Another large corporation in Boston is having the same problem of tenured employees not willing to retire in this economic environment. They are revamping their retirement benefits to entice people to go. Not a buyout. Changing it for all employees. Heard it from the horses mouth.
5 replies (most recent on top)
@b0 oh darn. I was hoping the colder weather would keep this @$$hole under his bridge for the next few months.
@ax Spoken like a brown person or white liberal woman.
@ak yes but 2 things can be true at the same time. Regardless of the demographic they are promoting... There aren't a lot of openings at that level, especially at VP level, and many that are currently in those postions have been there a long time. Unless they want to keep promoting and potentially have a disproportionate number of Directors/VP's, the only way to open things up is to move them out (whether that be to bring in outside faces or promote lower level people from within). There are a lot of examples of VP reporting to VP, etc.
I’m not sure if it’s fair to say that the company has too many older more senior people in the way. Virtually all the promotions I see to director and VP are relatively young women and minorities. The only group not seeing mobility are White men.
I hope Fidelity does something similar...call it whatever you want (VBO or modified retirement package that you don't have to be 55 to be eligible for and perhaps with more incentive). The question is if Fidelity will do the same, which I suppose probably depends on if the company is getting the numbers they want/expect from RTO attrition. With the job market the way it is and other companies taking similar action I'd be surprised if Fidelity was any different.
Rumor is we still have too many older senior level people and the company wants to highly increase the number of early careeer associates. I also question whether the pulse survey results will influence AJ's thinking at all. I know they've stopped the VBO's, but with morale being so low and her wanting to revitalize the workforce you have to wonder if motivating the higher levels and disgruntled people to leave might be in the company's best interest at this point all things considered.
Only time will tell what they'll do, but it seems like a win-win situation for both those that would jump at a chance to move out, as well as those who want to grow but face mobility issues because the company is too top heavy. When things are so bad you have to bury your employee survey results for the first time you'd think they have to at least consider doing something along these lines.