He was brought into BNY Mellon January 2018 to improve business and all he did was layoffs and left October 2019 for more $$. When they tell you it's for good of the company, don't drink the kool aid. He did not improve business at BNY Mellon. All he was good at was being discriminatory. Good Luck -
9 replies (most recent on top)
They had to pay Charlie what they are paying him because they could not find anyone else to take the job knowing what had to be done.
Former BNYMer here. Get ready for a slice and dice like you haven’t seen. He will cut enough so that it is not a headline generator. Also, start thinking about reinventing yourself. Scharf’s replacement at BNYM is nothing more than a 2.0 version of him. Banking and Finance will be automated and AI intense in the next 2-5 years. Other banks of their stature will follow suit. Get reskilled and upskilled if you stay around.
If only to cut cost and lay people off, then many could do that a whole lot cheaper than his package.
The Wells Fargo Board of Directors didn't hire Charlie to grow the company. They hired him to cut costs and lay off employees, paving the way after several years for a new CEO to come in and grow the company with a clean slate.
It was not clearly communicated. It was anything but. Last year John G. held a town hall to say "if you are currently telecommute you are free to move about the country". We asked if telecommuters were part of the 10 and under strategy and Saul said no. He also said there would be exceptions and yet people have stated herein their relo letter said no exception s. People repeatedly asked for specific addresses of approved hubs and we were told Charlotte, st. Louis or Minneapolis, no details, but that was when they had c-ap data. No SF, NY, Seattle or Portland. LIES and wordsmithing. Does anyone remember Saul stating in the Philly town hall they had no way of identifying who was telecommute and who was not? Yeah, a tech group with no data mining skills. What a joke. It was clear as mud. Amateurs.
@qep+13Aj9Rsj - Yeah, people need to plan, but that doesn't let the company off the hook.
Years ago, before shareholder supremacy became the mantra, companies did some good in their community, because it was good for business.
Now our money trickles up to Wall Street and Wall Street doesn't care about American cities and towns, only about ROI, coc–ne, and discreet h–kers.
In the case of Wells, hundreds of thousands of our customers were victimized, and now, thousands of employees are playing the price.
In the case of EIT, we don't get to play with the money, we're getting s___ on because of the crimes of Stumpf and the rest.
So yeah, we need to plan, but we're gonna' complain about it just a wee bit along the way.
This company has not been transparent, bottom line
I am pretty sure that he was brought in to WF to fix the issues with regulators, get the asset cap lifted, and cut expenses. He has been quite forthcoming about it in his comments, web postings and email. WF makes money in spite of itself due to sheer size, and giant profits from the card business.
Too many here haven’t prepared themselves, but they cannot say they did not get a warning directly from Scarf.
While I feel sorry for EIT people dealing with the location strategy project, it has been discussed openly since last summer. Scharf started in October. That’s a lot of time to prepare and consider options. No one should be surprised and should plan for it to get worse.
Read the BNYM layoffs site and see all the good he left behind. Run and run fast..