Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

More layoffs - Earnings call "Cut expenses [employees] by another $3.2B"

Around 30,000 US based employees in total - these jobs will not be eliminated - they will just be shifted to India.

"If we don’t see net improvements in performance of the company, we’ve got the ability to ratchet back the discretionary spend" - he means bonuses and pay raises.

Wells Fargo told investors Friday that it expects to cut expenses by an additional $3.2 billion this year after already trimming about $7.5 billion over the past two years. 

“We still have higher headcount and higher expenses than people who are more complex than us,” CEO Charlie Scharf said in discussing on Friday’s earnings call how Wells (NYSE: WFC) stacks up against other large banks. He said some of the bank’s higher expenses and headcount are due to the work it is doing to improve internal risk controls, fallout from the bank's multiple scandals of several years ago.

“But there’s a lot more beyond that. That’s the work that we’re doing to peel that back piece by piece by piece,” Scharf said. “We still have a huge amount of manual processes inside the company. We have duplicate systems.”

While cutting expenses through operating more efficiently, Wells expects 2023’s total expenses, excluding those primarily tied to regulatory issues, to be essentially flat with 2022 expenses. The bank continues to spend on technology and other infrastructure, but even there it plans to spend prudently.

“We’re not going to spend under any environment at all costs. That’s not the way we’re thinking about it,” Scharf said. “If we don’t see net improvements in performance of the company, we’ve got the ability to ratchet back the discretionary spend, so that we do continue to see improved performance.

“That’s the framework that we’re using to make the decisions,” Scharf added.

Since joining Wells Fargo in October 2019, Scharf has been leading the San Francisco-based bank in an effort to boost risk controls and address regulatory issues following scandals that began coming to light in 2016.

One of the bank’s latest moves to improve performance was this week’s announcement that it will no longer buy loans made by third-party lenders and “significantly” shrink its mortgage-servicing portfolio through asset sales. The bank will focus on making mortgages to existing customers, as well as borrowers from minority communities.

“We’re not interested in running and having a business which is focused on a standalone mortgage product,” Scharf told investors Friday. “We very much appreciate the importance of mortgage to the consumer base. We’re going to continue to stay in the business, but we’re going to view it as part of the importance in the broader relationship.”

Other cost-cutting measures at Wells included last year’s closing of 179 branches and cutting branch staff by 10%.

“We continue to focus on branch rationalization as digital adoption and usage among our customers have steadily increased,” said Mike Santomassimo, Wells Fargo’s chief financial officer. “We expect to continue to optimize our branches and staffing levels in response to changing customer needs.”

by
| 2903 views | | 12 replies (last January 23, 2023) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kNl7lHv

12 replies (most recent on top)

I think this us part of their mortgage winding down and decrease in branches. Don't think this is new. Other banks are streamlining too. We are in a profit cycle not a revenue cycle it is all about savings. Without getting political current administration is not business friendly and all the flush of cash from pandemic needs go be eliminated before things get better

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ich+1kNl7lHv

Cutting staffing 3.2B, that number sounds familiar? (Most recent regulatory fine). Bring in all new executive staff, while losing senior employees and their institutional knowlege, but can not maintain, "net improvements in performance", ya think? So the option is cutting MORE employees. Investors heard it right out of Chainsaw's mouth, is this an investment you want? /s

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1fni+1kNl7lHv

Asset cap is a smokescreen. If you can’t make money with $1.9 TRILLION in assets, you shouldn’t be in charge of anything.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1cdc+1kNl7lHv

WF is supposedly all about Risk/Controls and yet moving 1/2 the company to India is not an obvious conflict ?

India, ya know, Putin’s ally, i.e. lapdog and the phone scam / info stealing capitol of the planet.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1fxe+1kNl7lHv

https://www.myvisajobs.com/Visa-Sponsor/Wells-Fargo-Bank/594177.htm

https://www.myvisajobs.com/H1B-Visa/SearchLCA.aspx?ST=Certified&Y=2022&CI=594177

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lgs+1kNl7lHv

Saul was hired because he isn't an American. He has no care about American workers. No tinge of patriotism. He is a foreigner who doesn't care about jobs being sent overseas to foreigners.

Offshoring will continue until American salaries have dropped to being on par with third world India and Philippines.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jia+1kNl7lHv

The efficiency ratio is affected by the asset cap. You can't grow, the only way to improve the ratio is to cut.

The negative trap if trying to appease the shareholders above all is the sacrifice of long term profits for short term. They want to buy cheap and sell after a good quarter moves the stock value up and collect the profits. But why should Charlie care? He won't be here 5-10 years from now.

He is here to squeeze and bleed as well.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @laz+1kNl7lHv

For tech read Saul's weekly post and see the comment on operations move the line. Centralization will equal what they refer to "saves". Capital expense reduction can easily be justified by shifting the new operations product alignment to offshore by splitting it up between US and India. First step will just be move the alignment, followed by strategic decisions.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @sti+1kNl7lHv

The $10B in expense cuts goes all the way back to Stumpf. Charlie is the one delivering them, which is why he’s getting the super-sized comp package. It’s all the board cares about - efficiency ratio.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pxe+1kNl7lHv

I read it differently. He said spending was flat, but we should not spend where prudent. He most certainly said employees would be punished via bonuses.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @woh+1kNl7lHv

“We’re not going to spend under any environment at all costs.”

What in the actual f@&k does that even mean? This guy needs to get the hook - like yesterday.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kbv+1kNl7lHv

Yikes! That's a little harsh.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ped+1kNl7lHv

Post a reply

: