employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Modernizing Medicine

Engaged Employer

Violations of the ADA - Anonymous employee Modernizing Medicine Employee Review

1.0
Aug 11, 2016
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The fruit and nuts. The abundance of alcohol and parties.

Cons

MMI violates the ADA. They force employees to use up PTO with FLMA. Then you have no PTO left. They do not allow remote work for disabilities, even though we have remote employees from Canada to South America. This is in violation of EEOC where it states, 'if an employer does offer telework, it must allow employees with disabilities an equal opportunity to participate in such a program.' They do not allow or offer part-time employment. Which could help ease the burden for some employees who are sick and with frequent appointments. If you do take PTO, they expect you to work. They even call and make sure you are working while you are out sick or on vacation. Any employee who has filed long-term FLMA has not received promotions. FLMA employees are targeted by management and worse by HR. Their goal is to get the disabled to quit. When reasonable accommodations are brought up that are on the Askjan site, they are ignored. None of the accommodations would cost anything to MMI.

Explore other reviews about Modernizing Medicine

1.0
May 12, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The strongest aspect of the company is the resilience and talent of many of its individual contributors. I worked with smart, creative people who consistently found ways to keep critical functions operating despite significant operational and resource constraints. The environment offered extensive hands-on experience with complex systems, cross-functional dependencies, and high-volume operational problem solving. Employees often gained rapid professional growth simply because they were required to manage responsibilities well beyond the scope of their formal roles.

Cons

The company’s operational philosophy often seemed to confuse endurance with effectiveness. Employees were expected to absorb expanding responsibilities indefinitely, even when workloads had clearly exceeded sustainable limits. In some cases, entire operational domains were effectively owned by a single individual with little redundancy, limited support, and no realistic contingency planning. Leadership frequently discussed innovation and growth while failing to address basic organizational health issues such as staffing adequacy, process ownership, and burnout prevention. Months of excessive workload and escalating pressure resulted in predictable employee exhaustion, yet meaningful intervention from management or HR never materialized. There was also a noticeable tendency to treat systemic operational failures as isolated employee challenges instead of acknowledging broader leadership and resourcing problems. This created an environment where highly capable people spent more time compensating for organizational instability than performing strategic work.

4
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All