It’s being reported that teams are requiring to lower the scores from meets to needs improvement. During calibration calls employees started with meets but were downgraded to needs improvements to meet a quota threshold issued by HR. Management can’t give just reasons for the lower score , except saying it’s by direction. Please know if you get needs improvement off bs, it’s because of a quota not bc of merit.
25 replies (most recent on top)
More Wells Fargo shitshow.
@2mda+1nBAETXx. You are not the only one. Had sadistic middle manager with barely 3 years of banking experience, the rest at Lowes corp put something on my year end that was never brought up throughout the year AND I had covered for her while she was OOO. She never wrote the review as she was on leave, but she added in one negative "ding" just to put me down & protect her job. She couldn't downgrade my rating as my performance was strong, despite her setting me up to fail before she went on leave.
You sound like a joy to manage
After what happened to me my advice would be to carefully document verbal commitments that aren’t stated in your midyear review documentation. I was told that there was “no reason” I wouldn’t get an exceeds at year end if I did XYZ. After doing XYZ I was surprised to get a Meets with one area graded as inconsistently meets.
I had no proof of the promise because it was verbal and I had not documented. There was no coaching to get me to an exceeds. I opened an HR investigation asking them to objectively review my year-end review, but of course, that came to nothing. Lots of excuses. The review was full of lies, but in the end they protected the shady finance manager. To be expected of anyone in scandal-ridden CSBB.
I had to leave the bank after 25 years of excellent reviews without severance to protect my sanity. Just a caution to those waiting for severance.
Funny how stacked ranking makes teams worse not better. If you are a high performer you need to make sure you are on a team with low performers to make sure you get an exceeds. In an ideal world you would want high performers to gravitate towards each other to work together on hard problems. But with stacked ranking they make sure any team of high performers breaks itself up.
I had to change a couple last year. Never changed the verbiage, it read better than the rating, but my team knows how the system works
Super fun as a manager to see someone as a meets, never tell them they're not meeting, and then at review time be overruled by your boss and/or boss's boss and told you have to downgrade it to inconsistently meets or worse. And now you have to 'own' that and rewrite the review to show why they're inconsistently meets throwing in BS that you've never discussed during the year.
I didn’t have to move anyone to needs improvement, but I haven’t been able to get a exceeds approved since Charlie came to town.
Not really new or late breaking info. If you are rank and file, don't sit around thinking your manager or 2-up have any clue or control, they don't. They might try, but they don’t. The ones making this decision are the least removed from you. They are better equipped to join rock concerts at Hudson Yard, because they arent emotionally wrecked by the decisions made. All moot here soon really, AI and offshoring will indeed render most of you ‘unneeded’. Yes, your job too.
@foa+1nBAETXx I guess he didn’t count on a huge group of people deciding to hang in for the severance they feel they’ve earned. Like half my team.
Funny, people are looking out for themselves rather than helping him make his numbers. How dare they?
Anyone who is rated NI and honestly knows that are not a NI Needs but are merely a casualty of this chainsaw tactic needs to flood HR with EVERY single issue you have. Document everything. Open cases. Report all wrong doings. Do NOT go down quietly or easily. Put your Manager on notice. It’s sad because they are feeling forced to go along but too bad if it affects you! Make them scared to have conversations with you or make you the fall guy. They will either pick someone else to sacrifice, stand up & push back to their leadership or go down with Charlie & Company. Enough is enough!!!!!
The only method of lowering expenses that the boss will approve is downsizing people. Nothing that will actually work is on the table. That much is obvious. When diverse suppliers, useless buildings, and everything the "green committee" pukes out is on the table I'll believe they are serious, until then it's a fake news narrative that's just an excuse to fire people.
Not happening on my team of 30. BUT, I am limited to only a few exceeds and one consistently exceeds.
Remember a "Meets" rating means you are meeting all AND exceeding in some areas. If you aren't exceeding in some areas you can't be a "Meets".
That's the double edge sword. They sell you on the idea that "Meets is awesome because you really are exceeding in some areas" but at the same time use that same measure to justify lowering the rating if you aren't exceeding in anything.
This is absolutely happening still. Was told that 3 levels of management approved for exceeds, but senior exec level mandated to move to meets. Same thing for meets to lower to needs improvement. All in the name of Schart's cost savings to control bonus and merit payouts and to get people to quit to avoid severance.
Absolutely. Stack or force rankings were meant to achieve goal of letting employees go period. If execs demand 10% of the work force be fired, individual divisions or units are expected to come up with people to fire.
was said in the earnings call today and in the earnings presentation that attrition is lower than expected. this is one way to fix that.
Ratings have and always will be littered with inconsistencies and inaccuracies. You could be an Exceeds for years and the reward for all your hard work is what? More work, same job, over and over again. Stuck. You can be a Meets and get the same benefits of Exceeds with no pressure or accountability to be better.
The company is hypocritical, as everything is designed to bring everyone down to below average. It's safer that way as it reduces costs significantly needed to properly engage the workforce and offer/reward oppportunities where appropriate.
If someone wants to work harder, the bank won't stop it as it is to their benefit 100%. Dirty tactics as the bank knows the pyschology of workers will "feel" a responsibility to be a leader and take punches.
There is so much more to say, but really, this whole performance review system is nothing but an HR default check-the-box system for formality purposes only.
But does that mean HR recruiting is hiring average/below average performers?
Thought we only hire the best
This has been the case for two years and differs by each LOB.
Post ID: @xtu+1nBAETXx unless the company can lower expenses nobody will be getting a bonus. but for real needs improvement isn’t bonus eligible in some cases. it’s really hard to get a bonus which could be the reason so many are getting down graded
As long as I get my bonus I’m good
Post ID: @dnx+1nBAETXx it does matter if you are trying to apply out bc the rating appears to your next hiring manager. Then your likelihood of it going up during year end is low.
Who cares. The only one that matters for your bonus is year end review.
Easier for the end of year rating to go up than stay the same. I would be annoyed if I got an exceeds now
Can confirm that I was directed to arbitrarily lower all Exceeds to Meets for calibration meeting across several hundred people. No discussion or specifics wanted or allowed.
Luckily I was not required to fake downgrade below "Meets".
I am at a loss for words over the pure stupidity and hubris of our leadership. I used to think stuff like this was one of those 'Crazy like a Fox' things. Not anymore; this is just slam your hand in a car door over and over to see what it's like d-mb. I don't think anybody knows what they are doing with this company anymore.
Let it rot!