It's tiring to watch so many people being cut in the name of cost cutting while at the same time the company is happily hiring more people all over the place. The ELT should institute a hiring freeze company-wide, not just certain areas, until they have the number they need. Then move on from there. The way things are being done now is only driving morale even lower.
15 replies (most recent on top)
People grow out of their roles all of the time. I was a Teller and now head a high tech software engineering team. I watched and even learned to write the codes.
There is a company-wide hiring freeze, but like anything it can be waived if you go up high enough. To fill a recently vacated position, we had to send the request up to the OC for approval.
You will still see open reqs, but very few comparatively. Eventually, open reqs will be limited to internal-only unless you get approval from the OC Leader.
It's hardly about getting cheaper workers. Plenty of employees with pay rates near the company minimum have been let go, and plenty of current job postings have much higher salaries.
And hiring freezes? Believe it or not, there's positions that need to be filled to keep things running. Many of these jobs are low on the pay scale, so it's not like a ton of displaced employees are interested in it. Other times it's a question of skills.
Out with the old. In with the new. Lay off the older, more highly paid employees, rewrite the job description slightly, and bring in younger, cheaper people in less expensive locations to do the exact same thing.
Marketing has it down to a science. No doubt other areas do also.
Too hard to understand that they don't think the people they are laying off are qualified for newly open roles?
BB&T/Truist did this for a few months. The idea was they had too many employees after the merger with Suntrust and it was the best option to retain as many people as possible. To be clear they only stopped external hiring for a specific amount of time and for specific LOBs but the effort was there.
WF leaders could learn a lot from this, real leadership requires putting in the extra effort. Even if it only helps a little. I’ll go the extra mile for my leaders if I feel like they would do the same for me.
people, get real. At least in ICS/security and dmi we have people in roles who should not be in the roles. they are only in the roles because of their tenure here.
Because some groups are bloated. Some groups require people with highly specialized skill sets. It is not as if everyone at WF is identical. I can't take someone with a PM background, and have them work in a highly specialized security role. Likewise, no one would want me to go work as a financial advisor. It simply does not work the way you want it to because we are not all drones.
It’s all a scam to get cheaper labor and anyone with half a brain knows it.
It because there are jobs that may have been useful 10 years back but not anymore. If you look at the hiring page, there are 200+ core engineering jobs, but a few in other LOB.
FYI - a group of employees at GOOGLE have successfully unionized in order to have a collective voice to management. Employees are requesting overhauls on pay, policies, and company ethics.
I would love to see it here. Mainly over the topic of offshoring. But it could be around whatever concerns employees have collectively. Not suggesting offshoring American jobs is illegal, but there are growing examples of employees from other large companies joining forces and using social media to create change. Especially around policies that go against major societal and political issues.
Agree that there are critical roles that, when vacated, need to be filled with someone with the correct skill set.
Unfortunately, though, some leaders are really skilled at making a case that their open reqs are critical – because at WF headcount is power. Plus, it's hard to justify a new req vs. hang on to an existing one. So in the face of forced layoffs they'll fight tooth-and-nail to make a req seem critical, since there's slim chance they'll get a net new one to replace it anytime soon.
This has been covered here before, and it's really common sense.
Layoffs are for folks like me, I'm expecting my team to be let go and possibly moved offshore sometime this spring.
But other teams may still be needed, and they may need more people, or to replace people that leave.
I'm IT, they've been working on automating/offshoring us for years, but there are still people needed in other parts of IT.
And if they do let my team go, it's not like we could go do mortgage or personal banking or whatever, even if we were in the needed location.
sounds like they are using current staff for what info they need now, then will replace everyone here today through a slower process
Good questions which no one seems to address.