Virology

[anonymous]

Leadership turned a blind eye. As usual

 

[Help me understand]

We want answers.
You aren't allow to have personal opinions unless they inline with Merck's DEI, ask Patty. Safe to speak up? No!

Why was Patty fired? Ask V and C
Why was Lori fired? Ask C and HR.
Why was Steve fired? Ask O and V
Why isn't Cynthia fired?

Why did marketing discontinue promoting a STR and allocate scarce resources to promote the other product? Our market share is pathetic. No logical explanation exists, as it is illogical. These are the same individuals launching our new product, you have set the bar low. Have you ever considered the impact on customer perception? Learn the market.
Lead or Leave

“Show them they were wrong” Who? What are we showing? Keep your candy. Some of us have extensive territories and spend three to four hours traveling to a customer, yet we still want to return home for the evening. Being positive and upbeat isn't the answer. Stop avoiding, answer our questions.
Lead or Leave

 

[Anonymous]

That is the question to be answered - why isnt Cynthia Edlow being fired??

 

[anonymous]

Seems like the same person replying to themselves, from what I understand they both deserved to be let go

 

[anonymous]

How is it that they "deserved to be let go"?

 

[anonymous]

Virology division is a dumpster fire. Run away as quickly as you can!!!!

 

[anonymous]

It's a toxic environment. Somebody please do something.

 

[anonymous]

Why isn't Cynthia Edlow being fired?? Great question!

 

[anonymous]

Quite the accurate thread.

 

[anonymous]

Why isn't Cynthia Edlow being fired?? Great question!

for what? Cynthia is a great leader

 

[anonymous]

for what? Cynthia is a great leader

Hahahahahahahahahahaha. Ok Cynthia

 

[anonymous]

for what? Cynthia is a great leader

If you need to go to Cuba for a mission trip

 

[anonymous]

Seems to be MIA, where did CE go?

 

[anonymous]

Funny how “DEI” becomes “over-the-top” only when the playing field is no longer tilted in one direction.

For centuries, the majority didn’t build success on merit; they built it on control. They built empires on the unpaid labor of the enslaved, the stolen lands of Indigenous people, the exploitation of immigrants, and the silencing of women who were denied the right to vote, own property, or even open a bank account without a husband’s signature.

Every system: economic, political, academic & even religious was designed to preserve their dominance while squeezing profit and labor from everyone else.

Now that DEI initiatives attempted to make us One America for All, that feels like a threat to you. Not because Equal Opportunity is unfair, but because for the first time your “opportunity“ is no longer exclusive.

Let’s be clear: DEI isn’t “lowering the bar.” It’s removing the gate. If your success depends on the gate being closed to everyone else then YOU Were Never The Most Qualified. You Were Just The MOST Protected!

 

[anonymous]

Funny how “DEI” becomes “over-the-top” only when the playing field is no longer tilted in one direction.

For centuries, the majority didn’t build success on merit; they built it on control. They built empires on the unpaid labor of the enslaved, the stolen lands of Indigenous people, the exploitation of immigrants, and the silencing of women who were denied the right to vote, own property, or even open a bank account without a husband’s signature.

Every system: economic, political, academic & even religious was designed to preserve their dominance while squeezing profit and labor from everyone else.

Now that DEI initiatives attempted to make us One America for All, that feels like a threat to you. Not because Equal Opportunity is unfair, but because for the first time your “opportunity“ is no longer exclusive.

Let’s be clear: DEI isn’t “lowering the bar.” It’s removing the gate. If your success depends on the gate being closed to everyone else then YOU Were Never The Most Qualified. You Were Just The MOST Protected!

what a load of BS, likely from someone who makes a living of DEI...just because there were not certain percentages of an ethnicity, gender in certain positions, levels does not mean discrimination...thats how these nutty DEI advocates think...I can tell you the pressure to focus on hiring and promoting "under represented groups" was real until recently, especially if your team lacked such "diversity". That ship has sailed, your going to need to find a new career field.

 

[anonymous]

Funny how “DEI” becomes “over-the-top” only when the playing field is no longer tilted in one direction.

For centuries, the majority didn’t build success on merit; they built it on control. They built empires on the unpaid labor of the enslaved, the stolen lands of Indigenous people, the exploitation of immigrants, and the silencing of women who were denied the right to vote, own property, or even open a bank account without a husband’s signature.

Every system: economic, political, academic & even religious was designed to preserve their dominance while squeezing profit and labor from everyone else.

Now that DEI initiatives attempted to make us One America for All, that feels like a threat to you. Not because Equal Opportunity is unfair, but because for the first time your “opportunity“ is no longer exclusive.

Let’s be clear: DEI isn’t “lowering the bar.” It’s removing the gate. If your success depends on the gate being closed to everyone else then YOU Were Never The Most Qualified. You Were Just The MOST Protected!

100% this!

 

[anonymous]

what a load of BS, likely from someone who makes a living of DEI...just because there were not certain percentages of an ethnicity, gender in certain positions, levels does not mean discrimination...thats how these nutty DEI advocates think...I can tell you the pressure to focus on hiring and promoting "under represented groups" was real until recently, especially if your team lacked such "diversity". That ship has sailed, your going to need to find a new career field.

*you’re

Let me guess. You’re a middle aged white man, huh? #typical

 

[anonymous]

Funny how “DEI” becomes “over-the-top” only when the playing field is no longer tilted in one direction.

For centuries, the majority didn’t build success on merit; they built it on control. They built empires on the unpaid labor of the enslaved, the stolen lands of Indigenous people, the exploitation of immigrants, and the silencing of women who were denied the right to vote, own property, or even open a bank account without a husband’s signature.

Every system: economic, political, academic & even religious was designed to preserve their dominance while squeezing profit and labor from everyone else.

Now that DEI initiatives attempted to make us One America for All, that feels like a threat to you. Not because Equal Opportunity is unfair, but because for the first time your “opportunity“ is no longer exclusive.

Let’s be clear: DEI isn’t “lowering the bar.” It’s removing the gate. If your success depends on the gate being closed to everyone else then YOU Were Never The Most Qualified. You Were Just The MOST Protected!

Thanks for the lecture Conrod

 

[anonymous]

Funny how “DEI” becomes “over-the-top” only when the playing field is no longer tilted in one direction.

For centuries, the majority didn’t build success on merit; they built it on control. They built empires on the unpaid labor of the enslaved, the stolen lands of Indigenous people, the exploitation of immigrants, and the silencing of women who were denied the right to vote, own property, or even open a bank account without a husband’s signature.

Every system: economic, political, academic & even religious was designed to preserve their dominance while squeezing profit and labor from everyone else.

Now that DEI initiatives attempted to make us One America for All, that feels like a threat to you. Not because Equal Opportunity is unfair, but because for the first time your “opportunity“ is no longer exclusive.

Let’s be clear: DEI isn’t “lowering the bar.” It’s removing the gate. If your success depends on the gate being closed to everyone else then YOU Were Never The Most Qualified. You Were Just The MOST Protected!

I acknowledge your perspective and agree, we need to hire the most qualified! It is imperative to recognize that the current state of this division is directly attributable to Cynthia Edlow’s leadership. Despite her race, she lacked the necessary qualifications to effectively manage this division. Until Edlow’s leadership, this division had consistently embraced diversity, regardless of race, gender, or age.

Edlow demonstrated a profound lack of understanding of sales principles. A sales leader should maintain a comprehensive understanding of her sales representatives, top customers, and the challenges within the sales force. She knew none of these. She also neglected to attend crucial meetings and, regrettably, hired individuals solely to protect her own incompetence.

Her focus on Community liaisons disregarded the primary objective of the division: profitability. While CLs may provide a perceived “value add,” they do not contribute significantly to the company’s bottom line. Moreover, they incur substantial costs with minimal or no return on investment, particularly considering the extensive resources allocated to them.

As we approach a launch, I sincerely hope that this division can regain its footing. However, we are witnessing a concerning trend of talented managers and sales representatives being terminated and seeking employment in more favorable working environments.

We need to hire the most qualified not the most protected, I agree. Cynthia Edlow was hired to be a sales director, she was not qualified, she created this chaos to hide her incompetence.

Cynthia Edlow needs to be fired in order to move forward.

 

[anonymous]

I acknowledge your perspective and agree, we need to hire the most qualified! It is imperative to recognize that the current state of this division is directly attributable to Cynthia Edlow’s leadership. Despite her race, she lacked the necessary qualifications to effectively manage this division. Until Edlow’s leadership, this division had consistently embraced diversity, regardless of race, gender, or age.

Edlow demonstrated a profound lack of understanding of sales principles. A sales leader should maintain a comprehensive understanding of her sales representatives, top customers, and the challenges within the sales force. She knew none of these. She also neglected to attend crucial meetings and, regrettably, hired individuals solely to protect her own incompetence.

Her focus on Community liaisons disregarded the primary objective of the division: profitability. While CLs may provide a perceived “value add,” they do not contribute significantly to the company’s bottom line. Moreover, they incur substantial costs with minimal or no return on investment, particularly considering the extensive resources allocated to them.

As we approach a launch, I sincerely hope that this division can regain its footing. However, we are witnessing a concerning trend of talented managers and sales representatives being terminated and seeking employment in more favorable working environments.

We need to hire the most qualified not the most protected, I agree. Cynthia Edlow was hired to be a sales director, she was not qualified, she created this chaos to hide her incompetence.

Cynthia Edlow needs to be fired in order to move forward.

Amen