Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

LEARN SOME MATH CHARLIE

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-05/wells-fargo-to-freeze-raises-for-high-earners-as-it-limits-costs

Let's do some simple math...
You're a lazy b–tard and you make 149K a year base - you get a Raise 2%, new base 152K
You bust your a– for the year and make 150K a year base - no Raise $0, new base 150K

Seriously are we paying Charlie money to be this dumb? He just increased the wage of a lazy person above someone who adds serious value. What does the hard worker do, he leaves. What does the lazy b–tard do, he stays. If you owned a business is this what you would want to see happen, my god no. Charlie and his David in HR must be fired, they are harming the business. Every shareholder must hold the board accountable for this, it's not using common sense.

by
| 3247 views | | 11 replies (last November 7, 2020) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+17MRMNfy

11 replies (most recent on top)

Capping raises doesn’t reduce expenses it avoids future expense probably by 100 to 200 million annually. The expense cuts will come with the layoffs in 2 weeks.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2vbb+17MRMNfy

So what happens for those slated for promotion?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rhl+17MRMNfy

If you are rated less than a Meets rating there is no raise either so in your example if the lazy B is actually recognized as a lazy B and rated less than a Meets on their year end performance review they also get $0 raise.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @mhb+17MRMNfy

Keep in mind. That stock is purchased at the current rate (@ $21 per share). If the stock price goes up, to say 31.50, CS' compensation he receives now indirectly goes from $30 million to $45 million.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @zqk+17MRMNfy

Most of the comp at the EVP level is in WFC stock. How do you raise the value of a stock? You either increase revenue or reduce expenses to increase net profit. Since Wells Fargo is under an asset cap, it cannot raise revenue. It is also being hurt by the low rate environment. So, Wells' only option is to reduce expenses. Biggest expense in a bank is salary/compensation/benefits (people expense). Reducing that has an immediate effect on the bottom line.

Their hope is that the increase to the bottom line will impress the investor community to buy the stock and increase the stock price. If that happens, all EVP ranks from CEO down to middle management make it rain. A quick review of CEO's stock is $29,000,000. We have to wait and see what the rest of the OC received to join the bank. I am assuming they got similar amounts. It's not rocket science.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @mjh+17MRMNfy

I used to have some pride to work for Wells Fargo, now I'm literally emabarrassed to work here.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fzj+17MRMNfy

The 401k debacle demonstrated how out-of-depth these people are. Making decisions based on a spreadsheet, with no critical thinking on how it impacts the bottom line. I could decide my electric bill is too high and decide to terminate service. There, now I've eliminated that cost. However, now I have additional expenses due to the fact I don't have electricity. Don't be surprised if they come back and slam a moratorium on all raises on earners $75k+. These people are not capable of running a Claire's Boutique, let alone one of largest banks.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @day+17MRMNfy

I hear ya, but...

Whether it's the raise freeze or literally anything else, the company doesn't care. The company's duty to itself is to maximize profits. The employees' duty to themselves is to maximize income and minimize sacrifice.

Employers' and employees' values are always at odds with one another, but for some silly reason we pretend like that isn't the case most of the time. Only during times of mass layoffs are we all reminded what the real situation is.

The company will (and should) do whatever it can to help itself, just like employees do when they look for other work, etc.

The silver lining of all this will hopefully be more realistic interactions (i.e. business-like) between WF and its employees going forward, instead of the contrived 'family picnic' style interactions of the past.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fhx+17MRMNfy

He and his cronies don't care - they all have contracts so they get their raises no matter what - that's what people are missing. The senior leaders are out of scope the people getting hit are the 150-250 people and some of you may still not care but many of them are the senior people with a lot of knowledge and it is apparent Charlie wants them gone.

I am not in that tier but the writing is on the wall. First it was 250 now it is 150 soon it will be 100. I have no issue giving lower paid employees more I draw the line at not even giving a pitiful 1-2% raise when we ALL lost profit sharing for the year and most of us forever.

I bet his cronies all have these eliminations IN THEIR CONTRACT. He wants the senior people to leave and he is going to get his wish - but a lot of knowledge is going to walk out the door and when it hits this place he will be running off to destroy another company.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @vml+17MRMNfy

Will Charlie and the OC get raises hhhhmmmm

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lvt+17MRMNfy

No one will care accept the id–t who is working his a– off. So, stop working your a– off and enjoy your life a little with family, friends, thing you like to do, etc.
I use to work my butt off as well for a different company and they laid us off without a salary increase. The companies will use you as long as they can. Pressure you into working day and night and then not pay you or appreciate your effort.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @zmn+17MRMNfy

Post a reply

: