This place is doing all they can to force attrition….
23 replies (most recent on top)
I was required to do this in a previous roll I had on a Dollar Team that we corrected transactions etc. I don't know if the rules are still the same, but in that position, we were allowed to take 5 days off and our manager could find us busy work for the other 5 days that didn't require us to log in to any systems. The downfall was if anyone even asked you a question regarding something that has to do with your normal work it would reset your time away, so I wouldn't be surprised if they stopped making exceptions like that.
Yes this comes out of your PTO bank so is difficult for new hires.
just another day on the plantation aint nothing nobody can do about nothing
I worked for a bank 20 years ago that required it for ALL roles. Had to be out 5 consecutive days. It was explained that if you’re out 5 days, someone would have to cover for you and their ability to find anything nefarious would increase. It’s a risk management tactic. My last 3 (banking) employers were like this. I’m surprised WF has not required it broadly. I made sure to ask the first day on the job here so I could budget my PTO accordingly.
It's a regulatory requirement for certain roles. This isn't just WF policy.
What, it has always been enforced for those in a role where required absence is required. Possibly they're expanding what roles are included but the idea this hasn't been enforced is incorrect.
@1rer+1qaF2SiG Certainly a good example. I understand it, can empathize with it. At the same time I believe it is mitigated by 2 things.
- (Especially if new) The employee knew of this requirement going in. It's pretty much an industry standard. Just going to need to su-k it up.
- It may not align perfectly but I have no doubts schedules can be worked with. Yes I understand that seniority will carry weight and if A got 2 off at Christmas last year then A shouldn't get it again this year. But you can't tell me that an entire department will all want the first 2 weeks of July off.
Seems like a typical situation where you might have to occasionally deal with a "bad" time off but then the next go around you use that as leverage to get a block that better aligns with your desires. Regarding needing it for random reasons, well, oh well? Take them, go in the hole if necessary, do what is right for you! Schedules are important but if I'm low man on the totem pole and my 2 weeks fell in the middle of October then so be it. My kids are coming out of school and we're taking vacation then. Done. But next year I'll be getting what I want.
I work in a field that recognizes this insider threat but hasn't not created an official requirement around it other than heavy encouragement to take time off and other Org wide policies like limiting PTO carry over, use or lose holidays, etc as applicable per state and federal laws.
Start to find a new position
Certain bank operations functions require employees to take time off. Specifically, managers responsible for auditing vaults branches or main vaults. There are rules around rotating personnel and there have been instances where folks didn’t want to take time off because they were stealing and covering the losses through false reporting/auditing. So again, nothing new in this regard.
Is it paid leave or do you have to use your PTO?
This comes out of your PTO balance?
Pretend you are a new employee, who gets ~three weeks PTO (18 days). You are forced to use two of those weeks (10 days) in a row with little choice as to when you are to use them. Now you have 8 days left for the entire year to juggle any other PTO needs and cover any sick time you might incur.
Would you want two weeks of your precious PTO allotment to be dictated to you? What if the options you are given do not align with your family schedules? Remember, not everyone can be gone for a two week stretch over summer - it gets spread out thru the year.
How is requiring you to take time off a negative that would drive attrition? Are you implying that those this would affect wouldn’t be paid for this time or that they’d be paid less than they could earn with say bonuses and such?
On the surface this reads like complaining for the sake of complaining.
Crazy that your employer wants you to show up on time.
My department had this as a requirement years ago, but it was dropped as a requirement. Can’t say I’m surprised that it’s being brought back. Especially since they have a quota of people they want gone.
This is not new. Many operations group have had this in place, especially for those that work in vaults and processing.
@rsd+1qaF2SiG Ive been here for 7 yrs and this is the 1st time it been implemented. I’ve seen it done in other orgs and know it’s a “banking” policy
I’m in an back office operations role and we’ve had to do this the last two years.
@naa+1qaF2SiG Ok Captain Wells Fargo you know every role in the bank. Go back under your rock
Jesus OP. Do some fuuucking research.
It was NEVER enforced for positions other traders and sales. They included more positions that wouldn’t usually have a impact.
Certain positions in banking required employees to take 10 consecutive days off. This policy wasn’t really enforced until now.
Policy requiring those in certain roles to take 2 consecutive weeks off. Traders, Sales, etc. so they can't hide any positions/losses.
It's ALWAYS been enforced. Big nothing burger.
The what policy?