Thread regarding Truist Bank layoffs

@lk4 - Exactly. Leadership is putting a lot of emphasis on teammates taking the Skills Assessment. The fact there are multiple information sessions where a teammate is on camera sharing their screen as to how to take the assessment step by step; when the assessment itself is basic and self explanatory. Truist wants to make sure teammates complete this. As previous reply below called it out perfectly. The engagement survey and OHI were just an email with a link. No information sessions beforehand. There is more than meets the eye and leadership is not being fully transparent.

@1k4 what retiree benefits were cut? Hadn’t heard about that.

Underperforming bank + Company wide skills assessment + Cutting benefits for retirees.....Sale is imminent at this point. No purpose corner update needed to see writing on the wall.

@1hy - Leadership's MO based on past experiences is to act long after they feel we teammates have forgot about something. RTO, STAR, list goes on and on. These initiatives leadership implemented after they told us they were not going to happen.

With skills assessment, they'll do layoffs in Q1 after the holidays thinking we have long forgot about the assessment we did in september.

@1hw If they're going to do it, makes more sense to do it before the end of the year, write it all off this year and start next year with a clean slate.

The SA will definitely be tied to upcoming layoff decisions! It is uncanny Truist is having "Information sessions" on how to take the SA. They have a teammate who gives a thorough overview in these sessions and they keep saying they won't be used for employment decisions. There was never this much focus on the engagement survey or organization health index. All we got was an email with a link to take them.....

We all know leadership at Truist. When they say they will not do something, they turn around and do the opposite! Most likely bank wide layoffs will occur in Q1 2026 before AIP is paid out.

@a7 my financial advisor told me that word on street is they trying to drastically cut expenses to policy themselves up for sale.

@j6 we took ours 6 months ago and our manager never mentioned them again to any of us…no response, no correction, zip nada. I too believe they are away to get managers to “inform” them of who they want to layoff if they have to let people go. Previously the decisions were made somewhat randomly by HR and some good people were let go and some under performers with a bit more seniority were retained, and there was a pretty big outcry from managers.

Time to reshuffle the management team AGAIN, while laying off more worker bees!

@1e9 TLDR

@1e9 hmm...you said a whole lot of nothing just like BR on the monthly Purpose Corner. Of course, everyone knows you mm's align yourselves with "us" when your tail is on the line, but behind closed doors strive to be one of "them" when it's not. But, good luck with keeping your job.

@1cv - The writing is on the wall! Next step will be for some folks to train people. They'll ultimately be laid off or given the option to work for a consulting firm.

@1e3 Middle manager here. I know I will have to fill it out as well. Don't think I need to be assessed just like I don't think the larger workforce needs to be assessed. We all know why this is happening so we all just better buckle up and be ready for the BS that will follow, probably towards the end of the year. I know a lot of people are frustrated and want to put this all at the feet of "middle management." I'll speak for myself and say I'm no yes man and I'm a vocal fighter for the well being of my team. Understand if (when) it falls on the deaf ears or our collective senior and executive leaders, that just puts us middle managers in the horrible position of being admonished by those leaders for speaking up and admonished by our teams for being seen as not doing enough. I'm not arguing this is how all middle managers are. But understand there's a relatively small minority of people in this dysfunctional place that shape and influence decisions that the overwhelming majority of us are subjected to as long as we're here. Hopefully there are more managers like me that have enough of a backbone to call it out when the decisions being made are counter to the BS missions and values these feckless senior leaders want to prop up when it suits them. In other words, we may be in different chairs, but we're all on the same boat while our "leaders" are flying in their private jet. Rant done.

Will middle management be required to take the skills assessment? Because they are the ones who really need to be assessed.

The assessment is NOT voluntary. You have to complete it. Bozo leading this call finishes up by how excited they are to do this assessment. “We want to be sure that we have the right people to do their jobs or get the skills they need.” BS

@1cv on the call right now. It is pure BS this won’t be used against you. If it wasn’t, why can a manager change your rating without discussion with you? You won’t know until the assessment is complete.

Our tech ops org did those awhile back and it led to 1) being rebadged to Accenture for some or 2) some being laid off. For some of those at the bank a long time with below market pay, the rebadging helped them out a little as there was a pay increase and benefits were better. Others experienced a pay cut. Some of them were cut later after training people but picked up another project or moved on. The folks who didn’t accept the rebadging were relieved of their duties (no severance, etc). Most saw it as a way the bank got folks off the books without it costing them too much.

@kj the reason for whatever rating you get has nothing to do with your performance. It has everything to do with the merit pay increase you get or don’t get

Just wait, it will get worse

@j6 - It's a rational business decision to part ways with underperforming employees, as organizations should prioritize retaining individuals who consistently contribute and add value. At Truist, it appears that over 80% of employees are rated as having a "Meaningful Impact" rating, which aligns with a "Meets Expectations" evaluation. Given this, one might question the practical role performance reviews play in informing layoff decisions, unless the underlying objective is to identify and release low performers, which would be a sound strategic move from a business standpoint.

In contract, larger banks often approach layoffs more indiscriminately, resembling a randomized process. This is largely a risk mitigation tactic aimed at minimizing lawsuits. When layoffs appear to disproportionately affect individuals from protected classes or those perceived as "different", the bank becomes vulnerable to claims of discriminatory practices. To shield themselves, employers may adopt a more randomized approach to avoid the appearance of bias.

For employees, being selected for a reduction in force (RIF) should prompt a careful review of the severance agreement. Consulting an employment attorney prior to signing is especially prudent when the severance offer is minimal. Signing such an agreement typically includes a waiver of the right to pursue legal action against the employer, so informed legal guidance is essential before making that decision.

@j6 - It is a rational business decision to part ways with underperforming employees, as organizations should prioritize retaining individuals who consistently contribute and drive value. At Truist, it appears that over 80% of employees are rated as having a “Meaningful Impact,” which is generally understood to align with a “Meets Expectations” evaluation. Given this, one might question the practical role performance reviews play in informing layoff decisions, unless the underlying objective is to identify and release low performers, which would be a sound strategic move from a business standpoint.

In contrast, larger financial institutions often approach layoffs more indiscriminately, resembling a randomized process. This is largely a risk mitigation tactic aimed at minimizing lawsuits. When layoffs appear to disproportionately affect individuals from protected classes or those perceived as “different,” the organization becomes vulnerable to lawsuits of discriminatory practices. To shield themselves, employers may adopt a more randomized approach to avoid the appearance of bias.

For employees, being selected for a reduction in force (RIF) should prompt a careful review of the severance agreement. Consulting an employment attorney prior to signing is especially prudent when the severance offer is minimal. Signing such an agreement typically includes a waiver of the right to pursue legal action against the employer, so informed legal guidance is essential before making that decision.

@j6 you neglected to use the word Purpose in your dialogue. No self respecting Truist “Teammate” would say all that without some commentary about this being “purpose driven”!

Skill assessments are used for a variety of purposes. It is important to remember that these are subjective assessments. Managers will correct any number you give. This lets them support their current beliefs about you. Most banks have this. Technical areas already do.

Less scarily, they demonstrate to regulators that a firm has the appropriate skills that regulators deem necessary to comply with the laws. They provide a way to determine where you can upskill with additional training. Firms may decide to buy or rent those skills.

Skills assessments are used by managers and skip-level managers in performance reviews regardless of what they say. Performance reviews are used to justify layoffs. Skills assessments justify their assessments of that. Firms use them in tandem to provide protection for layoffs of protected classes, older workers, or people thought of as different.

If you don’t complete it, your manager’s assessment is all that’s there. Complete it. Justify every point. Act like this is a work product going to TAS. Assume your boss has to cut ten percent of their staff. It doesn’t matter if there are open job posts.

Take a moment and skill up. Get a certification. Be able to get a job at another firm. Stop thinking like anyone owes you anything except pay for work done. You don’t owe them anything other than what they pay you for.

Yes, layoffs are likely. They usually occur before bonus cutoffs, in our peers.

Will assessment be for everyone? What does the test actually measure?

@dn Can't comment on whether the assessment is voluntary, but can confirm the assessment is coming. Teammates in scope will receive an email on it in early September. And after Teammates complete, Managers will beable to review the ratings and tweak it themselves if they so choose. This company is a joke.

Assuming this is true, you would also have to assume that not replying is just as likely, if not more likely, to be used to determine your future.

I want to see the stock price go up.
The dividend is pretty nice, though.

Layoffs increase the stock price and appease shareholders. Bill and leaders don't care about us. They care about dat cheddah $$$

Layoffs? But we're building new banks across major cities and we're sponsoring golf tournaments and the like. We're clearly so flush with cash that layoffs are just in the distant rear view. Am I right Teammates? AM I RIGHT????? eyeroll