Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

One major positive for a hub, if you're not already in one, is that if you were to get laid off you will have an easier time finding a new job in a metro area (assuming you're not already in one). The negatives include a higher cost of living and probably a much longer commute.

No, I will not uproot myself and my family to move to a hub location. It seems like Wells have taken advantage of laid off people due to the pandemic by forcing them to relocate on their own upon hub opening. It's downright pathetic and opportunistic, don't be a victim. Cast your wide net now and catch another fish before it's too late. This bank is not on your side.

Lol, no. Should you work for this bank at all? Also no.

I would never relocate for this bank.

Depends on the backup options. If the WF location is somewhere where you think you could get another job that you're happy with, then that may help mitigate some of the risk.

I've been back at WF for 5 years and was a remote employee, I was offered a new position and told I would need to relocate on my own dime. I negotiated how long I would have and decided to just do it. I do like many of the colleagues I've worked with here and believe I'm paid fairly. I don't mind the new area I'm going to and don't have roots where I'm at anyhow. So I sucked it up and moved, yes it cost me several thousand and the housing markets are insane, but it seemed inevitable that I wouldn't be allowed to remain remote either way. my offer letter also stated my new work location was XX and I was expected to work there or resign my position. It's a risk for you either way, you just have to decide which you'd rather deal with. I'd consider the job market in both locations, how easy/hard will it be to find new employment if things go sideways with WF?

Whether you should relocate is a personal decision, and honestly I don't think this forum is the right place to figure that out. I'm single with no kids, and I don't own a home, so to me moving wouldn't be a huge deal if I loved my job and liked the new city. But that may not be right for you.

Am unclear from your post if you have approached your boss about this, or if you have heard/are assuming you are too new to get help. If you haven't approached your boss yet...

1. ) Be able to articulate exactly what you want from him/her. Help with relo costs, or permission to stay put instead of moving? And make sure you have a strong, succinct case for why you need it. Saying it's "too risky" probably isn't strong enough.
2. ) Be ready for if the boss says "no". With ton of WF folks being told to relocate or leave, yours is not a one-off request. No harm in asking for an exception but realistically... So, update your resume and start your job search NOW as plan B. Don't worry that you haven't been at WF a year yet -- lots of folks are job hopping right now.
3. ) Don't feel guilty. You did your job, and got comped for it while you did it. That's the bargain with a job that either party can terminate "at will". You don't have to over-explain why you changed your mind about relocating -- either to WF or a new prospective employer.

If your boss has already said no, don't worry what we all think. But if you decide not to move, get cracking on your job search ASAP, if you haven't already.

Good luck!

You say you started late last year so we can assume you have less than a years' worth of service so no big severance package to consider for any future layoff. You did not say what hub is in play but with the unrealistic housing market that is out there you have no guarantee of finding a house to buy (offer accepted) and if you do, you will be paying through the nose.

I live in a hub but there is no way I would relocate for this current management...regardless of if they paid for it or not.

Bottom Line, under Manager Center there is a section on "Relocation Packages." Your manager was unwilling to go to their manager to start an approval process. The excuse they gave you was that you are "too new." I say fu-k Wells Fargo.

Do you know how many people on this board are quitting this sh-t ho-e? For years I have been dealing with tech leads and biz leaders who do not know how to communicate with each other, but rack in probably 300-400K base with 60 percent bonuses not to mention their stock incentives. nothing but a bunch of loser as-----s. and chainsaw is just replacing them with even more egotistical and higher paid as-----s from JPM. Or a foreigner to run human resources who has no inclination of what it means to be an American.

As for me right now. I came in to zero emails. My manager is an absent bimbo on the west coast. His most respected employee is a trans bis-xual on FLMA because "it" cannot deal with life.

No you should not. And just so you know, its not because you're new is why you're not getting relocation costs. They aren't paying for a lot of people to relocate who've worked here for years. Being new has nothing to do with it. It's all about them, not you or me.

They simply say "you agreed to relocate, here is the offer letter you signed, you didn't start working at this new location per the agreement, you are terminated." You'lll be one less person on the payroll which will make Chainsaw happy cuz voluntary attrition is the goal. And they'll provide your OL to the unemployment agency when/if you file a claim and contest it and you'll very likely lose. Would suggest you get advice from a lawyer for your situation and have them review your agreement that you signed.

OP, Your offer letter probably states that you agree to work at the specified (new city/hub) location starting by xx future date, and if you elect not to work there starting then, you will have been considered to have voluntarily resigned. Correct? So are you prepared to lose your job if you don't start working in the new city on that future date? Because I can tell you, they are going to be following through on it for everyone in your scenario.

All mine says is that I will start working at specified new office location address starting on a certain date. I plan to live there at or near when the time the office reopens and go to the office to work 3 days a week. However, the office is not going to be open on that date, so it's impossible for me to be working at the new location specified then until it reopens to us, and I have several company emails that say we are to wait until we receive notice of the office reopening date for our group. So then I had someone try to tell me as long as I'm living there then, and working remotely there until the office opens, I'm in compliance. That is not at all what it says, I can read and so can my lawyers. So they are trying to twist things, it seems to me, to try to find ways to get rid of people despite what is in writing, as if some of us aren't smart enough to read what is written. I'm just telling you, be very careful and CYA, because there is some super shady stuff going on here and they will come after you if you don't relocate per whatever your agreement says, and you won't get severance and likely have your unemployment claim contested. That's what you need to ask yourself, are you ok with that and being out of a job soon?

To answer your question, you aren't the only one who feels this way. The fact that they are requiring new roles to relocate (even for people who have worked here for years), without any relocation costs, should tell all the others who are not in hubs or your/my situation what is soon coming for them - that they'll be told to relocate in 3 to 6 months at their expense or take a severance package, or that their role is eliminated altogether because their work location has moved to a hub. Folks, wake up, if you don't realize what is going on here you are not in touch with reality and what is truly going on across the org. All you need to know is attrition is the mission.

Because they are not paying for your relo costs, like many others, they have no skin in the game here and if your role is part of Chainsaws grandiose layoff plan this year or next, you'll be cut and then they're not out any relocation costs for getting rid of your role. Do you see who wins here? Not you! Most companies that ask or want people to relocate offer employees relo costs (at some $ amount), but not here. They care nothing about you, your life, your family, etc, period. So you should ask yourself this big question - do you want to uproot your life and family for a company that won't pay you a dime for all the inconvenience of moving to a new location and all the hassle that consists of, where you could be laid off 6 months after you get there? I think you know the answer, Bro.

OK, so speaking as a not-angry and not-a-troll, your only leverage is pretty minimal and relies on your relationship with your supervisor/manager. Sounds like it's pretty clear that you realize the risks of relocation outweigh any potential rewards -- even if you were a star top performer that is no guarantee unfortunately.

You ask a bunch of losers and angry trolls if you should move for your livelihood? Obviously if you're that stupid then yes full on you want to resign tomorrow.

I have known and worked with a couple of people here in San Francisco who stayed here during the week and went home on weekends. In both cases it turned out to be the right solution for them, because their jobs here lasted less than two years.

You might want to try that, if even for just a few months, while you get to know the new city. Granted, it not a perfect solution, but it’s better than uprooting your family for nothing.

What about looking for another job in your home town while waiting to force-relocate? There is still time. If you decide to stick with WFC, relocate, and what if WFC lays you off? You will spend all that money for nothing, even being in a place you don't necessary want to live.

I mean, depending on your role and it’s relevancy, cost of living in new state, moving costs, etc. .. if you’re questioning it though, probably not