Thread regarding Truist Bank layoffs

I remember hearing that BB&T had antiquated technology and management didn't have any confidence in the technology team, one of the reasons for the merger.

That is true! Unfortunately, Suntrust misrepresented their technology portfolio and only had some window dressing on top of an aging and underfunded stack. Now you have double the issues, double the fun.

Truist is smart. Truist is important. Truist is kind.

Wrecking ball, that’s an interesting nick name. Care to elaborate?

HSTI had a mega secret we-pon. The current CFO. His nickname is squirrel. But most of us think of him as wrecking ball.

Truist to the moon!!!

In my org, hSTI was way less risk adverse, had much better controls, documented processes and procedures and was more advanced in strategy and tech than our hBBT counterpart.

You mean the hSTI that brought their 20 year out of support Visual Basic 6 codebase to the Mo(un)E?

It absolutely goes both ways. I've seen the nightmare legacy tech of both orgs and it just is what it is. Things don't get made in a vacuum, and sometimes you're lucky when the tech holds up as long as it does. Regardless the current process to release anything is dystopian at best. The software engineering directors who push for RTO should be dropped first because they have disconnected from what it takes to actually create quality software, but hey, they trust 3rd party auditors more than their own strategy so we will clearly be successful.

hBBT here. There's probably a good amount of puts and takes with both organizations: some departments where hSTI was better, some where hBBT was better. It's a given when working with organizations as big as ours.

Of course I worry about everyone's jobs (including mine), but I fear that even on the other side of this we're setting ourselves up for being an inferior long-term enterprise. We were sold T3 - "touch + technology = trust". However, if the "touch" is people in the Philippines our clients can't understand, and our technology constantly breaks (and is also outsourced i.e. CYBERSECURITY?!), then we by default are asking our clients not to trust us.

In a perfect world, before they touched employee salaries, they would go after the waste, fraud and abuse (KK Leadership Institute, shopping trips on corporate planes, disco ba--s on corporate cards, etc.). But ah, if it was a perfect world, we wouldn't be here, now would we?

In my org, hSTI was way less risk adverse, had much better controls, documented processes and procedures and was more advanced in strategy and tech than our hBBT counterpart. Several hBBT leaders pushed their model and then retired and now we are having to set back up everything we had running smoothly before MOE. I've sat in meetings discussing things that I solved back in 2017 but some hBBT manager decided to turn it off because it wasn't theirs.
I think a lot of it is very dependent on what department and who your leadership is/was. I have great hBBT coworkers that told me their leadership managed by fear and they were shocked at how well we all worked together. They were absolutely triggered by the letters "BCG".

I remember hearing that BB&T had antiquated technology and management didn't have any confidence in the technology team, one of the reasons for the merger

For the person in this thread that said it’s all disgruntled BB&Ters and that Suntrust was great….not so! The ST folks I work with said it was pure misery and a breath of fresh air when they started working with BB&T folks. They have told us they were so micromanaged they had to ask fox permission to p-e.

If Bill Rogers is the answer I’d love to know the question!

I don’t have a dog in y’all’s heritage fight but this is funny. I’ll assume you’re being sarcastic but if not you’re part of the problem not the solution.

It’s so funny reading these posts from disgruntled hBBT employees. Suntrust was great and Bill is making Truist the exact same.

Bill is literally the smartest dude I know. Behind kelly of course.

True bro. We going to the moon!

It’s so funny reading these posts from disgruntled hBBT employees. Suntrust was great and Bill is making Truist the exact same.

Bill and other ST execs are all fu-k ups.

Truist’s risk appetite is much greater than BB&Ts was. It’s no wonder the company is in the sh----r when it’s ran by former failing bank ST leaders.

SunTrust’s risk appetite was much more liberal and they were under regulatory scrutiny.

Unfortunately, Truist is following the SunTrust model.

I do not think this is true. What supports Truist is under regulatory scrutiny for risky business dealings?

True mergers of equals are hard to pull off. Compromises create confusion. Too many cooks in the kitchen. Once it started, those of us in both heritage organizations saw just HOW different the banks were…in virtually every regard. What kind of bank the CEO says they are…and what they really value, and how they operate are often very different indeed. When employees tried to point out the conflicting processes, goals and ways to operate, we were called “change adverse”….no guys, actually we saw this mess coming 4 years ago…you just didn’t listen.

BB&T was well known for their conservative approach to risk aversion and their financials were solid.

SunTrust’s risk appetite was much more liberal and they were under regulatory scrutiny.

Unfortunately, Truist is following the SunTrust model.