Does State Street really think it saves money if people have such bad training? I would not even call it training. It's a shame really. My opinion is that a company in this way can only lose customers, trust, and ultimately - money. The company's strategy is more than bad...
5 replies (most recent on top)
This place is not a technology company. Most users do not know basics on how to use a computer. Sad state. Good luck with the wall street spin.
Clients don't care, they aren't paying the losses , they force State Street to own risk and cover the losses.
@Post ID: @1wwc+1bNSRHfV
Training is not always based on money, training is having people with 10+++ years experience train the new people.
When you have gotten rid of all the highly skilled workers, and now have people with less than 5 years on the job doing the training.
Your going to get very poor results
No money for training. Not seen as important. Cost cutting measures cut training resources.
Agree , but you maybe you forgot a lot of the best and brightest were let go when they started doing layoffs around 2005yr. Then the layoffs became ever 3 years the 2 years, now sadly its a yearly event.
That is why you have poorly trained workers being trained by so called senior people who been their 5 years or less.
A vast highly skilled knowledge base was let go to save money.
And know you have understaffed departments with workers doing double and triple workloads