Thread regarding Elevance Health (Anthem) layoffs

I’m Making a Prediction

I predict Gail will leave the company within a few months (if not sooner), whether it’s her own decision or not. I’ve been here a long time and I’ve never seen a CEO stay as long as her. Our stock is tanking, and has been tanking for at least a year. I cannot believe she’s still the CEO. She’s the common denominator in all of our troubles.


by
| 75 views | | 26 replies (last April 15) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kkdajv1k

26 replies (most recent on top)

@e4 I have seen it happen, sometimes it's quick, other times I am still waiting

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @59x+1kkdajv1k

Been here 20 years and I think your right about her being the longest standing ceo but I don't see her leaving she is going down with the ship and I agree in my time here Larry Glasscock was the best that's when the company was in its prime

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @386+1kkdajv1k

It is blatantly obvious the woman isn’t going anywhere

She can literally be sued for insider trading and still sit as CEO

she knows/is friends with the right people. She will be here until she destroys this place by sending everything she can to India and who gives a damn because she has her golden parachute

Be smart. Look elsewhere.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2hw+1kkdajv1k

@jp she is not only raking it in, she will be paid nicely to leave and they will agree to come up with a nice story so we don’t think she was asked to leave, but everyone will know she was. She will go down as one of the least inspirational and ineffective leaders during my tenure at the company. Larry Glasscock was the best.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1km+1kkdajv1k

@e4 Karma is real, sometimes it just takes longer than we would like.

She is definitely a model management executive to be used in workplace violence video training

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @14v+1kkdajv1k

@pk Another poster said that exact thing earlier and then he went down the Wall St rabbit hole. ASO accounts can cover whatever the heck they want

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @sm+1kkdajv1k

@cw National Account customers, for the most part, are self funded and thus they determine their plan of benefits, not Anthem. It is clear you have no knowledge whatsoever of that market space.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pk+1kkdajv1k

@jp and that tells you how bad Ozempic really is 😉

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jz+1kkdajv1k

@en Traders use much harder stuff than Ozempic! Lol!

Back to the topic at hand. There is no reason or incentive for GB to leave. If you're being paid millions to ruin a company without facing any consequences, why would you quit? Most people would keep raking it in until they were kicked out.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jp+1kkdajv1k

@e0 Traders can’t use Ozempic, sorry I didn’t think I had to spell it out. I must be talking to management, based on your ChatGPT answer.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @en+1kkdajv1k

@e5 Does full retirement age really matter when you have a net worth of over $1 billion? You have to remember; Executives continue to receive a lot of retirement benefits that those beneath them do not.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ek+1kkdajv1k

Retirement full Social Security is now age 67

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @e5+1kkdajv1k

@d0 we mention karma, is karma real?

In my life, it's strange to see good people pushed and faded away.
I ask why, but no one has an answer.
I hope karma is true, because we all need a little more hope.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @e4+1kkdajv1k

@dp re: "wall street bans Ozempic " - what is wrong with you. How do you still have a job here?

Wall Street companies are not banning the use of Ozempic by employees; rather, they are grappling with the high cost of covering these dr-gs, with analysts predicting up to 24 million Americans could be using them by 2035. Instead of banning, many firms are managing costs by scrutinizing coverage, while some have even embraced the trend, with employees openly discussing their use

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @e0+1kkdajv1k

@dq Because CEO types like her are psychopaths in every clinical sense of the word. They don't necessarily care about money. It's about power and control. The money is a byproduct.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dv+1kkdajv1k

@cv she’ll stay until she’s 100 if they let her. I can’t for the life of me understand why people with that much money continue to work. Why don’t they travel and do fun stuff, they can afford it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dq+1kkdajv1k

@cw - yes, lawsuits are starting on the mutilation front. Wall Street bans Ozempic because it affects your performance. You can’t hide Ozempic face, so you’ll be cut and never rehired.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dp+1kkdajv1k

I hope she leaves for personal health reasons, which is as slow and painful as the days were under her corrupt leadership. Karma please. I am a firm believer in getting what you deserve out of life.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @d0+1kkdajv1k

@cg LOL do you think we are going to stop approving Ozempic and gender affirming care? Is MK going to tell National accounts - we will tell you what benefits you can have?

Wow - triggered much the poster should have added Mark Cuban also as an example of leadership

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cw+1kkdajv1k

I don't think she is going to give up that $22+ million compensation package that easy. Look how many failures, losses on ROI and lawsuits have occurred under her watch and the board still didn't take action. Plus, I think this CEO position and the top 'lists' she somehow gets on are too much a part of her identity to give it up at 65. Maybe at 67 or 70 once she gets her net worth up to $1.5 to $2 billion, she will decide to retire. Just remember that when you are struggling to afford groceries, gas, and pay mortgage/rent....

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cv+1kkdajv1k

@c0 Scott Galloway pushed Ozempic and Gender Affirming care. He should be nowhere near Healthcare.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cg+1kkdajv1k

She has it this good with no repercussions, and banking millions, she will stay as long as they allow it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ce+1kkdajv1k

Retirement is not required at 65 per the government you are eligible - so move on that topic.

Angela Braley was just as toxic and eventually got tossed - but the board was not the same as it is now. All these people have a boatload of money and are likely in the "just one more year" money mindset. They don't care about this company they care about themselves which is why this place is a hot mess and how it got there.

In my opinion women in power in this place are straight up full of themselves and frankly mean. Men here are insecure and equally mean.

Frankly the best thing that could of happen is a person like a Scott Galloway run this place. Sadly that likely won't happen.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c0+1kkdajv1k

@a7 Why does she have to retire at 65? What is proof for saying this? Nobody “has to retire” at 65 as far as I know.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bm+1kkdajv1k

10% of CEO’s are >65. Warren Buffet is 95. My hot take is 30 more years with Gail.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @af+1kkdajv1k

Not exactly a hot take; she has to retire at 65, so she's almost certainly leaving this year. The only question is when, and who will succeed her. (Clearly not Pete.)

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a7+1kkdajv1k

Post a reply

: