Judging by the quality of some (most) of the new hires, our reputation is finally catching up with us. The new people are all either too young to know better or rejects from other banks who had no other choice. In both cases, they don't have the experience and/or knowledge to do the jobs they were hired to do. At least the younger ones are willing to learn, the rejects are perfectly happy in their ignorance. I miss the days when we were able to attract top talent. I'd be satisfied with average talent at this point.
30 replies (most recent on top)
OP- You forgot to add if you're a high performer, the dead wood will run you off as you make them look bad.
The public is well aware of WF’s tainted reputation as it has been all over the news since 2016 with numerous scandals and turnover at the top. There is nothing wrong with saying during interviews that you are seeking opportunities at an ethical company. We (most employees) have no control over what leaders choose to do. It’s not the fault of the average worker here that the bank is what is is. Just state the truth in a professional way and you will be fine.
I think saying you "don't want to be associated with that sort of thing" could be seen as bashing your current employer and may be a turn-off to some hiring managers. I took the approach of saying "I am seeking an opportunity that is more aligned with my long term career goals." and since it was outside of the financial industry, I also threw in "I find the mission of your organization much more appealing."
Having Wells Fargo on your resume is not a bad thing for those who are interviewing at another company. It shows that you are seeking to remove yourself from a "scandal plagued organization".
When somebody asks you "Why are you leaving Wells Fargo, you can simply say, 'You've probably seen the recent headlines. I just don't want to be affiliated with that sort of thing'".
Diversity helps the company be strategic.
Everyone with the same skin pigment has the same experiences and intelligence so it makes sense to make hiring decisions based on it. For more more information please reach out to your manager.
@1ixh there is also the converse of that. The young g-ns who have to change everything the way they want, even if it makes us less productive.
Like touch-optimized across devices. Why the he-l do I have to use a touch interface with an actual computer for engineering functions? It makes no sense to take a slick, designed for mouse and keyboard use interface and make it touch-optimized when nobody uses touch-based devices to do that work.
Yet enterprise-level tools were reworked into that model and, as an example, some things that used to take 3 clicks to accomplish now require 20+
But at least it's prettier and works better on executive management's tablets.
It got so bad when I'd call the support line and got someone in the US, I would hang up and prayed for someone in the Philippines or India.
It's honestly the attitude here in about half this thread that has been ki----g IT in this bank forever. It's chock full of 'old-timers' who refuse to adapt and modernize, insisting that things remain the same 'because that's how it works around here' and 'that's how we've always done it, why would we change?'. Fresh talent comes in with ideas on how to modernize infra and processes and gets stonewalled by the old guard who just insist that these new guys have no idea what they're doing. I see it over and over again across the org and it's a large chunk of the reason that we're so behind the curve in tech, why we have processes and procedures that are laughably circa 2000's, and why those that do modernize\FinTechs will continue to chip away at this org.
Everyone on this sub talking like they're God's gift to WF. We all know you're sitting on conference calls for half the day and doing your dishes the other half.
Then why do you care? Why do you still let this place take up your time? So weird.
Let's not kid ourselves here, we all know what's going on. The Woke Cult has flooded the ship with unqualified DEI hires. Good headcount are leaving in droves, no one is doing 3 jobs to cover for mentally disabled unqualified headcount.
Is the Wells Fargo name on the resume respected in the job market?
For $100k and up jobs, or jobs in high demand, Wells Fargo does pay competitively for external hires. New people will come for the salary and get Wells Fargo on their resume to leave for greener pastures. Wells Fargo does not have loyality to their employees, its a two way street they created.
If you like jumping onto a sinking ships where the benefits have been dwindling for a few years and the performance management system is a sham that's enforced by spineless middle managers, then sure.
Should I apply to Wells Fargo if I have 5 to 7 years of experience?
Dear "Anyone can look up the ratios in hrss."
Will you please do so and update this thread with the results? I quit so I can't access it.
Anyone can look up the ratios in hrss. Just search for performance review. Not like it’s hidden or some super secret.
Post ID: @dlx+1hCoRgVM
I don’t know the exact %’s, but yes WFC is now following such a model since Charlie came on board. An example would be 10% are high achievers, 80% are satisfactory, and 10% are unsatisfactory. Departments are Divisions are forced to meet those ranking levels.
Is it true that middle managers to hand out 15% "Inconsistently meets" and another 5% "Does not meet"?
The new hires we have are actually better skilled than those we replaced. None of them are "young", but in their 40s.
As someone with over 20 years in "this company", I find it funny that people think we're NOW hiring poorly. Wells has been scraping the bottom of the barrel for a while. I can't count how many employees I've carried.
Some of the new hires in tech are principal level engineers and worked with sr level managers also brought in. So if you’re not at that level elsewhere you can come in at higher salary and level. They’re also putting some of these people in positions where they’re making some key decisions. But generally they’re not going to know squat about our systems or how things s work or why.
Meanwhile veteran techs have to work under them.
I’m an “old-timer” who will stand up for the new hires. My observations are:
- Wells Fargo is not offering the kind of salary or jobs that attracts the experience and the talent. You get what you pay for. I can’t believe what our tellers and bankers are paid. It’s embarrassing.
- The talent can easily find jobs elsewhere with more flexible hours and yes- WFH.
- What some one else said about the “old-timers” hanging on ‘til retirement is true. Many of us are hanging on hoping for a package. The problem with this is that it doesn’t leave much room for the younger people to advance in the company. It doesn’t take long for them to notice the lack of opportunities and they quit. WFC could easily solve this problem with Voluntary Packages, like better-run companies have, but Charlie is too short-sighted and out of his league .
- WFC oversells the jobs new hires think they will be getting. The bank has d-mbed-down
a lot of the jobs. So they think they’re coming in to learn the business, but it’s really just a call-center position.
- Who wants to start new at a company that is in expense cutting mode, is in off-shore mode, and is in trouble with the Feds?
- In our department, layoffs and attrition have left us dangerously short-staffed. We don’t really have the time to take a new hire from “ground zero” to the point where they can be productive. We make it work, but it’s not how I would choose to train someone if I had more time.
- Despite what people say, we have gotten mostly bright young new people in who are respectful and want to learn.
Wells Fargo is just a miserable place to work at this time. I feel empathy for everyone trying to survive the chaos, both the old-timers and the new hires. I don’t blame anyone other than Charlie and the BOD.
The question is, what is so appealing to new young hires about Wells Fargo? I don't think they are reading the fine print.
If you knew the 401K match is only once per year, unlike many other jobs where its once per month, per quarter and even per pay period, would you apply? If you knew the "management team" requires spineless middle managers to hand out 15% "Inconsistently meets" and another 5% "Does not meet", would you bother applying? I wouldn't bother.
"The true "problem employees" at this bank are the middle managers (and above) who are too far removed from the operations, yet are making decisions that are highly detrimental to those operations."
100% accurate.
To those who are asking why some of us are still here. It's because a lot of us are on the brink of retirement. Months away, to perhaps a couple of years. People like us are not going to go anywhere and start over. We're going to finish here (and hopefully get a layoff) and then move on and never think of this place again.
I've just described 80% of the people on my team. Anyone who has more than two or three years left in their career is already gone.
The true "problem employees" at this bank are the middle managers (and above) who are too far removed from the operations, yet are making decisions that are highly detrimental to those operations.
It's a valid point, WF hiring strategy is left to hiring the best of the worst b/c HR and the bank at large is absolutely broken and toxic. The HUB & RTO policy will only attract the bottom quartile of performers that no other institution would hire.
Some people are just plain old mean. OP, you have been here a while. Naturally everything is easy for you. Cut others some slack. Maybe one day, you'll get a chance to be the new kid on the block, and someone will think the same of you, when trying to train you. Sheesh!
Not the op but I wonder the same thing. I have wondered why I have stayed so long. I realized I just hate change. I seem to have made my own prision and afraid of the outside world. The new hire I am training took a full two hours to understand something I learned and understood in 5 minutes. The previous employee who left the bank for more comp could run circles around me.
What a d umb post. You are attacking new hires for choosing to work at a place where you have implied you have long tenure.
If it’s so bad why are you still here? Actually never mind. I know the answer