Is it true that teammates are being told they have to rebadge as Accenture or be laid off and if they choose layoff they get no severance? If this is truly how Truist is operating then I’m disgusted and ashamed to be associated with such a place.
11 replies (most recent on top)
I don’t think this is unique to the bank vanguard did a similar move last year
Reading this thread makes me sick to my stomach that I work for such an awful company.
They're paying us out the difference in PTO days within the first 30 days, which is in the offer letter. The calls promise a one-time payment to the 401(k) because they don't have a pension. I expect a lot of folks to (wisely) "take the money and run..."
As an added bonus, your years of service get reset (read your paperwork). You're being brought to Accenture to make sure nothing slips - basically some quick knowledge transfer (in the case of hBBT it will be really quick). You'll be offered a chance to compete, but that not realistic and you know it. After a bit, you'll get RIF'ed from Accenture...and get severance based on your time at Accenture. Which for most of you will be 6 to 8 months.
It's true, it happened to our wealth teammates, I'm sure it will happen to CT&O as well.
It is true. If you refuse to rebadge with Accenture, they consider it "voluntary resignation" so you are denied severance and unemployment. I'm rebadging next month under dures. Half my team is in the same boat. The other half will be RIF'd the month after with severance but they were not given the option to rebadge. We are in Trust in Richmond and Wilson.
I would recommend searching the SEC for Truist severance guidelines. If they have filed their guidelines, they are legally bound to follow them. There are no work arounds for them. Also, if you are ever laid off, you should speak with a labor attorney to have them review the contract. They can clean up language to ensure their are no hidden boobytraps in the document. I have done so in the past, and they are relatively inexpensive and important when considering employer retaliation and how petty some companies are.
If true, seems like something worthy of getting a few people together and at least getting an attorney’s opinion. I am not sure if it is “legal” or not, but it seems to be pushing the limits. Can you really deny severance because an employee didn’t take a job with another company? Simply because something is in a severance agreement doesn’t automatically make it legal.
I would love to see this issue played out in a public court. It is one thing to be cutthroat, it is another to be cutthroat and yet market yourselves as this caring, purpose driven, loving management team. Make them publicly own the reality of the work culture at Truist. I have no insight, but I bet this is the last type of thing this executive team wants to fight in public, particularly in light of the bad press starting to trickle out.
Wow. That’s crazy. Imagine dedicating years of your life to this place and this is how they treat you. Such hypocrisy. So much for purpose, mission & values. We are the furthest thing from a bank that cares.
Yes, its in the severance policy (which you can find and read via the source) if you decline job placement (internal offer or vendor outplacement) you forgo severance
I don't know the answer but it wouldn't surprise me with the sc-m running things. Just listen to him on the town halls, he must hate every one of us.