Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

When will the next C suite come in?

Despite Charlie and Scott being in their 50s, they look, sound, think, and act like they're in their 70s or 80s.

Lots of Wells employees are mostly happy here, with the exception of RTO. It's frustrating to look for other work when the only reason I'm doing it is because RTO is pointless, and literally everyone knows it.

Realistically, when should we expect them to be replaced for any reason at all?

by
| 2426 views | | 23 replies (last April 11, 2022) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1g9poscK

23 replies (most recent on top)

Like most humans, hey always want to go up. So where would they go? In my opinion they will hold onto their seats until they've been shown the door. Are there enough reasons for their displacement?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3fha+1g9poscK

@1kwa+1g9poscK

I don't want homeless people to have their stuff stolen either. Has nothing to do with "worship".

As far as locating in beneficial places, you know that's how the country was founded / designed, right? It's supposed to be 50 laboratories, with different policies, in a never ending search for optimal policy.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3bav+1g9poscK

I have always thought and still do that Prince Charles will not survive 2022. Scott is a mouthpiece. I really don't care about him.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1hvr+1g9poscK

Pre Chuckie I felt valued, now I’m nothing more than a number. The last slice and dice, I wasn’t even told my employees were being laid off until after the fact. Yes you read that right! I wasn’t in the loop nor did I deliver the message.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1dqm+1g9poscK

Guys like Musk, Bezos, etc. base their businesses where they get the best tax structure and most handouts from the local government. They rentiers.

I'll never understand the point of worshiping people who are rich just because they were born that way and got there easy.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1kwa+1g9poscK

Everyone's an expert here.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1mxy+1g9poscK

@rch, most people who think they have the moral authority to steal from billionaires are not only unethical, they're bad at math. If you took 100% of the wealth from the world's billionaires and divided it up amongst everyone, we'd each have enough to buy one share of Amazon. And that wealth took DECADES for them to accumulate.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1sjh+1g9poscK

@opp+1g9poscK - A “turn-around leader?” Tell me one thing Chuckie has accomplished in his time here, other than ki----g morale and the launch of that one plain-Jane credit card? Talent is leaving in droves and his efficiency ratio still sucks!

He’s a failure through and through.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1aun+1g9poscK

It's true. If uncle Sam took every penny Musk has tomorrow, they'd blow it in a few weeks, corruption would swallow up 90% of it, and the gov would put their hands out looking for more money they could steal.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rch+1g9poscK

@ofn+1g9poscK

It's not "silver spoon", it's recognition that the truly greedy force in this country is the government, who we give trillions every year and it's NEVER enough. They didn't earn it, and all they want to do with it is buy votes. THAT'S where the greed problem is. Guys like Musk, Bezos, etc. create a huge number of jobs and industries with their billions that's a great thing for the rest of us.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @poy+1g9poscK

Boy, not the OP, but this thread sure got off topic! So back to the question, how much time does this c suite have left?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @osk+1g9poscK

A thousand people donating $10k does more than one person donating $1m.

You and your absolutes.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @eca+1g9poscK

Right, @xem, because the government is known for spending money wisely.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pby+1g9poscK

@tde a rising tide doesn't lift all boats?

What a depressing view of humanity you have.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qhg+1g9poscK

"Look at the entitled silver spoon who down voted the idea of only living on $1.25 million a year."

It's not about getting by on $1.25MM a year. It's about what else you can do with your money. In my town, most of the cool stuff -- arts, sports, museums, etc -- are funded by wealthy individuals. Their success makes my life better. Doesn't take anything away from my happiness.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tde+1g9poscK

Wow, the mods removed my post explaining how the below numbers were not even realistic since I didn't account for capital gains or interest?

That makes sense. Gotta protect the entitled class.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ygi+1g9poscK

Post ID: @xem+1g9poscK

Vile American capitalism? There's plenty of other places to live if you don't like capitalism - Hungary for example or China or Russia or Venezuela ... the list goes on. No shortage of choices for you if you don't want to stay. Bye.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @obx+1g9poscK

Look at the entitled silver spoon who down voted the idea of only living on $1.25 million a year.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ofn+1g9poscK

A billion is overkill.

$100 million is enough to live an average US life span on $1.25 million per year.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dwu+1g9poscK

"Lots of Wells Fargo employees are happy here?" That's not how it seems to me. Make up your mind.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @vqi+1g9poscK

More corporate US propaganda. Once your net worth passes $999,999,999.99, that excess should be immediately taken by the IRS. I think we can all agree that a billion dollars is more than enough money for a person to have. For a person to accumulate that much wealth (profits=unpaid wages), they must indulge fully into the completely exploitative nature of vile american capitalism and sustain that indulgence to feed their ceaseless hunger for money, hustling, and huckstering. Their empty imperialistic hunger has a detrimental effect on society as their exploitative practices become precedent. After all, if the "Captains of Industry" are able to sink that low, anyone can. We must set a limit to their USian greed.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xem+1g9poscK

Realistically, 2-4 more years is my estimate. This ceo is a "turn around guy", which means once things are back on track he'll move on. In this case, on track means (to the board) another 50k in headcount reduction and and more expense cutting. Don't know what the magic efficiency number is, but I'm sure they have one. Probably something similar to peer banks. In any case, once we get there this executive team will move on. All we can hope for now is that it happens soon and that the next CEO is a good one, because they'll probably me a more long term leader.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @opp+1g9poscK

….and which of them need to leave to get some relief. It’s obvious where Scott and Charlie stand. I wonder if SVB is more supportive of remote work but can’t say so after the backtracking in the fall.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rvf+1g9poscK

Post a reply

: