Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

Time for Charlie’s Annual Performance Review for 2020

FORBES

How To Lead Through A Reduction In Force

“It’s a big company. You’re just a number here. They don’t care. Why should I work hard for this company?”

Management’s response matters

However justifiable (or not) reasons for layoffs might be, the news creates instant anxiety for the employees who might end up on the chopping block as well as for those who will remain. The approach that management applies as it moves through difficult times like these matters. Employees will become increasingly doubtful and anxious as they watch their colleagues become unemployed and wonder whether they will be next to receive a layoff notice.

It is incumbent upon managers to do things to alleviate – as opposed to increase – anxiety.

Layoffs happen and should even be expected from time to time. But managers unnecessarily exacerbate the challenges for those impacted by withholding information, providing misinformation, being overly opaque, failing to plan for and manage a consistent process and by overlooking the importance of addressing human dynamics. In contrast, the best managers and most effective leaders will do things like this:

  1. Give as much notice of pending layoffs as possible. A lack of notice creates real resentment from those being laid off and dramatically increases mistrust of management among remaining staff (also known as survivors). ❌ (Fail)
  1. Address the feelings that both the laid off and remaining employees will experience. Show empathy and validate emotions. ❌ (Fail)
  1. Preserve the institutional knowledge and intellectual capital. Be certain to keep enough of the best people on board to accomplish organizational goals and/or have knowledge shared with others. ❓(Unclear at this time)
  1. Base layoff decisions on sound business analysis and data intelligence rather than making arbitrary, across-the-board cuts. Avoid making hiring/firing decisions based on personal relationships and biases. ❓(Unclear on lay-off decisions) ❌ (Fail on hiring decisions)
  1. Be transparent and communicate openly and often. In the absence of information, employees will simply fill in their fears and anxieties with information, usually negative, about management and the company. ❌(Fail)
  1. Reassure remaining employees of their value to the organization and how they can contribute to building a brighter future.❌(Fail)
  1. Ineffective implementation of a reduction-in-force plan could lead to unintentionally losing excessive talent and institutional knowledge. Make an investment in those left behind. It is typical for many people to ‘jump ship’ during uncertain times so be sure to invest proper time, resources and emotional fortitude.❌ (Fail)
  1. Have a clear vision and plan for operating post layoff. Will the ‘new’ organization or department be in a position to deliver the services and/or products you require? Consider operational capacity in your lay off decisions. What kind of new stresses will remaining employees experience? Have a plan to mitigate this.❓(Who knows? But definitely a Fail on communication of said strategy)
  1. Exhibit compassionate and strong leadership.❌ (Fail)
  1. Be prepared for and address the myriad of emotions that you are likely to observe. In addition to the financial insecurity that can be created, the loss of a job can affect other areas from confidence to self-worth. Expect feelings that span the range of confusion and despair to anger and a lack of trust. This may be one of the most stressful times for all parties involved. Try to empathize and be understanding as you manage this process.❌ (Fail)
  1. Focus on the employees who will remain as well as those being terminated. It is equally important that leaders recognize and address the mixed emotions of those employees who remain. There is a high likelihood that productivity, morale and commitment will decrease as a result of anxiety, instability and a perceived breach of trust. While implementing plans for the employees who will be leaving, don’t forget to rebuild trust and develop morale with those who remain.❌ (Fail)
  1. Be as transparent and forthcoming with information as you can. As stated earlier, in the absence of regular, open communication, people will seek to fill in the blanks with unconfirmed – often untrue – information. Be sure to serve as a valid and dependable source of information and resist the temptation to appear secretive, inaccessible, or withdrawn. ❌ (Fail)
  1. Provide as many resources as you can. Help employees believe that you ‘have their backs.’ Even when their jobs are being eliminated, employees can feel a sense of dignity and respect when the process is deemed supportive and fair. Make it a goal to provide real meaningful resources to help them move forward. ❌ (Fail)
  1. Balance empathy and understanding with company loyalty. Be a leader among leaders by advocating that all the recommendations listed here get considered. It’s a delicate balance, but one you will need to master. ❌ (Fail)
  1. Be smart about the restructuring and realignment process. Really look at the remaining talent pool along with the organizational programs, products, and services and make sound restructuring and placement decisions. As best as you can, match people with the right positions based on interests, talents and skill sets. How you go about doing this will send powerful messages about your commitment to the remaining employees and, if done well, will go a long way to rebuilding trust and organizational commitment. ❓(Who knows? Communication of strategy would be nice,)

To be fair: I give Charlie a 🥳 (Exceeds expectations) for most of the WFH strategy. He and the team pulled it off in a reasonable time frame.

Overall, though, Charlie is rated:

Below Expectations* in his Leadership of Wells Fargo through Lay-offs.

by
| 3551 views | | 28 replies (last December 31, 2020) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+18EtHbgF

28 replies (most recent on top)

One of the trolls first honed in on “proving Charlie is not giving notice”, not the OP.

The article has 15 separate points. It is the sum total of Charlie’s poor leadership that gives him the gigantic FAIL.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2twa+18EtHbgF

you all who are saying that there should be more "notice" and quoting the forbes article.... so what kind of "notice" are you asking for? There has been publicly stated info with reduction numbers about size of workforce since before Charlie got here. And then again after he got here. This is the longest notice i've ever seen.

Prior mgt stated the intention to reduce and people were all freaked out over that... and then failed to execute. We told the street we would cut 4B of expenses, and then reinvest 2B in growth... all by 2020. We then entered 2020 (before COVID) - UP 10B in expenses instead of down. So now we have to take out 10B instead of 4B.

If you have been at one of the other large banks in the industry, they have already been through this... WF (as usual) is the laggard.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2dtx+18EtHbgF

Shrewsbury, Sloan, and possibly even Stumpf were saying this needed to happen. Then there’s the business press (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-09/wells-fargo-is-readying-thousands-of-job-cuts-to-start-this-year?) and if you’re in Tech the big push by Saul to bring telecommuters back to the office (May 2019 or so) should had gotten your attention. I’ve never gotten this much notice of where things were going in my career.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2dxm+18EtHbgF

"As this is a tangible requirement and you say that you’ve seen it, the onus is clearly on you to provide some proof that Scharf is providing notice, information or even any of his thoughts upon layoffs. I’ve heard he town halls, I’ve heard the earnings calls, I’ve read the emails to all. Never a hint of notice to employees. There were references to setting aside money for displacements in the earnings calls. Few if any of us follow this stuff so it could only be regarded as stealth communications."

That's not how any of this works. When someone is accused of something, the onus is on the accuser to prove the charge. Ever heard of a concept called "innocent until proven guilty"? The accused doesn't have to prove anything, and since there is no evidence that notice isn't being given, the rating of 'fail' is based on nothing. I've seen employees given notice, more than the standard 60 days. Do they announce it to all 270,000 employees when it happens? No, and why the heck would they? You think a guy working at the Boeing plant in SC gets informed when another person in WA gets notice? That's not how any company works. People directly/indirectly impacted are given notice.

I'm not sure what people expect when it comes to notice. You think the CEO gets on a earnings call or townhall with thousands of people and blurts out "Nancy Robertson in Charlotte? This is your 60 day notice!" No. There's this thing called delegation and there are respectful ways to do these things. The company has been talking about reducing costs, including the cost of having excessive numbers of employees, for some time. It's not a secret, they've been talking about it publicly for what? A year?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ynh+18EtHbgF

Post ID: @2ioo+18EtHbgF.

Regarding your comment: [People want to know "am I safe". You are not going to get an answer to that on a public forum or town hall.]

That’s demeaning and dismissive to the conversation. Employees want and deserve transparency and truth and respect. I can’t, for the life of me, understand why anyone would disagree with that.

Even if you don't give a care about the people who are laid off, maybe you could care about the surviving employees and the consequences for the company you work for. Unless you’re a short-timer yourself? Mishandling layoffs leads to lower productivity, lower profits, lower trust in management, bad PR, a toxic work environment, the inability to attract new strong talent etc.

The article is from Forbes, giving advice to leaders of companies going through lay-offs. The end goal of the article is to lead the company through change in a way that all parties suffer the least amount of damage. That includes the company, the surviving employees, the laid-off employees, and the shareholders.

You don’t have to believe this article. There are plenty of other articles from other respected sources about strong CEOs leading their employees through layoffs in a humane, and honest manner. The CEOs are out in front of it, they are communicating regularly and honestly with the goal of achieving buy-in from all parties.

I agree with the ❌ Fail, and wouldn’t even give him as much credit as the OP did.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2rcc+18EtHbgF

OP here.

Thank you to Post ID: @1pgw+18EtHbgF . I like to engage with people who are knowledgeable about the topic at hand. Thumbs up.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2rbq+18EtHbgF

@1pgw+18EtHbgF wrote:
" I’ve heard he town halls, I’ve heard the earnings calls, I’ve read the emails to all. Never a hint of notice to employees. There were references to setting aside money for displacements in the earnings calls. Few if any of us follow this stuff so it could only be regarded as stealth communications."

"few if any of us follow this stuff" - so because you (or anybody else) doesn't listen to or read available info, it's not being communicated? Earnings calls are public info, town halls available to everyone.

In his most recent town hall, he did make reference to displacements and have empathetic words for those impacted. You may not believe them, or like them, but that's not the same as him not doing it.

On earnings calls, there are very stringent regs about what can and cannot be said. They are saying as much as they can - which is either financial accruals for displacements, estimated workforce reductions (before the fact) or actual reductions of workforce (after they have taken place). You are never going to get specific answers on who, what or when from an earnings call - this is not any different than any other publicly held/traded company.

People want to know "am I safe". You are not going to get an answer to that on a public forum or town hall.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ioo+18EtHbgF

Post ID: @1tml+18EtHbgF “Having gone through this at another FI”

Tough talk is respected when it’s truthful. People know the truth when they hear it, and they know when they are being bamboozled. Charlie gets around it by not communicating at all. I agree with every word. People need to hear it. Great job.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2nhk+18EtHbgF

Back to the topic of spans/layers, are we done with that? What does it mean if you’re middle management with 5-6 directs and, say, 50-100 somewhere in the hierarchy?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ucd+18EtHbgF

Having gone through this at another FI, here's the cold hard facts for WFC:

  1. Anyone who is legacy WFC is tainted in Scharf and all his NY-cronies. With that perspective, they don't care about saving "talent" because they don't believer there is any. Then, it just becomes a numbers game.
  1. The Span of Control of "7" is just a starting point with 10 being the norm by end of 2021.
  1. From Scharf's comments and "foot in mouth" on D&I to date, if you're a straight white male above 40, consider yourself gone.
  1. They will make the working environment as toxic as possible to accelerate attrition, especially since when layoffs are announced, anyone planning to leave will stick around in hopes of getting paid to do what they were going to do anyway. The toxicity will come in the form of infeasible objectives, forced stack-ranking to justify removing positions, and reduction of benefits/perqs/bonuses/raises.
  1. The "survivors" will be forced to take pay cuts and reductions in position as a cost of keeping their job. In addition to the lesser pay, workload will go up since inefficiencies will not go away.
  1. Any "Manager" or "Leader" in California will be replaced with someone from NY/NJ/PA/CT as part of the "Cultural Transition".
  1. As soon as the Cost Ratio gets in line with other FIs, Charlie will collect his bonus and ride off into the sunset.
  1. WFC has a toxic reputation across the Financial world so I recommend everyone who is able, to leave now voluntarily. Being laid off from such a poorly regarded company will be a huge black mark on your resume' and you will be considered the worst of the worst and unhirable.

All this is very harsh, but can be backed up by experience. Never forget, Charlie is a third-stringer who was basically begged to take this job and therefore got a lot of concessions from the Board to swing a big axe.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1tml+18EtHbgF

@pnj+18EtHbgF

#1 is the top of the list, and it is clear:

Give as much notice of pending layoffs as possible. A lack of notice creates real resentment from those being laid off and dramatically increases mistrust of management among remaining staff (also known as survivors). ❌ (Fail)

As this is a tangible requirement and you say that you’ve seen it, the onus is clearly on you to provide some proof that Scharf is providing notice, information or even any of his thoughts upon layoffs. I’ve heard he town halls, I’ve heard the earnings calls, I’ve read the emails to all. Never a hint of notice to employees. There were references to setting aside money for displacements in the earnings calls. Few if any of us follow this stuff so it could only be regarded as stealth communications.

Let's just start at the top of the list, shall we? Where is the “boldly apparent” proof that you’ve seen it,

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1pgw+18EtHbgF

Post ID: @1rgg+18EtHbgF and Post ID: @1qqe+18EtHbgF

Responding and agreeing with yourself doesn’t add to your credibility or the substance of your commentary.

If you portrayed yourself as a knowledgeable objective and reasonable poster, you might find genuine consensus.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1hiw+18EtHbgF

Unacceptable, results count; since its holidays lets do an F+

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1laz+18EtHbgF

Post ID: @1rgg+18EtHbgF

It does seem to resemble QAnon sometimes. The worst thing is that somebody wasted 20 minutes of their life typing this nonsense. Oh well.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1qqe+18EtHbgF

“has he sold any of the business units yet? How many more to go”

3 WFC businesses allegedly on the market that I know of. Reported indications of interest, but no deals yet.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1tzx+18EtHbgF

"I saw a flying saucer once, and I saw a vision of John Lennon appear on my toast a couple years back. I kept the toast as proof, but no one can prove I didn’t see the flying saucer. I totally feel you."

Never has a point so clearly stated been so comically missed, but wild/emotional/baseless claims do trump reality on this site, so it's par for the course. If you've got actual evidence that #1 isn't happening on any kind of widespread basis, we're all ears. Otherwise that rating for that is based on nothing and has no value, meaning, or relevance.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rgg+18EtHbgF

has he sold any of the business units yet? How many more to go.

Referring to a comment in another post that is the strategy is to sell everything off due to mismanagement.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rrs+18EtHbgF

Regarding: @1uvy.

This is fascinating. Stumpf was once quoted as saying something very similar:

“Who the HELL has time to report this nonsense to the LA Times? Wells Fargo is a BUSINESS and needs to make PROFIT. Cross-selling is an unfortunate part of LIFE some of us experience. Put on adult undies and accept life is all about doing as I say and with EFFORT we will all be fine. NO COMPANY is required to employ Whistleblowers for life!!!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rjx+18EtHbgF

Post ID: @1uvy+18EtHbgF

Hate to break this to you, but this post is well-written and objective. It does not say there shouldn’t be lay-offs. It is from a respected source about business and leadership, Forbes. It refers to a strong CEO respectfully leading an organization through lay-offs in a way that leaves the company and it’s employees healthy and thriving in the end.

YOU sound like the petulant child that needs to put on your adult bloomers.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1sqm+18EtHbgF

Post ID: @1uvy+18EtHbgF

Not sure what your comments have to do with Charlie being a terrible CEO, but glad you got that out.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ubr+18EtHbgF

Who the HELL has time to post this much nonsense on this site? Wells Fargo is a BUSINESS and needs to make PROFIT. Layoffs are an unfortunate part of LIFE some of us experience. Put on adult undies and accept life is all about change and with EFFORT we will all be fine. NO COMPANY is required to employ anyone for life!!!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1uvy+18EtHbgF

OP is actually being more generous than Charlie and HR, in being open to disputing a performance review rating. I’m pretty sure there is not a process for that at WFC. You get what you get.

OP was also generous in giving Charlie a 2. I would rate him a solid 1.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tan+18EtHbgF

“I’ve seen it and it is boldly apparent to me.”

I saw a flying saucer once, and I saw a vision of John Lennon appear on my toast a couple years back. I kept the toast as proof, but no one can prove I didn’t see the flying saucer. I totally feel you.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xyk+18EtHbgF

OP here! I am more than willing to give credit where credit is due if someone wants to provide evidence that goes against my assessment. I tried to be objective by giving him high marks for the WFH strategy. And I gave question marks for areas where I thought he “could” be doing an ok job, but it might not be visible to the masses.

I believe most would agree that Charlie is not an open and transparent CEO. You can access the 3rd qtr earnings call to for proof of his evasiveness on the top questions regarding cost-cutting, asset cap progress and future business strategy. But please feel free to share instances of Charlie showing compassion and respect towards employees, his actions to alleviate rather than increase anxiety, his efforts to reassure surviving employees, his efforts to avoid losing important institutional knowledge, etc.

What is his strategy for the new organization post lay-off? What has he done to improve employee morale and rally the team? If you know, please share.

I’m all ears. Prove me wrong, please.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @soo+18EtHbgF

Let's just start at the top of the list, shall we? Where is the proof that it's not happening? I've seen it, and it's "boldly apparent" to me...and yet it's marked as a "fail". Based on what evidence, specifically?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pnj+18EtHbgF

I agreed quickly with the ratings, but based upon @gzt+18EtHbgF I thought that I would reread.

I did reread in more detail and agree with the initial assessment by OP. Every rating is easily proven factually. Interestingly, I also agree with the OP that 8 is the only possible thing which Charlie did right, but we simply don’t have any facts to prove or disproven.

8: Have a clear vision and plan for operating post layoff. Will the ‘new’ organization or department be in a position to deliver the services and/or products you require? Consider operational capacity in your lay off decisions. What kind of new stresses will remaining employees experience? Have a plan to mitigate this.❓(Who knows? But definitely a Fail on communication of said strategy)

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tim+18EtHbgF

Happy for Post ID: @gzt+18EtHbgF. She must be reporting directly to Charlie.

This is not a list of items Charlie might be doing in the background that employees would not have the opportunity to observe. This is a list of items that, if done well, should be boldly apparent to all the employees.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kyj+18EtHbgF

Being a large company it may be difficult for any one person to tell if the bold list of items that 'management should do' in these situations is happening or not in all cases. Maybe elsewhere those things are not happening, all I can tell you is that in the area I am able to observe directly, ALL of those things ARE happening. YMMV, but the generalizations made in the OP are clearly not universally applicable.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gzt+18EtHbgF

Post a reply

: