Just ask yourself State Farm. Does your ethics align with your customer and your employees? If you are 100 honest, you would say NO! You have pulled families apart, forced people to retire, and engaged in RICO activity. Shameful! Engaging in unethical behavior and not keeping your promise has consequences. Unfortunately I believe you weren't paying attention to your parents at a young age.
23 replies (most recent on top)
This reason I left SF after over 25 years is their ethics. SF does not support the employee anymore nor does it really support the customer. Senior employees leaving for other companies or retiring; or pushed out due to offices closely. I personally could have gotten into management if I wanted but chose not too because of the loss of integrity of this company.
Their are trolls on this site stating that SF is a great company to work for but it not true, at least not in claims from which I came from. SF thinks that one employee can handle 300+ injury claim files each with exponentially causes of 100 (BI) losses. There is no way. I would love to see what the Suit counts are now.
Before I left 2 years ago customers (Insured) complained and left as they had poor service. Claimants complained and stated that they would never buy inurance from SF. The ones who would buy are the fraudsters who are claim concious and were frequent flyers.
Once a great company and now a sorry company. I knew a lot of people in claims - Managers, CS, CSO who switched insurance companies from SF to another company due to poor customer service being provided. I know a lot of employees who chose to leave on their own or forced out. These were experienced and good employees.
I, along with other long term employees, will no longer recommend SF as an employer of choice. Sad but true. Executive has gutted this company. Not the same company at all. In fact the senior employees who still work there are miserable. They would leave also if they are able but they have mouths to feed. I do know some will leave once they hit 55 yo to get early pension and then go do something else so they are happy.
Good luck to any proposed new employees. I would stay away. If you do go to work there it would interesting how long you stay.
It is a total lack of situational awareness of value.
Exactly! Time after time, we've seen this leadership team take something that works and proceed to break it. Then, once it's clear it's broken, they sc-ap the entire thing. CDE was the biggest, most expensive example I've seen of this, but certainly not the only one.
As long as we're talking about failures, don't forget the Bank. That thing's got 5 years left in the tank MAX before it's gone forever. That's an entire business line that has been an enormous disappointment.
“Abject failure” is the faulty premise in this conversation.
No, the faulty premise is that the changes being made are good for the company. They are not. Change is necessary, but the people in charge of this change are incompetent.
Why are you sticking up for them? It seems pretty damned strange that you'd be doing that. Either you're a type yellow personality who needs to believe that the people in charge of the power-structure actually know what they are doing, or you're one of them, or you're deluded, or you just can't stand to be wrong on an anonymous message forum. I have no idea.
Most people who have lived through the last couple of decades at State Farm can see what a shambles this leadership team has created, as one decision after another has failed. How many examples do you need?
The many abject failures:
1) CDE: a multi-billion dollar effort to reorganize systems that was ill-conceived from the start (as was clear to anyone who worked there), but which was pursued anyway, despite repeated warnings that it would never work. The end result? Billions lost. The business-analysis roles that were rendered useless by the re-org being completely jettisoned. Buildings being reorganized and then organized back to the way they were. Hundreds of consultant teams from all over the world delivering garbage and then being told to leave after they had already collected their checks. I mean, I could go on.
2) Claims re-organization based on metrics, which resulted in poorer customer service, lost policies, and the lowest employee morale I've ever seen
3) The movement of managers (who know nothing about technology or systems) into Product owner roles. That will not work. This is just as clear NOW as CDE was to the rest of us at the outset.
I can't think of a single thing this executive team has done correctly.
"Abject failure" is not from technology. It is a total lack of situational awareness of value.
@4cap—referencing the “many abject failures”. Those would be what....from a business standpoint? Is it the ever increasing bottom line? Maybe it’s the ever improving expense ratio? The efficiencies we’re finally developing that we never have before? Or it could be the expanding product line of more diverse products, including some created by other industry leaders? Maybe it’s the sea of people on mobile devices who are the first young generation since the 70’s who see State Farm as an option.
Yes, there’s pain. I’m among those with falling income and possibly limited time left. What I was hired to do originally disappeared years ago. Then it happened again. Now it’s happening again, and I am nearing the end of my road. But the overall effect is not one of “abject failure”. State Farm has to be preparing for what will be 20 years from now, not was was 20 years ago. “Abject failure” is the faulty premise in this conversation.
Okay. In 1985, injury Claim Rep inventory was 30 to 50. Now inventories range from 300 to 500. I really don't care what kind of technology you have. The service level has dropped to a point they will not be able to combat. When you make service a process, the customer service is lost. Game over!
Do you think State Farm’s competive position would be improved by keeping tens of thousands of people whose functions are obsolete, working in expensive buildings that are no longer needed?
The people deciding whose functions are "obsolete" and which buildings "are no longer needed" have no idea what they are doing, as is easily supported by an inventory of their many abject failures.
So you are starting from a faulty premise.
Not seeing how State Farm’s competitive position has been improved with any change implemented in the last 5 years. Yeah alot of this stuff hurts. It hurt customer service, lapse/can ratio, employee morale, trust in leadership. I’m immensely disappointed at how things turned out after claims migration.
Do you think State Farm’s competive position would be improved by keeping tens of thousands of people whose functions are obsolete, working in expensive buildings that are no longer needed?
Yeah, a lot of this stuff hurts. But it has to be done because the bottom line is that customers will not pay for these things unless they see the benefit. And a customer does not care whether their vehicle change was handled by three different people with families, in a Regional Office, or by a millisecond of computer time. They just want it done and they want it cheap.
In 1995 the company worried insurance was going to be bought through kiosks. I heard talk after talk about this at claim conventions. The massage was sent to provide quality customer service in a personable fashion to set us apart from the feared kiosk companies. Now metrics prevent that type of service. I also saw the kiosk situation at McDonald's. Agency, you are next; woe to those who see it.
1mhk---see the hypocrisy? Make promises and break them. Your employees and customers believed your lies. You have to live with them and your abuse and bully philosophy.
///State Farm doesn't owe you a lifetime career. And you don't owe tgem lifetime employment. Either party can end the relationship if needed. We owe our policy holders a competitive rate and ate working toward tgat with restructure///
Perhaps they could start achieving these competitive rates by actually getting executives who have a clue what they are doing. I mean, it would be a start.
State Farm doesn't owe you a lifetime career. And you don't owe tgem lifetime employment. Either party can end the relationship if needed. We owe our policy holders a competitive rate and ate working toward tgat with restructure
@VpaCswq-iic, Like your response!
State Farm! You owe it to these folks to listen and provide an answer. I am a customer of yours and I am a owner of this. If it's price, I would be happy to pay more to not see so many hurt. I was asked to look at this site. I'm ashamed. I've been a customer for 45 years. This hurts!
I just back from convention I’m putting my house up For Sale tomorrow. Good luck everyone u are going to need it. My wife and three kids are going hate here this but I’m not going down
You have to be kidding it’s unbelievable not sure who guiding the ship but who ever is running P&C autury is if not fired by now is going to be what a f--- up train wreck you have to work hard to run the train off the track like this total f up sh-- show.
Total absolute f--- up and Life company is bragging about annual statements and JD Power what the f--- what about the dividends internal rate of return we are rank 18th what the hell is going on!
AMEN TO LAST POST! NEW EMPLOYEES BEWARE!
I agree totally with the post.
I have over 25 years with the Farm and personally know many that were let go, some of which were less than a year from retirement age. Yes, some had the choice to go through a competitive posting process and relocate but others did not.
In the 1995 reorg they offered to add three years to your age and a bridge to social security. This proved costly as many more retired than expected at a time when our reserves were considerably less. Back then the company valued employees and it was inconceivable that a person who spent a lifetime working for the Farm would be let go just short of retirement. We promoted our defined benefit plan and boasted the Farm as one of the best companies to work for in the insurance industry or any other industry for that matter. Those that believed the hype, planned and invested with their retirement benefits in mind got a rude awakening.
I don’t recall in the Ernst and Young planning sessions the Farm provided as giving the scenario of being released a year or even a couple of years short of retirement age after a lifetime of contribution and losing the partial company funding for health insurance.
How does one plan for this?
If this does not scream of a lack of ethics and paint a picture of what the new Farm thinks about its workforce nothing will.
I support our leaders in some of the things they are trying to do to remain competitive. Times they are a changing. A recent trip to McDonald’s found they had 4 walk up kiosk taking credit/debit cards only and 2 cash registers actually manned with people. They are training a new generation and in the process saying how they are going to respond to the demand for 15 an hour.
Yes, change in enevitable and we all must do our part. With our current reserves we can do better and treat our employees and their famlies with more respect and compassion. My friends are thankful for their severance and we need to thank State Farm for these packages. They could have offered less or even nothing. In the big picture though even these packages provided limited relief for those losing all their benefits.
It is a travesty the new State Farm is piggy backing on the good will and branding that has taken generations to build. We are State Farm in name only. Everything that made State Farm a great company is being dismantled piece by piece. Yes, we need to change to remain competitive. Yes, we are facing challenges never seen before. But no, not change this way and not at the price our employees are being asked to shoulder.
The OP makes perfect sense. Previous poster, you haven't made any sort of argument. You might want to start by making one if you have one,
Huh???? OP you aren't making any sense?