Hi Aleigha Case

Merging with another organization has downfalls of destroying wealth from the merger. Considering the buying price is important when merging, spending too much on the merger will impound the value after the merger. Some mergers do not create wealth so capital is lost through the merger. There is no guarantee of financial gain and every formula considered with focus, just as with an acquisition. The final decision dictated by the variables. One company merging with another company takes the debt and losses of those companies in the new formed company.

Fourth, both health care organization are anticipated that during our organizational restructuring on the Care Select Health System would most likely affect job satisfaction levels and potentially compromise the quality of services provided, yet evidence on the impact of hospital mergers on staff satisfaction is surprisingly scarce. Therefore, Care Select Health System staff might perceive mergers as a breach of the psychological contract (implicit commitments and expectations between employers and employees) when they feel they are not listened to, when they have to ‘suffer’ from delays in service development and job uncertainties. For instance, cultures of merging organizations might also clash when they have opposing attitudes towards

The main weakness of merging the two companies would be with the staff. There would be cultural changes, disengaged staff and moral decreases (Iveybusinessjournal.com, 2015). Reorganization would need to be done to

Pikula (1999) observes that in merging two or more entities, the management of the companies must adhere to the Sherman Anti-trust Act which was established in 1890. This act was specifically established to prevent mergers from creating monopolies and cartels with an aim to exploit the consumers through determining prevailing market prices. If the merger results in a monopoly, it won’t be approved by the government. Employee contractual agreements must be considered before, during and after mergers. For the merger to go on seamlessly there should be shareholder approval. Initial approval by shareholders for the companies to consolidate their operations helps prevent conflicts from shareholders after the merger. Lastly, regulatory approval should be considered. The management must register the newly formed company. In addition, managers from the merging parties must consider agreements and contracts that the parties are engaging in as these will be transferred to the new company upon the merger.

A merger is a partial or total combination of two separate business firms and forming of a new one. There are predominantly two kinds of mergers: partial and complete. Partial merger usually involves the combination of joint ventures and inter-corporate stock purchases. Complete mergers are results in blending of identities and the creation of a single succeeding firm. (Hicks, 2012, p 491). Mergers in the healthcare sector, particularly horizontal hospital mergers wherein two or more hospitals merge into a single corporation, are increasing both in frequency and importance. (Gaughan, 2002). This paper is an attempt to study the impact of the merger of two competing healthcare organization and will also attempt to propose appropriate

I agree, physicians run the risk of non-payment and persuading them to adopt this payment system is challenging. Additionally, physicians are concern of complications that may occur outside the episode-based payments—how would they get paid and should they be paid separately. Finally, physicians are subject to losing patient’s if they opt out the bundled payment system to others that adopted the plan.

As the human resources manager, this situation could be very delicate. The merger poses a compensation challenge terms of the listed paid time off policies. Company employees might want to keep their policy paid time off plans, whereas Company B might think their terms were the best. There is the risk of paid time off crisis. In addition to the provided information about the leave policy of the company, there is also a need for information about the number of employees, their levels of work, and their pending off days. Information about their pay rates is also needed. The different companies might have had different pay rates for the same job levels (Smith, 2012).

After the failed merger talks, the organization then had to deal with their employees most specifically the union. When mergers happens, the employees usually have that fear that they could be paid off when two companies merge because they need to cut off the cost. The existence of the labor unions is to protect the people working for a certain company or organization. Nevertheless, there could be times that labor unions can be hard for small organizations or companies with their demands. Just like in this situation, the organization cannot afford to just give in to the demands of the union.

The merger is a qualifying reorganization. It is a forward triangular merger, §368(a)(2)(D), because the parent (ODI) created a subsidiary (Atlantic) with the contribution of its stock (the ODI Nonvoting Preferred Stock), and then the target (CPI) merges into the subsidiary (Atlantic). CPI’s shareholders will receive the nonvoting preferred stock of ODI, and CPI will disappear. The requirements necessary under §368(a)(2)(D) is that the subsidiary acquires substantially all of the target’s assets, which will be 90% of net and 70% of gross. This does occur because Atlantic acquires all of CPI’s assets and liabilities. Typically, stripping off a target’s assets are prohibited, but in this case the subsidiary is acquiring the cash received from the sale of the tools division. Another requirement is that the target’s shareholders only receive stock of the parent and not the subsidiary, and in this case, the stock transferred to CPI’s shareholders are all ODI’s stock. Another requirement is that the target is merged into the subsidiary, which does occur; CPI merges into Atlantic and Atlantic survives. The final requirements are the judicial authority requirements. There is a continuity of shareholder’s interest test, just like required in a type “A” merger. Even though not all three shareholders of CPI receive shares of ODI, Harry’s and Teresa’s ownership is greater than 50% of CPI. Harry owns 60% (300/500) of CPI and Teresa owns 22% (110/500) of CPI. It also meets the

After the merger, the large company initially consisted of nine total geographically separated locations; therefore, to scale back, management decided to close the San Jose plant and move the majority of employees to San Francisco location. In order to facilitate the closing, the San Jose division manager, Karen Howell decided to let go roughly 20% of the employees. Consequentially, she determined to let go 20% from each department by using the

Post-merger integration work is difficult, political, and often driven by teams that still have day jobs. Budgets are undefined, executive leadership is not clear beyond the C-level, no plans exist, and no one has done it before. Companies are willing to spend money on due diligence ahead of signing the papers, but do not always follow through to ensure that targets are met. In many cases, integration team members are plucked from the “operate and maintain” staff, and either cannot see or do not share the strategic vision of the “design and build” dealmakers. Companies that thrive from mergers do eight things (at least) correctly: Have a Plan, Communicate, and Measure Results, Dedicate the Team, Automate, Plan for Turnover, Focus on Business

Although the bank should have reorganized prior to the acquisition, the purchase will interfere with normal operations and invite government and regulatory scrutiny (e.g., Dodd-Frank Act). As a result, it is very important for the bank to maintain up-to-date communications with all employees, which will reduce anxiety and fear. That is, employees should never gather employment information from the media and/or unofficially from coworkers (e.g., rumors). Most importantly, the bank must immediately notify and meet with employees (e.g., upper management) that will likely lose their positions due to the acquisition and offer them satisfactory severance packages, which can be paid/available if employees remain until the acquisition is approved

After a merger, it's not uncommon for a company to lay off a few or sometimes massive amounts of employees. That’s because mergers generally take place for the purpose of joining two or more companies to achieve greater efficiencies of scale and productivity. Back in 2005 when Procter & Gamble announced that it would buy Gillette for $57 billion, 6,000 people were slated to lose their jobs once the company joined. The reason why, suggests Peter Cappelli, director of Wharton’s Center for Human Resources, University of Pennsylvania is because the investors focus on costs, which generally means cutting workers to save money. So, if your hearing rumors about mergers, then sit down with your boss and have a good heart to heart about your future with the company. Going through merger suggests it’s time to clean house, and that could mean dropping you from payroll.

There were many factors that increased the risk that the post-acquisition organization would be overly complex. One such factor is the speed in which the acquisition took place. IBM did not hesitate in the slightest to acquire Lotus. Rather they paid a significant market premium for the company to ensure that they could gain control in an expedited manner. IBM tendered and all cash offer of $64 dollars a share which accumulated to the largest software buyout in history. However, the speed in which the deal occurred would have generally added a great deal of confusion to both organizations. Therefore there was little time to engage with the employees and include a level of understanding from the human capital (Peterson & Voules, N.d.).

As we can see on attached charts - Market was not too sure about this merger (“On paper, the deal has much to commend it, many outsiders say”. But thorny issues remain, including how to accommodate the strains between consultants and auditors, potential conflicts of interest involving important clients and even the delicate matter of choosing a new name. If the negotiators are not careful, fallout could haunt the combined firm for years to come.) From the time when merger plans were made public Shares of