Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

Performance "Calibration"

Performance "calibration" at work. Try not to be hurt - just move on. This has been going on for 3 years and gets more aggressive each year. Your manager probably held out for as long as possible or is "rotating" the good ratings to spread the pain.

We're being told to have 60% Meets, 0-30% Exceeds (with a lot of extra work to justify, preference is %0 exceeds), and this year they added 30% need to be inconsistently meets. Every year they tighten the numbers of good reviews we are allowed to have.

There are slides from 2019's "calibration" talks circulating for managers that show a "calibrated" team's performance - a perfect bell curve and the words "We are not grading on a curve". Not sure how that's possible since I was told, "Drop one exceeds to meets, drop one meets to inconsistently meets - don't care who, don't care why, update your verbiage to match by COB when they run the report again".

In years passed I "donated" my higher rating to one of my deserving staff. This year no luck. Attrition is the mission.

I'd call the Ethics Line, but that will get me nowhere - this rotten practice started at the top. Just leave this dead shark. Fake accounts, fake regulatory progress, fake interviews, fake move to the cloud, fake reviews...see a pattern?

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

not my post, i took this from a separate thread and copy/paste here - i just want to make sure other folks are seeing it, here is the stamp on that post that i copied:
Post ID: @jls+1hIvMSfF

by
| 4313 views | | 21 replies (last July 16, 2022) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1hI2zzqL

21 replies (most recent on top)

You pretend to rate and pay me and I pretend to work. So many things are just floating by me where once I cared and would act. Not anymore. Waiting for the package or other. Just don't care anymore. My manager has checked out also.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2gni+1hI2zzqL

This is absolutely the truth, as a manager, my peers and myself had to give cr---y reviews to “meets” employees and had quotas of who got what - we were upset and of course “ki-l the messenger”.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2eyy+1hI2zzqL

I had years of excellent performance reviews....13, in fact.

But I was always told I was one of the more highly compensated people on my team, even though I never got to 100% of midpoint. I did get to 95%, I think?
So for years I was told - we had to lower your raise b/c others on the team are further below midpoint. OK....I didn't like it but I trusted my managers and thought that seemed reasonable at the time.

2020 I won the Golden Spokes award for the second time even though the first time the award had a different name.

2021 midyear I was slapped with an inconsistently meets which I think was in July. I was really surprised. And I got the speech about how I wasn't performing to the same level as others on my team - really? Well, it's a subjective call and I had a new manager.

Sept I was laid off. I wasn't shocked but was so happy. Thank you severance!

Considering how many of my ongoing programs couldn't secure funding to automate processes and had to be pieced together with manual workarounds, of course I was told by friends after I left that basically everything I worked on crashed and burned after I left.

Ha. I'm in a much better place now.
What makes me sad is what my peers had to deal with after I left trying to keep my stuff going (we were actively discouraged from x-training, btw, which was nuts) Our EVP didn't break a sweat, I'm sure.

So sc--w you WF. Sad thing is, all the higher ups will leave set for life. I'd wish the bank well, but it doesn't really seem to make any difference for the rank and file since executives will just suck up all the money and leave the minimum for everyone else.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2dtk+1hI2zzqL

Don’t most banks have performance calibration. What makes Wells Fargo different?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ylv+1hI2zzqL

WF is a company I truly love. Are there are recs on how to be an even better employee for this fantastic company? I do not want to be employee alumae.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1miw+1hI2zzqL

@1zbu. Amazing that 3.1 BILLION are considered brutal earnings and will forecast layoffs. Shows where corporate greed has gotten us.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1wts+1hI2zzqL

for those who would like to contact the media:
Jed Horowitz - columnist for Advisorhub jhorowitz@advisorhub.com
ALSO
Jeff Benjamin - senior columnist INvestment News jbenjamin@investmentnews.com
Twitter @BenjiWriter

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1wli+1hI2zzqL

Missed a key recurring deliverable, it'll go on my annual review. Normally this would cause me to fear for my job.

I'm surprisingly calm and relaxed today. I could care less.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1otm+1hI2zzqL

Earnings were brutal. Layoffs coming.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zbu+1hI2zzqL

Awaiting my review after reading this.

I am the top performer on my team but of a certain age, so I wouldn’t be surprised if this happens, knowing they prefer cheaper people, either younger that fall for their BS or offshore that will do the same to their face while screwing them behind their back.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1qkz+1hI2zzqL

"and this year they added 30% need to be inconsistently meets."

That's funny, I don't even have a third of 30% in IM and no one pushed back on my ratings in any way. All got approved.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1sjd+1hI2zzqL

@1tyu

Not allowed to contact media, sorry!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1aan+1hI2zzqL

according to the "manager talking points PDF" that was linked in the company wide email about mid-year reviews, a "meets" is supposed to be for a "strong performer". How do they expect 60%+ to be a "strong performer". Systematically setting it up to be near impossible to give exceeds, keep everyone at a meets for no raises, and nit pick the smallest things to downgrade people to needs improvement and get them headed to the door.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1kth+1hI2zzqL

It’s almost like WF is gaming their own system kinda like they did by doing fake interviews.
Wow. I smell a class action coming since they’re continuing to do ratings this way and screwing over top talent. It’s unethical.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ckk+1hI2zzqL

It’s almost like Wells Fargo wants to have the entire bank offshore with a small team of elite executives onshore.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1qry+1hI2zzqL

Jack Welch did come up with this and he did mess up GE forever.

He also invented mass layoffs, google it...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ijp+1hI2zzqL

Jack Welch "leadership" model.
Fire 10% of your staff every year.
Part one, create false ratings and push managers to choose who gets rated with "inconsistently meets", then fire them for non-performance.
Charlie wants to "rightsize" staffing and hopes that those rated "inconsistently meets" will leave the company and save having to pay them severance.

Sorry Charlie, you will have to pay me the severance.

To the board,
You think Welsh style leadership is wonderful? Look at the long term results with GE and Boing.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1lee+1hI2zzqL

A company of SCUMBAGS!!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1eoz+1hI2zzqL

all companies doing stack ranking (rank and yank) are dancing the same dance.

look at this mess, just scan for company names, from GE to reuters, to accenture, to oracle, to GM, to Optum, to microsoft, to UnitedHealth, to xerox, etc...

Here is the link:

https://www.google.com/search?q=StackRanking+site:thelayoff.com

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1qdx+1hI2zzqL

I'll use the soundbite and expand:

  • fake accounts
  • fake profits
  • fake leaders
  • fake promises
  • fake regulatory progress
  • fake job postings
  • fake interviews
  • fake move to the cloud
  • fake tech transformation
  • fake reviews
by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1kdc+1hI2zzqL

Can we contact Media to expose this?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1tyu+1hI2zzqL

Post a reply

: