of what is posted here is true..but not the above. Just get your facts right, so folks can be informed.

 

Are FLLs paid based on success of all of Pharma like the field is or only the specific business unit?

 

Hey, stop bringing facts to the board. Only negative comments are welcome.

 

same for all business units and FLLs as well as reps

 

Wouldn't operating profit be associated with our sales, and isn't that violating the governments agreement since they re basing compensation on volume of sales

 

Sales volume is only one component of operating profit. It is easier to impact operating profit through expense reductions and price increases. It is probably the least controversial financial metric for any company.

 

That is complete BS. Sales volume is absolutely the major factor. Price increases and expense control are a part of the total picture, but actually a minor part. Someone is stupid.

 

That someone is you. It takes 2 seconds to cut expenses and/or to raise prices. Yet, you can institute a multitude of sales programs and there is no guarantee that you will impact sales volume. This isn't rocket science and I suggest you take a basic finance class.

 

To Post#5 - Changing the topic. If you are a 1st line leader, can you elaborate on promotional criteria? There are representatives who have been with the company seven or eight years and are at an S7 level. Then you have representatives who have been with GSK 10, 15, 20, even 25+ years who are at an S8 level. A few if these reps I know personally. Hard working and highly "distinguished" in my opinion..hell in everyones opinion. Yet they have to watch as younger, less accomplished, (and again, my opinion) less professional representatives reach the highest level a sales rep can achieve. What gives? What type of culture does this promote? No one is saying that just because you have a bit of tenure you should be promoted, but this is frightening to watch. This system of "non-transparency" as it pertains to simulations and exams is frightening. To those of use in our thirties and forties, pay attention. We will get old as time stands still for no one. Look at what the future holds. GSK is a total mess! It begins with leadership! A damn shame!!

 

It isn't rocket science but it is business and this must be the first sales organization in history to declare a growth strategy based on price increases and expense cutting. No wonder we are in trouble. Pathetic.

 

This is common business practice. Your business acumen is greatly lacking.

 

but its a minor part on which bonuses are paid. we are paid on how well we do a stupid test verses a colleague

 

Given your low intelligence, that puts you at a disadvantage.

 

We are not the first to use this strategy. In fact, its the oldest one in the pharma sales book.

 

No matter how small or insignificant sales volume is to the operating expense it is still violating the CIA agreement. It says no portion of compensation will come from sales volume.

 

It cannot come directly from volume and it is not. Volume is not the main driving factor and the comp systems would have been flagged by now if they were in violation. Clearly, everything is reviewed.