Was a manager, not I’m an associate manager
There goes my upward progression at least from an outside hiring manager’s point of view
How much will this hurt both negotiating leverage and even making it in the door for a first interview?
35 replies (most recent on top)
LAM means Loan Administration Manager
Ok after poking around a bit I think I understand the issue and feel the exact same way. Originally there were 4 options on my team - I was essentially a 2 even though we weren’t given numbers, my title was second out of 4 options in the hierarchy. Now I am a P2 but my peers who previously held the title directly above me is now 2 above me (they are a P4 and there is now a level between us P3). It’s weird though bc no one in my entire leadership team holds a P3. They are all either a P2 or P4. Even if P3 isn’t included in our ladder it just feels weird and does not make sense.
I am the assistant to the regional manager
My title actually went up today.
Sounds like someone is sour about still being an "officer"
My previous manager got two demotions in less than a year.
Ex Manager was removed as manager because of the 1 manager - 7 employees rule.
The recent change demoted them to the same title as the people he/she managed. It’s funny because my previous managers Arch Nemesis who had a lower title than the ex manager Now has a title above the ex manager.
It’s hilarious .
As a VP with an incredible amount of responsibility, I agree whole heartedly. There are plenty of fake VP’s out there. Being in software development, I unfortunately cannot hide like others can. We are the face of the operations and make everything go smoothly around here.
I can’t wait until the day of reckoning comes for every person with a bloated corporate title too. So many SVP, VP, and director tears will be shed that day.
"Is that really a demotion? Why should one be classified as a manager when they do not manage? Seems like they were finally classified properly. I’m guessing they did not lose pay, or their precious corporate titles."
I've always thought giving any job the title of __ manager when one only runs a function while not having reports does not necessarily deserve the title of manager. Saying that however, I am not trying to imply that those in this type of position do not necessarily possess the skills and abilities to handle much more. That would still be an individual by individual thing.
This is nothing compared to the title sandbagging afflicted upon all the legacy Wachovia peeps.
I feel like I did, but we'll see once the pay ranges come out. The thing I'm worried about is that I was on the lower end of the range in previous title and I hope I wasn't pushed down to now be on the high end of the scale. That could suppress any raises. Or I guess optimistically it gives me more opportunity for promotions. The competencies definitely do not line up with me though. They make it sound like it's one step above a new hire out of college.
Still a highly valuable VP, no demotion here
Still more FUBAR and SNAFU from our HR folks. Only CS knows the master plan here.
why are people just discovering this today, even if your manager never talked to you on Nov like they should have their have been many communications on the title changes including there to find your new title for weeks now
don't get stuck on title. if your pay didn't change them you didn't get demoted.
that happened to me a couple years back went from manager to equivalent of associate. they took level 1 and 2 and grouped it into level 1/assoc. at this point I. based on the internal job qualifications and descriptions I am over qualified and at the high end of the range since they won't promote.
Is that really a demotion? Why should one be classified as a manager when they do not manage? Seems like they were finally classified properly. I’m guessing they did not lose pay, or their precious corporate titles.
Marketing managers with no DRs all got demoted to consultants.
Now if only 90% of the board knew (notice how it didn’t spell correct me into new or gnu?) what a lam2 stood for. Maybe Lamda Lamda?
It's funny how I proved to my manager that I had the requirements of the next position he never selected me for. I say it's funny, because I can't cry.
well this opened up a can of worms. now everyone can delineate what each person is at from a job range perspective. that used to be a big secret. not nice to see peers higher level than me. then i also learned today another peer gets LTI's. i am starting to smell manager favoritism.
noticed lam2s and lam1s got squished. id be upset as a lam2. lam1 will probably get a big old pay increase lol.
@mxi+1eChPq4Y Yeah, I figured. I just happened to have it playing on one of my monitors while I was reading this morning :D
Don't put associate manager on your resume. Problem solved. Titles vary across companies, they're going to look at what you actually did, not some made up title.
This is what I meant when I said you beat me to it, whoops
Post from TheLayoff.com
Dang you beat me to it!
I went from worker bee 1 to worker bee 1
All engineer are snr now, unless you were snr then you became lead
I was an engineer, now I'm a senior engineer. I don't feel any different. But I also saw they took 8 years of seniority away from me in Workday by changing my hire and benefits date to when my company got absorbed into WFC, so maybe they added the "senior" to make me feel better about losing actual seniority.
Bummer dude
Whatever level or qualifier is in front... if you have direct reports, you're a manager.
Assistant TO the regional manager
if you were previously a manager and are now an associate manager, why would you update that on your resume?
Put whatever title you want to on your resume for an external job. Nobody at WF is going to validate your title. It’s your skills that will be put to the test.
The changes impacted people differently, some people got manager added to their title that didn't have it previously, so the change looks better on their resume. Other people got the shorter end of the stick.