I am retired from SF, but have multiple insurance policies with SF; home, auto, umbrella, etc., and investments; IRS, Mutual Funds, etc.. If any of the infrastructure jobs I had were outsourced, I would probably move everything to more competitive providers. Just lucky I a avoided this mess by retiring a few years ago... Many of the people I worked with for years may not have been so lucky..
7 replies (most recent on top)
They're moving to AWS so those jobs were changing. With AWS they don't need backend people so much.
Need to outsource the entire ET department. It is the anchor around SF’s neck.
Too bad most of the people that were given the “opportunity” did not hold up middle fingers and let the execs that put this shitshow in motion figure it out. It seems like much of the work was not relayed/accounted for and the analysts scurry to clean up this mess, all to make management look successful.
ofi+1mhQHint,
Don't get me wrong about lazy people in infrastructure. There were MANY excellent people I worked with and still do, but when you are in the trenches doing the work, it is those who do little that stick out to those doing the work.
Regarding those who took the HCL 1 year contract, I believe everyone received substantial bonuses, including management, but now that we are about 2 months in, we are now seeing HCL co-managers joining the teams and I assume that means at the end of the year, the original SF managers are out, and the new co-managers will take over.
Thanks, for replying. I know about Northern Trust. They "misplaced" a large time sensitive wire transfer I made for an emergency for a couple of weeks, despite almost daily phone calls and eventually claimed that the person I had been talking to (at their toll free number) did not exist. I did not pursue litigation because the funds were "found" in time to meet my deadline. Those funds are still hosted on my State Farm agent's website and invested in STFGX.
I am well aware of the abundance of non-performers in many areas at SF, but that was not the case on two of the infrastructure teams I worked on for about 18 years which were made up of men and women who were competent, hardworking and dedicated to their work. Of course several of them had been there for decades and were highly paid which would probably have made them targets for outsourcing, which I consider a betrayal of the lowest sort. The skill sets needed for those roles (3rd level Unix/Linux and Unix/Linux Security support) were deeply technical and loafing incompetents did not survive for long. Cannot say for certain about the last team I worked on as I had a great deal of autonomy and did not work with other members of that team. I made six figures my last few years there but have multiple masters degrees and hundreds, probably thousands, of hours of advanced technical training.
The loafing incompetents I worked with started at the IT Architect level and went up from there through Function Directors and AVPs. How many over paid upper managers and architects were outsourced or even took pay cuts? Working with those people was embarrassing and frustrating because of their lack of competence and skill. The only talent/skill needed to reach those levels was kneepads. There was ALOT of lazy, incompetent fat SF could have cut before reaching the level of the teams I worked on.
I experienced this before with an aerospace company I worked at that made some huge management errors and proceeded to gut their workforce "to fix it" before their upper management was eventually (finally) fired and the division I worked in was sold.
IRS and Mutual funds are no longer with SF-they are with Northern Trust. Agents act as independent brokers for NT.No banking or investment products remain at SF.
A great deal was outsourced. To the best of my knowledge, most everything was outsourced. I was outsourced and generally everyone I know was also. Numbers were never officially announced, but near 1,000 people. Some people were kept as SF employees to "guide" the work, but that was a small number.
I wouldn't move policies because of this because it was probably a good financial move.
State Farm HR policies allowed a lot of dead weight employees to keep their jobs while a few did the actual work. This move will go a long way towards improving worker output since at the end of the HCL yearlong contract, they will likely get rid of non-performers. Unfortunately, some good people will be lost also.
Additionally, it gets rid of the pension overhead for those people.
I also see this as a method of getting workers back to on-site, as WFH isn't as efficient for the majority of "dug in" State Farm works who weren't performing well to begin with. Don't get me wrong, a GOOD worker is probably better while working from home, but lazy/ineffective workers are worse when WFHing.