#management

They have laid off so many people not one person wants to go the extra mile. Everyone is deflated, everyone says not my department. This company is honestly so fkd up. Why isn’t management stepping up? Protect the base ….. how about treat our customers with respect. Not one update from James Mc a total waste of space. Renewals are falling off a cliff and I’m being punished for it. Sort it out !

Why most hires in india wont code and just do confluence updates . Are they hired as per ppl manager friendships

If your slide deck slogan is ‘we are going to hold the Customer accountable’ then you probably need a box!

Managers now just brazenly lie on the check ins and reviews so employees can be illegally fired for cause. Will Wells Fargo now just commit perjury in court when they are sued like they did on the fake accounts? Wells Fargo is the most corrupt company.

Having lost millions due to Accenture outsourcing not going as planned the management is now planning layoffs and even more offshore and outsourcing instead of taking responsibility.
Shitstry should be ashamed n be immediately fired!

This entire organization is a mess.

This is what happens when you let a banker, a lawyer and a boozer run a pipeline company.

Anyone have a map, I’d like to see where we are going?

What do relationships managers really do?? Because at this point I belive their job is to just redirect their responsibilities or even misdirect. Do your job and stop making others do the work of three depertments!!! Its infuriating!!

Now that I’ve been here over a decade, I can see why the old timers before would get livid that Fidelity invests so much in kids right out of college.

At the time, I thought the older people were jealous but now I understand fidelity gives the kids more money because they’re the only ones d-mb enough to work for free.

When they move into the “I’ve been here a decade”, they’re all also confused as to what happened, then they burn out.

That’s not favoritism like I thought it was, it’s someone who needs to go back to school and stop playing “leader”. Fidelity cannot stay a top company when fundamentally we cannot understand the difference between what the words leader and manager mean.

To save the company from imploding, fix the management pandemic panic.

I've worked in some difficult places, but Dell has been the most frustrating by far. The management, processes, and supposed performance based pay all fall short.

The next person with most experience has been here for a little over a year. Needless to say, I spend most of my time explaining how things work instead of doing my actual job. I'm this close to just quitting and lettings them figure it all out by themselves. I wonder how that's going to work out for the management who got rid of everybody with any experience.

For employees who management let them pass their PIPs, did management indicate early on that they would support them? Were there any signals you could identify?

We are drowning in horrible management. Please revamp mortgage fulfillment back to the way it was before these vertical lines took place.

R&D LT will start delayering of roles as part of restructuring. There can only be up to 7 layers of managers. Directors need to have 5+ directs, all or nothing. Sr. Directors either have 7+ directs or none at all.

It makes me happy that some people in this world are FINALLY starting to wake up to this facade. I've known for for a few years that things weren't going well here, even though management would try to deceive me. It appears that Cramer finally saw the light:

"I can't counsel owning that… Jim Currier is the CEO, and he told Phil LeBeau three times that things were going quite well and they weren't. And I heard they were going quite well and they weren't, and so therefore I have nothing good to say about Honeywell Aerospace".

This excerpt was quoted from this article:

https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/jim-cramer-says-t-counsel-112244525.html

Cramer has nothing good to say about Honeyhell Aerospace? That makes (at least) 2 of us.

Source: https://drjustinbateh.com/in-the-media/

You're 31% less likely to get promoted.

Your output has nothing to do with it.

Fully remote workers get promoted 31 percent less often.

Hybrid workers keep pace with everyone in the office.

Nine ways proximity bias shows up before anyone calls it that:

1/ Task assignments go to whoever's visible
→ New work lands on people nearby, by habit
→ Not on whoever's actually best suited
→ Visibility substitutes for evaluation

2/ Casual hallway trust becomes career currency
→ Quick chats build familiarity fast
→ Familiarity gets mistaken for competence
→ Remote work simply can't produce as many of them

3/ Managers forget who isn't in the room
→ Nearly half admit forgetting remote workers exist
→ Not maliciously, just by default
→ Out of sight quietly becomes out of the plan

4/ Layoffs cut the people they know least
→ Decisions get easier without a face attached
→ Remote workers are 35 percent more likely to be cut
→ Distance makes the hard call feel less personal

5/ Executives openly reward showing up
→ Favorable assignments go to in-office effort
→ Raises and promotions follow the same pattern
→ Location becomes a hidden line item in the decision

6/ Mentorship happens where the mentor already is
→ Advice flows to whoever's easiest to reach
→ Remote workers get less of it by default
→ Growth compounds unevenly for reasons unrelated to skill

7/ Calibration meetings run on memory, not data
→ The names people can picture get discussed first
→ The ones they can't, get discussed last, if at all
→ Memory favors whoever occupies physical space

8/ Hybrid workers dodge the penalty entirely
→ Same flexibility, none of the promotion gap
→ The problem isn't remote work itself
→ It's being fully absent from the room where it counts

9/ Visibility becomes something you have to engineer
→ Waiting for fairness doesn't close the gap
→ Documenting wins and showing up where decisions happen does
→ The bias doesn't disappear, but it can be out-worked

Proximity bias doesn't ask if your work was good. It just asks if anyone happened to see it.

Can BP do a proof of concept and identify those toxic personnel who benefited from the BL era and were artificially promoted in an effort to detoxify bp?

Also identify middle managers who’s claim to fame is making more process and hurdles…identifying just 20 of these operatives and discarding them would do wonders for productivity, profitability, and safety..

upper management has to be do many rounds of layoff because this company is over staffed with inept and useless people.

So vp’s don’t touch their sr directors or directors but layoff all the Nike engineers.
The systems are unstable as Accenture did a sh---y job and know nothing.
Big issues occur and vps hammer down on why things are not fixed.
Directors and sr directors are trying to fix but have no tech knowledge or background and Accenture is clueless.
Sorry vps, but you’re lying in the bed you made.
We should be fine….

Everyone will be a VP soon. The org chart is bloated with VP's and the VP's themselves are bloated. Talent gets you nowhere in Telecom management especially in Uniti/Windstream culture. About 75% of all VP's are crony appointments and the others are Telecom lifers with talent but waiting for their severance package.

VP's! It's VP's ALL THE WAY DOWN! The job title bloat is unreal but what do you do in a shrinking industry full of telecom lifers.

Are there any reports of AT&T reversing 'not rehire eligible' statuses for employees terminated by the presence system, given that management later acknowledged the system's flaws?Is there any one rehired?

IT team su-ks.. the business architects seem clueless. Zero technical ability. It's a miracle thd company is still afloat.

Just saw that TEBG quality cut 4 of its managers/directors. I assume the plan is for that VP to bring in his own croonies to do the role. Meanwhile the rest of us are all waiting for someone to be announced to be able to get resources assigned and projects approved. What a joke.

For a company full of people climbing over themselves to push AI ideas - I have a challenge for you. Ask AI what the actual impact of forced low ratings in a major company. Not to steal the thunder here but - it’s a total failure - across the board!

It brings -

Terrible supervisor behavior
Crushes morale
Encourages disposable practices
Invites lawsuits
Extreme cost from turnover
Moreover - these impacts are worse at a company like P66 because of the annual cycles of cuts, the layoffs, outsourcing, and automation.

What’s so bad about it? Consider this situation:

You are in a group of 60 people, no supervisor has more than 6 people, some have only 3. Because of the continuous cutting of the “worst” since 2012 and the outsourcing or automation of many entry level jobs - your group is comprised of seasoned professionals. You supervise 4 people, all improve their work processes, find opportunities and add value. Through the year you stretch your people and have challenging targets. Almost all are hit. And - this is a big one - you have no reason for substantive performance conversations through the year.

At year end, as you “calibrate” you are asked for your bottom performer. You choose the person who missed 1 of his stretch goals - knowing that this person had a great year, they just happened to be at the bottom of your group. You know they don’t deserve a “3”.

Through calibration, your group of 60 must have three people to hang “3”’s on. Last year, you had 2 people in the larger group who were very deserving of “3l ratings and one more that made sense - they all left the company. Now, as calibration moves on, you realize that your employee is in the running for bottom 5 of the group.

Let’s pause here - because this whole process is built on the idea that each supervisor is as good, as active, as honest as the next. Surely each supervisor is as diligent in giving stretch goals to their employees - right? Surely none of them have employees who do the minimum but don’t mess up - thereby flying under the radar?

Back to calibration. At the end of the session, all of your peers and your people leader agree that your person is the third “3”. Now, after a successful year, you get to tell them they underperformed and are going to have negative impacts to their compensation as well as be put on a performance improvement plan.

This, in various forms, is what forced ratings look like. In every instance you must assume that people who did not earn a 3 will get them. And when that message is given - what will the supervisor say?

An honest comment would be “I believe you did a great job, however, in calibration the group determined you to be in the bottom 5%.” And what would you tell him to work on, exactly?

HR will say you need to “own the rating” and you cannot say they don’t deserve it - but pull all that apart for a moment. Your true feelings, the ones you expressed at calibration, is that this employee does not deserve a 3.

This process cannot exist at a company that claims to care about employees.

Impact

The forced 3 should motivate this employee to look for a job. There is a high probability the supervisor may also be more open to leaving - having seen the true character of our policy. If they leave, how do you know we get someone better, and, when? Many studies show that turnover costs as much as 1 year compensation! Seems pretty short sighted.

Add to this that we don’t have good pipelines for development unless you are hiring from CapGemni!

Legal risk

Why is there legal risk? Because we are rating people low not because of their actions. In many cases, there will have been no negative feedback in the year from the supervisor. When this occurs, especially against a protected class - bad things happen. Use AI to see how many companies have been sued for this practice and how many have stopped because of litigation threat - it’s a lot.

This is a terrible idea - a horrible idea - and it impacts all but the highest level employees.

My hope is that a rigid core of supervisors will ask themselves honestly if each person who is hung with a 3 deserves it. If they do, they should have been given ample notice through meaningful conversations which are documented. If, however, you are a supervisor who is tasked with hanging a 3 on an employee you know does not deserve it - my hope is you say NO, and you inform management you would rather have it assigned to yourself as neither of you have earned it

Seeing sudden manager calibrations and stack-ranking across ESG. Word is that notifications are hitting the first Wednesday of October to kick off Q4. Anyone else seeing this behavior or heard anything concrete from leadership?

What do you make of the latest exec management changes ?
Growing more pessimistic here

Running like headless chickens.

Any impact? I left last year and I heard about the cut today. Good luck to all of you. I hope it was not big but judging on number of views it does not look good. I went to Wells Fargo and it's the same sh-t over there, layoffs come in waves and they are trying to outsource as much as they can. Cannot trust management, they tell u one thign and then turn on a dime tomorrow. It's even worse because of all limitations that were imposed on the bank a few years back due to the scandal. Anyhow, good luck all

I was reading an article today that said the Refinery was still down. How hard is it to get it running again after a power outage? (Been there done that multiple times)

Is the local management just clueless as to how it works?

Has KL been advised? Hopefully they are all using PSMS onsite to prevent those LAI’s.

• Exxon Mobil said in a regulatory filing that floodwater overwhelmed a pump at its ~275,000-barrel-per-day Joliet, Illinois refinery.
• A containment bo-m was deployed as part of the cleanup.
• The refinery had already been taken offline on Sunday (September 13/14) after a power outage (on ComEd’s lines feeding the plant) that triggered the safety flare system. Power was later restored, but the facility remained offline.
• As of Thursday (Sept. 17), the refinery was still offline (per Wood Mackenzie). Industry monitors had expected a return to normal by the end of the week. It also flared again on Wednesday.
• Exxon declined to say whether the pump/floodwater issue was linked to the earlier power outage.

Imagine the mess coming.

IT&V is going to take much of Audit’s work. IT&V hired a large group of Big 4 leaders that do not know internal audit, do not know how to identify an issue, or how to navigate the bank. They effectively QA control documentation pretending to evaluate the control enviornment. IT&V is not built to find issues and is not finding issues. Risk is a bigger mess than it was 5 years ago with over reliance on RCSA.

We will back in a huge mess in less than 3 years. In the meantime, we shrink. We make questionable decisions.

These things take time. Grab the popcorn.

Recently several exec's have explained the importance of being well rounded in many aspects of the company. To do so they mentioned how they would make as many lateral moves in order to learn holistically. Do these same leaders support us if we have the same desire. Will management support us if we have the same desire? How to be well rounded the execs?

The AD was shaking, voice weard, eyes blinking when talking about the Pulse, going to crash under the loads.

With AI, who needs management, particularly SeniorManagement.
Ownership means nothing to AI

They are very cautious about who will be around them and when you by any chance happened to be in a such "Team" ( They always like to portray themself as a "FAMILY" ) you expect to be on a street in around 4-5 years, because they do not like you from the very beginning, like an adopted child, and will try to get rid of you as soon as possible. They use very many sophisticated techniques to justify their useless to IBM existence, hiring people for a short period of time ( 4 - 5 years ) to create a shield to protect their own existence. When a company wide layoffs get announced that shield ( first line of defense ) goes to the street and those bad people stay at IBM and continue doing nothing. Managers in such teams are very incompetent and stupidly execute commands from upper management. Here is a suggestion: to sweep any corner in IBM Silicon Valley LAB to get rid of all toxic managers, remember Intel did it 20 years ago and the company now is much of a better shape and health.

Perhaps the same problem at CVS too!
"slop grenades" everywhere!

https://www.businessinsider.com/shopify-ceo-ai-slop-grenades-can-make-work-harder-2026-9

Just heard we got a new director and she is from there. Why is all senior management affiliated with this school?

Not OP of orginal post but that post maybe me realize:

IMAPS Corporation Award to IBM?

How? That department was completely destroyed and disbanded by the leadership of their last management chain. Their buffoonery bungled, fumbled, and mismanaged, driving the department straight into the ground by people who clearly had no idea what they were doing. In fact the only thing those guys were good at was destroying and ending other projects and programs. How can IBM win this when it literally no longer exists internally at IBM. How exactly does a team that's been wiped off the org chart win an award for work it can no longer even claim credit for?

We’re basically being told on the downlow by our managers that “they” can see how often we’re using CoPilot (AI). They forced it into our performance goals. So if we don’t use AI enough (no, “enough” has not been clearly defined of course), we won’t meet our performance objectives for the year.

Our screensavers are about AI.

Personally I would like to see them address how this objective isn’t causing yet another drain on our natural resources, but of course that’ll never happen.

Be careful about constantly taking on responsibilities that aren't part of your job. Once everyone gets used to you doing them, they will stop seeing them as extra and you'll be sc--wed. I'm talking from experience.