Valeant Managers creating grounds for class action lawsuit

How does the legal department allow for a manager as awful as 1 handling a state in the NE, top open company up to potential litigation by being asinine enough as to tell recruiters his ideal candidate is "young" and hungry? How young? 22? 32? People are saying this jackass has a complex about his height, and mediocre college background. What needs to be done to shut this ahole's mouth when he speaks to recruiters? Maryland, DC/Va are big markets that could be in jeopardy.

 

WHO?

 

Get a grip. Should he tell recruiters that he prefers fat, dumb and ugly, like you, to fill those spots? If reps were young, attractive and hungry, then they'll be able to sell the crap that you can't sell. You're overly sensitive, grow a pair and move on.

 

Awwww Poor fired Wyeth Warner/ Lambert troll above. Hows that non existent 401K Fatso ?
PFIZER ROCKS !

 

What division is this idiot in?

 

I work here and my commission has been better than the average rep here makes. But when someone brings up a legitimate complaint, as we do tend to hire too young and with very little experience, to then blast the guy/girl by assuming they're fat and ugly? I'm ashamed to know whomever wrote that works for the same company as I do. Any manager that isn't worthless doesn't need to tell a recruiter that they are looking for "young." Bein in my 30s, young to me and most means 20s. I'm not suggesting we have to go out of way to hire people in their 50s/60s but any manager dumb enough to actually state to a recruiter they want "young" is absolutely placing our company in a dangerous legal situation. As much as some may not like it we can't do that! We can't because saying we are looking for "young" by definition means we are intentionally barring anyone "not" young e.g. 40s etc and that is illegal.

I'm sorry the majority have to hear me explain this to the moron who doesn't grasp this simple fact.

 

Just a guess, but was this dumbass telling recruiters he only wanted "young", Schmidt in Maryland? He's got a insecurity about his height, immature and can be obnoxious, so he fits the bill.

 

And why not?? What do you have against more seasoned reps? Ain't you the pot calling the kettle black?

 

Correction -- Manager was asking the recruiters for "Young and Dumb" candidates.

 

Some idiots don't seem to grasp that if a manager states to recruiters they want "young" candidates, it, by definition excludes "older" candidates. That can be interpreted as unlawful as it blatantly suggests no "40 or older" a protected group. This stupidity puts the company at legal risk. We can't afford more negative press!!! Whatever manager said this should get the hell out of our company now!

 

people have been saying lawsuit this, lawsuit that. Fact is, no major lawsuit has won anything against us.

 

...yet, you fool.

 

"Yet," is not a strategy, but a slim hope.

 

We discriminate all of the time. Are we going to lose lawsuits over it? No way. We do it but never leave a paper trail that would be required to have successful litigation against the company. We come up with other reasons for the discrimination and use legitimate sounding justification for decisions made.

 

Not hope but some cases haven't even been reviewed yet, fool.

 

Due to lack of evidence. You really don't have a clue since you're just spouting, so I'll just dub you a moron.

 

Hard to decide which is more disgusting, you boasting Valeant discriminates all the time but covers its trails, or that you feel proud of it. You just proved that our company is run by complete piles of sh-t. I hope that this ahole manager keeps running his loud mouth to recruiters that he's looking for just "young" reps. If he really is the manager handling GI/Hepatology product in Maryland/DC/Va, I hope that his comments to recruiters come back to bite him and he gets fired. Any manager this stupid doesn't deserve to be working here and certainly shouldn't be deciding on who should be here or not. I wonder who the ahole is that hired him!!!

 

Someone just described Paul Schmidt perfectly. He's a weasel. Dude definitely has a complex due to being so short and not being a great student even at a mediocre college. He has a chip on his shoulder and I've seen him unable to hold back from leering at young female reps. It's disturbing on many levels. He should not be a manager here or anywhere. I'm sure he did tell recruiter he only wanted young, because being conniving doesn't mean being bright. He's definitely someone the company will eventually regret having on the team. There are some great managers here, Paulie just isn't one of them.

 

You have no evidence Valeant didn't do anything wrong.

 

What is the evidence of Valeant's wrong doing? Just hear a lot of complaining, and yeah, they were ignorant about revenue recognition, but it wasn't like Enron, where it was systematic fraud.