There is a very noticeable difference between the current CEO and the former one. What is that? Lack of communication, lack of vision, lack of strategy. The only thing we have heard so far is he is going to cut the dickens out of jobs in the company and has quasi plans to increase diversity over the next 5 years. We all could be dead by then. None of our managers or senior leaders have a clue what is going on, because everything is being shared with our CEO’s inner circle only. The rest of us have no leadership, no idea what we are supposed to be doing, no inspiration to even want to try to do a good job. Morale is in the toilet and our leaders have been frozen out and can’t answer our questions, motivate us, etc. It feels like we are sitting around waiting for the axe. I am too motivated to play this game anymore and if you try hard enough, you can always find a better job.
15 replies (most recent on top)
Reading the comments here on this website has been a great motivator.
For me to move on.
The folks who defend management, current and past, are the funniest, assuming they're not PR or HR.
If they are PR or HR, well, that's even funnier.
You may have enjoyed your work here, you may be on a good team, you may have spent a long time here and gotten raises and purchased a house and a nice car, and you feel like you've been well treated.
A "team member".
And that's great. For you the individual, that's great.
And you may have believed the PR that Wells spewed for years and years about being a well run business, but by now you should know better.
But the Stumpf's and Charlie's of the world don't appear out of nowhere.
You cannot look at the long history of this bank and say it's ever been anything than a big, evil bank, run by shady characters.
“Team members” language has been removed from official communication for months. Employees/colleagues. I’ve been coached to use those terms.
Can’t wait to watch our ceo get fired when the next compliance rule violation occurs. It’s gonna happen. Go big and go home!
I’ve noticed this too. In meetings Scharf never uses the term “team members”, he always says “employees”. How sad...we used to be thought of as assets to be invested in and now we are thought of as expenses to be managed, or gotten rid of.
Our CEO wants to rip the team apart to gain power and because he is a Everyman for himself kind of guy and he thinks we should all share the same cut throat survivalist mindset. I am already seeing changes for the worst in team members. Rather than cooperating to reach a common goal, it is turning into the hunger games. Backstabbing, withholding information, etc. their behavior is all driven by fear that our ceo is creating and getting off on.
To the person who says the people saying the Firm are not team members- everyone in WFA calls Wells Fargo “the firm”. They are their own little world over there.
I got an email the other day that Scharf does not like the term team members so we need to start saying employees.
I don’t think Scharf is super interested in the rank and file employee. As others have said, his goal is to get out from under the consent orders and get the company lean so if increases profit. Employees are a means to an end in those goals.
People keep saying “firm” laughing as they are clearly not Team Member’s.
He’s not here to win hearts and minds. He’s here to get the asset cap lifted and the stock price up. The diversity thing is a necessary PR move for the purpose of avoiding negative press, just like his promise that nobody would get laid off this year “ due to the coronavirus”.
The only thing Scharf knows how to do is hire people from JP Morgan Chase. Makes you feel good to know that they continue to hire "executives" but plan for huge layoffs this year. That's a real morale builder.
The new CEO is the only person who is willing and able to do what is necessary to make this firm great. The previous leadership were a bunch of lazy cowards.
Wells Fargo as we knew it is over - time to face the music. From here on out, only fear management will be used.
Respectfully, I disagree with your comments. I am a legacy Wells Fargo team member. While I admired every single executive dating back to D–k Kovacevich and his directs, who created a steady and consistent succession of CEOs over the next 10 years, leadership fell asleep at the wheel and did not adapt to the times. I recall the other major banks identifying the need to streamline systems and consolidate branches as they saw the the drop in branch visits/activity and the increasing movement towards digital banking channels. Wells Fargo leadership continued on the path they followed to become a national Main Street powerhouse: open more branches, hire more sales team members to add more market share. This has backfired now with regulators with everything that is well documented in media.
Scharf does have a vision: it begins and ends with fulfilling the remediation work regulators demand of us. This will achieve two things: eliminate the asset cap and get us out of the regulators black list. Compounding this regulatory issue is 0% interest rates, which is putting major pressure on revenues. WFC does not have a huge Asset Mgmt/Wealth, IBanking, or other fee based businesses. To offset these revenue pressures, WFC needs to cut expenses. Scharf has made a career cutting expenses. Just ask Visa and Bank of NY employees and you will hear the horror stories.
While WF has largely eliminated the bad, it has also lost much of the good. The difference is people have a short term horizon (build career, make money, provide for family, retire) while an enterprise like WFC has a long term horizon. As a too big to fail entity, WFC will likely not be broken up ever. If you are a high performer, you move on. If you are a coaster, prepare to work harder for results.
He has no clue how to be a market leader and innovator. Loser
Kudos to the CEO. He’s what was needed.