UPDATED 03.24.09 @ 9 AM
See the updated item.
Last night, Merck filed with the SEC more of its disclosure materials -- in this case, an updated slide-deck, being used with Merck employees, in "town hall" style meetings about the merger process. Page 14 of the newly-revised deck lept out at me, for two reasons:
First, note that if "a majority" of Schering-Plough's people are to be retained, then, to keep this statement purely factual, and accurate, up to 49.9999 percent of the pre-merger Schering-Plough people could be severed, in the merger. If that seems a tortured reading, consider that earlier pronouncements (Page 26, dated March 11, 2009, and filed with the SEC on March 12, 2009) on the topic, used the phrase "a substantial majority" -- and the ensuing difference is truly-striking [Click to enlarge images.]:
. . . .March 16, 2009, Page 14: Majority of Schering-Plough colleagues to remain. . . .
. . . .No top down review of Merck colleagues. . . .
Next, note that there will be no "top-down", position-by-position review of Merck people -- this fairly infers that there will be no "open-slating process" for all surviving positions (with nominees from both companies). The presumption here is that the pre-merger Merck people, absent special circumstances (poor performance issues; previously-declared redundant/outsourced -- in earlier Merck restructuring reviews), will be presumed to be placed in their positions, in the "new" Merck.
This is the newly-emerging reality -- and a perhaps unwelcome one -- for the Schering-Plough people, especially the corporate headquarters staff people, in my experience. There is little doubt that Merck already has substantially all of those roles covered, in Whitehouse Station. In the field, and in the R&D labs, this will be less-likely to be the case, in my estimation.