Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

The debate about telecommuters is more proof of the cultural rot at WF. There are telecommuters who do nothing and are incompetent. There are people in the office who also do nothing and are incompetent. Performance issues and incompetence are literally never addressed regardless of location, the people are just shuffled or papered over and they continue to screw up or do nothing. Being in the office is not a guarantee of productivity when the office involves things like smoke breaks, coffee breaks, long lunches, lengthy fantasy football discussions and drive by cubicle interruptions. Management should not be trying to reduce technology staff by location, they should be weeding out people who are incompetent, have no valuable skills and contribute nothing.

I notice that there is an undercurrent of animosity to the poster who said telecommuters are disadvantaged. Let me ask you one question: how many people in senior management are telecommuters (meaning not visiting an office for weeks at a stretch)? The right answer is ZERO.

So you have to make up your mind: convenience or growth? Don’t say you are a telecommuter and so you can be as good as your dumb colleague who did not get that dream deal and takes the car to the office. He May be having the last lafff!

@1ocn - For those of us who spent many years driving into offices, climbing the corporate ladder, and getting hired into a senior telecommuting role making bank, there is no need for the silly office politics and face time with pretty girls. I've learned to be productive by working smarter, not harder. Jealous?

Hey -1ocn, my manager works remote and all my managers for the last 10+ years have been telecommuters.

I think there are a lot of people who do not understand the telecommuting workforce, the way we work, and what we do.

FaceTime with my boss has nothing to do with getting promoted, telecommuters get promoted here and there just like anyone else.

@1ocn For those of us who have the years of experience, and know the direction we want our careers to go in; there is no benefit to "living on campus" as our dear leader put it. Unless you want to get better at managing interpersonal politics and drama...and possibly becoming another anxiety-ridden sycophantic drone in the process.

The claim that WFH people are fully productive is not totally true. Unless you are an individual contributors working solo, there is no way you could be more productive that your teammate who went to the office. That girl got face time with the boss you don’t. She will get promoted and you will be wishing and wondering and waiting ..

Working for home, I am 200% more efficient when working from home. Less interruption, I am delivery oriented and I am cranking out documents - this can be easily measured, I stand by my number: 200%

1sxd- ironic statement given you work at Wells Fargo, the cesspool for rotten apples.

@1efq - BS! I work from home and I am online all the time. Actually, you end up working more because there is very little difference b/w "in office" and "not in office" anymore.

May be there are a few bad apples - does not mean the whole barrel of apples are bad!

Perhaps there is no final communication about the proposed forth coming Hub plan because upper Management is realizing that it is not a good plan at all. Move everyone to a Hub location from all over the country. Changing the proposed plan due to potential impact of chaos.

Clearly nothing has been decided yet and there didn't seem to be any apparent point to holding the meeting. I think the only reason that the meeting was even held at all was that it had been previously been communicated and put on our calendars. It just felt like Saul was up there trying to k–l the time.

All said and done, the facts are that Wells is an old warhorse that cannot simply compete with likes of a JP or Goldman. It is better than Citi obviously and is a shade worse than BofA. The sad reality is that no bank has a “strategy” with several US-based hubs. Work is not getting done because of sheer time difference even within the teams. And then you have the real problem of lack of physical space. We have stopped hiring in at Charlotte and New York even though that is really where the talent pool exists. So if you attempt to get an architect in Iowa, you can safely bet that the person in is not top notch. Saul is trying to solve a really bad problem he has inherited: stupid strategy of the previous regime. His solution may be equally silly to undo the past by asking people to come to an office where they cannot even sit.

The announcement today did not help, but to tell folks if you think you have less than 10 technology people in the same city, you are doomed in 2020.....for the douche commenting on this site and said IT people are autistic - well F U. We are the roots of why places like this run...so bite it.

If you are in a site with less than 10 people...it's stressful and really folks need to know more details like:
*What is a site?
*Is the STAR program available to remote workers?
*Does tenure play into this at all?
*If you relocate, is there an employment contract or do you move and risk being let go later?
*If someone moves to a non-core location that still has over 10 people can they work remote from there?
*Does 'transferring' the job mean people won't be eligible for severance pay if they won't move?
*Does 'transferring' the job mean managers can rehire (or is that just a joke?)?
*Is HR prepared to answer all of these questions 'hypothetically'?

Sadly key information that is not being considered:
*Previous ratings (Why would you rather keep people on a PIP in a core location than talent in a remote location?)
*Previous executive approvals to work remote

To NYC guy – who says the fraud was undetected? All of it was known. That's what makes it so bad. Don't blame IT people for the greed of the Business execs. IT people don't generally invent ways for people working on a commission to get paid more.

I think one thing being said in the comments was not said in the meeting. I think Saul said that if you work with a team that is "located" in a site that has 10+ people, then you will not be asked to come into any office because there is not enough space to bring all those people into the office. My team is spread out with 1/4 in India, 1/4 in one US location, 1/4 in another US location, and 1/4 telecommuting full time (living nowhere near any of those sites). I don't think they will pick the site for people to move to for a year. I think they will have their hands more than full with getting small IT shops shut down and those people sent to bigger (200-300+) shops. What surprised me was that those people being asked to move aren't necessarily going to be sent to the target locations (Charlotte, Des Moines, Omaha?, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Bangalore). They are being sent to larger locations than the 10+ shops so that they can have a career path within the bank (the nice goal). I don't know what happens to split teams like mine. My best guess is that the whole project is sent to Bangalore, and all US employees are laid off if they can't find another position.

I am new. Most people who claim to be working from home are not even online. WF has one of the lowest productivity in the industry. And then you have the fraudulent stuff that went undetected . Management has to act. This is the bitter truth , unfortunately.

Looks like it’s being framed up as Saul’s world only... however, Saul’s strategy includes close partnerships with each LOB, which is why those of us not in Saul’s world are watching his strategies closely - since those will be what’s consulted to the lines of businesses they support (all of them). We are all dependent on technology - and if Saul’s world shuts down telecommuting, that sends a pretty loud message to the entire Enterprise.

I agree with the poster who mentioned the transparency delay as a result of the new CEO not yet being named. It’s got to be a PR nightmare figuring out who’s the fall guy - Parker, who probably wants to stay on the Board (at a minimum) after this, or the new CEO, who’s already getting a shipping ship.

Is this only impacting Saul's telecommuters, or is this going to hit the entire enterprise?

I would wonder if only portions of this strategy are being shared because the CEO is interim - perhaps a new CEO will be announced shortly which is leading to the delays in communication or only partial communication. If this strategy has a major impact to employees, footprint, reputation and financials, it would be foolish to front run a new CEO.

What is a site?

What a crock, they don’t know who’s in the office? Our building has a badge check turn-style not only coming but leaving as well.

They did this exact same thing last year, cut a bunch of talented people we needed for no other reason than they telecommuted from a location in excess of (some number they pulled from thin air) a certain distance from a hub, this is just a continuation of termination by location!!!’ Not a damn given to the talent they bring to the firm, did not let them move to a hub, TERMINATED!!! It will be the same this time.

Keep in mind, if you receive a severance package and are offered a job in another city, you lose your severance if you turn it down. Doesn’t matter if the company offers relocation or not. Happened to a buddy of mine and he lost his severance.

Honestly, I have to give Saul some credit for trying to be forthcoming with this. I'm (selfishly) glad to hear telecommuters at large sites will not be impacted. However, I agree with bqz; it's only a matter of time until our necks are on the block.

@tqu - wow this is the best summary - are you taking notes during the broadcast?

What we learned in this meeting:

Telecommuters that work in Saul's world in sites that have less than 10 Team Members will be required to come to the hub location closest to their current remote location.

Telecommuters that work in locations with more than 10 Team Members, will be allowed to stay telecommute for the "foreseeable future" or be required to come in to the office if the space accommodates the required "collaboration" tools.

No new Telecommute positions will be approved without a special exception. No more new hire Telecommuters.

Team Members effected will be offered a variety of options and be given 3 months to choose which options they prefer (package, relocation assistance, salary continuation, etc.)

Q1 2020 is when individuals will be notified by their managers with Team Members making their decisions in Q3 2020.

Layoffs are NOT the plan, but an expected natural attrition is likely.

What we did NOT learn in this meeting:

What is a site? Some branches have more than 10 Team Members.

Is a Telecommuters home considered a site?

If offered a position transfer to another LOB or area of expertise, will relocation ALSO be offered for those Team Members.

Will Wells Fargo prioritize hiring effected Team Members for open positions in locations or continue to hire in new people?

Does tenure play a factor in to the decision?

These are just some of my observations that I feel were not addressed in the meeting. I did however learn than Saul prefers the Rolling Stones which is vital to the decision making process for all Team Members.

I don't think the less than 10 strategy is to get people to quit per se, but I don't think they mind if it does.

They seem to be slowing their roll, Saul made a big announcement and he can't back it up as quickly as he made it sound.

Anyone know who's in a site with 10 or less? Are those sales offices for financial folks? Mortgage offices or something?

@bqz - I think so. Have fun staying at the office for a release and probably sleep there if things do not go well.

You can forget about the family too - sorry you must be on site that entire weekend to address issues with deploying stuff.

@bpe - one thing is clear. If your site has < 10 people. You are in trouble. If you telecommute and you are not close to a site that has more than 10 people. You are also in trouble.

This is almost done deliberately to induce fear to make people quit to save the bank money. They are trimming from the ends 1st - hence sites that has < 10 people.

Next ... repeat with sites that has < 50 people or something like that and so on.

Anyone else thinking as soon as they get space the big site people will lose their telecommuting as well?

They don't know who's telecommuting?

Have they checked the badging system?

A bank that can't count. Neat!

Now he's backpedaling on Q1 2020? Saul wastes our time again.

For those concerned about the relocation, this gives nothing of value. Nothing concrete. Just more waiting. Very disappointing. A lot of people really hoping today we could finally know what is going to happen to us.

Basically, if a telecommuter is not close to a site that has more than 10 people. Or if you are working in a site that has < 10 persons ... you ARE TOASTED!

Q1 2020 is the date.
You get try to hang on for another 3 months!

And it is GAME OVER!

So... if you are at a site with fewer than 10 people, you may be relocated or forced to take a new role. If you are at a location with greater than 10 people, you may be allowed to work from home? This is poorly thought out.

So..... hurry up and wait for Q1?

• kxg, please see the cashier and cash out your winnings.

Did Saul just admit that he didn't know the telecommuting numbers when he announced 2022?

Fail.

So much backpedaling!

A lot of talking with nothing really said.

I'm going to have to have absolutes at this point instead of whatever this is so far. I'm sensing flexibility though... possibly?

Wait, what? Are the offshore folks coming here?

I've been on this call for 25 minutes and I've learned nothing.

Saul just explained that his location strategy is based on his college years.

1980's technology is the best technology.