Thread regarding Charles Schwab Corp. layoffs

How did internal bias show up in everyone’s ABO this year? Anyone get over 100%? Anyone get zero?

Wow, it actually looks like the preferred-candidate approach might finally be getting shut down.

And if it’s true the leader at the center of this is on the way out?? Well then ding do-g…

The writing’s on the wall that Q1 cuts are coming so it may be time to flatter leadership’s “brilliance,” or ask for a selfie with them like they’re the celebrities they think they are or just pretend to be honored to even be in their orbit…..or stay invisible & hope they forget your name as they’re busy working on the list of people to cut.

It is exhausting to keep watching the same people get handed more authority when their main skill seems to be building fiefdoms and collecting admirers. The louder the praise and the more performative the loyalty, the faster they move up.

Meanwhile, those who focus on the work and bring different perspectives are often labeled as not quite aligned or not the right fit. That kind of feedback is not about development. It is a signal to stay in line. It keeps people quiet and small while others are rewarded for playing the part.

A strong culture does not punish people for thinking independently. But that does not seem to be the priority anymore.

There are some truly bad apples in this org!

I actually feel bad for leaders like the ones mentioned in this post. They’re just operating the only way they know how which clearly works here.

It’s not really their fault they learned weak leadership in a culture that rewards confidence, connections, and fakery above everything else. Hopefully they never realize most of the “friends” they’ve bought are just pretending.

What’s frustrating is that opportunities do not seem to be earned anymore. They go to the people who know how to play the game. The ones who constantly praise leadership, always agree in meetings, always make sure they are seen saying the right things. That is who keeps getting tapped. And the rest of us are told to just keep working hard and wait our turn, like that actually means something.

It is not about one job posting. It is the pattern. The same faces, the same inner circle, the same quiet handoffs disguised as mentorship or development. Meanwhile, others are doing real work and getting told to be patient or to do more. It feels like a setup.

After a while you stop speaking up. You stop putting your name in the hat. Not because you do not care, but because you already know how it will play out. And honestly, watching this happen again and again just makes people tired.

I know different departments have different experiences so I am not going to speculate on what’s accurate. But I do feel like leadership tends to get unfairly criticized especially on this site!

From my personal experience, I was allowed two slices of pizza at the last pizza party I attended which is a step up from the “engagement breakfast” where only 6 bagels were provided for about 25 or so people.

IMO this is proof that leadership is listening/taking in feedback and actively trying to improve so just wanted to acknowledge their effort. NGL I would have liked the option of a side salad & maybe even a some garlic bread but I understand they have to budget for their travel expenses too.

LOL wild how leadership lives by different rules. For them, steak dinners & endless drinks on very necessary business trips. For us, please limit yourself to 1 slide of pizza & bring your own sides & desserts at forced engagement pizza parties .

@a9 You sound like you’ve got a strong understanding of how things work in this organization so would really appreciate more of your perspective.

Any advice you could give to help those of us stuck in toxic environments understand if that’s just the norm? Any tips on how to get into the inner circle so some of those ‘preferred candidate’ opportunities might open up? Also would you be able to provide guidance on what sort of compliments are important? Something like ‘Green really is your color” or more something like “how do you retain so much knowledge” or both?

TIA for your reply.

@480 LOL LOL LOL LOL

Haha yeah, total joke. The obsession with seeing their own face in PowerPoint decks is hilarious and kinda pathetic at the same time.

The original leader mentioned in this post is a complete joke ive heard there will soon be an exodus of people leaving her team. This is similar to what happened on the last team they managed. Once again, it will be attributed to “their growth” instead of the fact the team has once again become toxic. I just hope the good ones also get out before it’s too late.

This is opportunity hoarding. It happens when someone in power gives roles or responsibilities to people in their close circle while others who have been showing up and doing the work get sidelined. It is usually framed as mentorship or professional development, but what it really does is keep access limited to a few.

People see it. Even if they do not say anything out loud, they notice. And over time, they stop raising their hand. They stop hoping for something better. Not because they are lazy or unmotivated, but because they know the decisions are already made.

It is frustrating. It is disheartening. And it is the kind of behavior that erodes trust faster than anything else.

I believe leaders like the one mentioned in this post confuse self-serving with servant leadership. It’s all about feeding egos, collecting stock awards, hoarding power, and retaliating against any perceived dissent. Fake headshots, staged town halls, and forced engagement are the norm. The rest of us just have to do our best to survive the cesspool they’ve created (and thrive in).

If the directive was “make it toxic,” then it appears they’ve earned the inflated comp they truly believe they deserve.

@35b so true!

Validating to see others share the same experience!

@2qd “ I want my team to feel comfortable to speak up and provide their opinion/viewpoint even if it differs from mine.”

In my experience, speaking up (especially if it challenges leadership) is treated as a threat, not a contribution. Most of the leaders in my org want control, compliance, and credit, not perspectives beyond their own. The tone at the top is about building a fan base that nods along and feeds egos.

Questioning authority isn’t tolerated, which leaves the place run by insiders who hire friends or, at best, loyalists who won’t push back. Actually, I’m surprised this thread is still up, given their fragile egos and needs to control narratives, you’d think they’d have gone after the site by now to try to shut it down??

@15s What really disheartens me is when "people leaders" respond to legitimate concerns with a dismissive and condescending "I'm sorry that your feelings and pronouns are offended by this process" - rather than listening and understanding the concerns surrounding how this process has been or has been perceived as being used.

Employees have received recent inline promotions, which I define as a promotion from a Sr. Manager to Director, for example, but in the same role. So yes, if a PL wants to promote a direct and has to post a req to do so because there will be additional duties/expectations, that's fine. Deserving high-performers should be promoted.

However, when there is truly an open position and the hiring manager hand-picks someone because they are a "rockstar who deserves the promotion" and goes the "preferred candidate" route, that is the concern. A truly open position (newly created or backfill) should go through the normal req/hiring process that equally considers all candidates for the good of the team, department and company. Just because one is perceived as (or maybe is) a "rock star" in an IC position doesn't mean they will be a good PL for a different function/team.

I am a better leader when I choose my team based on experience and qualifications regardless of my personal feelings toward them. I do not grow as a leader and my team will not function with a bunch of "yes" people. High performers demand accountability and as a leader I want my team to feel comfortable to speak up and provide their opinion/viewpoint even if it differs from mine. I do not grow as a leader and my team doesn't grow if genuine discourse and feedback is discouraged or not allowed.

@168 Although the process may be required, it can be or perceived to be abused. For example, if a PL leaves or changes roles and their hiring manager wants their friend from a different org/group in that PL role regardless of whether they are more qualified/experienced than others interested in applying, they'll put up the post for the 3 day min. requirement as a required formality. Even if someone more qualified/experienced actually applied it wouldn't matter because the role is going to the hiring manager's friend - period. You then most likely end up with sh*tty management w/ zero people leader skills, even less engaged teams, a complete waste of time of those who did apply, frustrated highly qualified/high performing applicants not in the "inner circle" who knew it would be a waste of time to even apply, and loss of high performers. This is the stuff that causes lawsuits.

The whole "preferred candidate" process should only be used for promotions where someone is deserving of going from manager to sr. manager or sr. manager to director in the same team/department which will add or change their current duties. It shouldn't be used to preferentially hire for backfills or to create new PL roles that are not really necessary "but for" wanting a certain person to be a PL vs. IC. This is the point, not the process but how that process is being used. If it is a true opening/backfill and/or a newly created role, a real req should be submitted for the normal length of time w/ the normal hiring/interview process with no "preferred candidate."

@OP

job hugging + cronyism= stagnant, toxic culture

Leadership fully supports this formula as long as they stay untouchable.

From the WSJ posted on here, seems to be common across Corporate America.

@1xp true, but at the same time they’re staying busy hunting down anyone they SUSPECT might be questioning their power. Retaliation seems to be their #1 strength, even higher than Significance.

Sadly, these ‘supposed’ narcissists will remain in their MD roles, collecting their fat pay checks, promoting their friends and laughing at all of us while NOTHING is said or done to address their behaviour. Promote rock stars and stellar employees?! Please.

Just seeing this today and it makes me feel even more disheartened about how bad things have gotten…

@1fx same

I never understood what “preferred candidate” meant on job postings but now I get it.

Wow this thread is really interesting. It confirms a lot of things I’ve been feeling but wasn’t sure if I was overthinking.

I really appreciate the insights people have shared here.

People are focused on the job posting, but that was never really the issue. What hit a nerve for many of us is the pattern. The same names, the same circles, the same quiet favoritism that has been happening for a long time. This post just gave voice to what others have been feeling but were afraid to say.

What has felt even worse is the reaction. Not curiosity, not reflection, just anger. That response speaks volumes. It makes people retreat instead of engage. It confirms what the post was trying to say in the first place.

This was never about one role. It was about a culture where speaking up feels risky and staying silent is the safest option.

Everyone blaming HR. You think they like this nonsense. The root cause is it’s a legal requirement. They have these processes to ensue compliance with state laws.

@15s Inline promotions are rare, but they still happen. Whether it’s technically through a posted requisition or not, the concern remains the same. This is about favoritism, or at the very least, the perception of it.

When multiple people notice the same patterns with certain leaders, the response should be reflection, not defensiveness.

But that assumes there is a willingness to self-reflect. Too often, concerns are treated as personal attacks instead of valid feedback. That is not leadership. That is ego. Narcissism tends to shut down dialogue before it even begins.

@ad You're missing the point. "Inline promotions" do not exist anymore. Everything has to be done through a req. I'm sorry that your feelings and pronouns are offended by this process, but it is what it is. As a PL I'm going to promote my people that deserve to be promoted by whatever process is required. You're welcome to apply to the internal req as well, but there's a high probability you aren't going to get it because the whole reason it was opened in the first place is because I have a rock star on my team that deserves the promotion and has the experience to back it up.

@a9 it also happens with external candidates post in openings for less than a day under the guise it’s open to all - but now - to give postings to former colleagues rather than promoting from within.

I just hope the person(s) referenced use this as an eye opener.

Didn’t this same MD (supposebly) get called out or do something very similar to this previously?

@a9 the issue is that these promotions happen so exclusively when other employees that have demonstrated exceptional work and have exceeded expectations according to the parameters of a given group, they have been told that there are no resources available for promotions, or that they need to do something extra in order to get closer. That second part, the expectation of doing more when you already are, seems more like a dismissal than a respectful blunt answer of “sorry, we appreciate your work, but we can’t do that at the moment.” But even then, when you see a job posting open up for someone in particular, when it was originally understood that there were no resources, those proven employees will feel betrayed. I already hear someone in HR and in executive management saying, “That’s just how it is.” To that I say, “Ok then, don’t be a snowflake to the criticism then.”

@a9
So, in a lot of these cases referred about this specific MD is that stellar performer = friend/sycophant/idolizer

@a9 you sound like someone in the know, so can you explain why HR created this sh---y process in the first place & why in-line promotions aren’t supported anymore?

Genuinely curious since you seem to have the inside track! #WantToKnowMore

@a9 blame HR all you want, that’s exactly what leadership hides behind, creating a process to make favoritism look legit.

If someone’s truly doing an exceptional job then give them the inline promotion they deserve & people will respect it. But when you give promotions/preferred candidate status mostly to your travel buddies and besties it looks shady. The only people fooled are the ones defending it. #TheMoreYouKnow

This is normal and not a malicious thing. Whenever someone is promoted for doing an exceptional job and operating continuously above their job level HR requires a position be opened and that person be hired into the role. This is a normal procedure and how all promos work. So yes, there are internal openings with someone already in mind because they are promo openings. Blame HR and their sh---y processes. Don’t blame the hiring manager that just wants to promote a stellar performer. #TheMoreYouKnow

STILL TRUE!