Any rumors at all? I seriously doubt they’ll limit it to just redundancies. I expect they’ll go after experienced, skilled veterans too, because that’s what everyone does. Knowing your job often comes at a cost. I’ve yet to see layoffs, here or anywhere else, done strategically. It’s always crude, led by numbers, never real planning.
13 replies (most recent on top)
@bd - @am has a point. Let’s not get emotional and make it a St Louis vs remote thing.
As a hiring leader (based in St Louis), particularly when looking for specialized skills (e.g. Salesforce), I always find that I get better talent when the position is open to remote. It is not that remote candidates are cheaper. In fact, if they are on the coasts, they command a higher salary (in line with the cost of living there).
Again, this is not a knock against St Louis…. Simply saying that casting a wider net gets you better talent particularly for sought-after skills.
@am So they can pay below market wages in exchange for working remote. Full remote positions are essentially extinct in the financial services industry. Almost every company makes all employees work in office at least a few days a week. Edward Jones is the outlier and likes hiring full remote workers because they’re cheaper. No other explanation makes sense.
They are absolutely going after experienced people. They know newly hired, lower paid widget-punchers can do the same job. The money saved is worth the annoying inadequacies.
@am this started during covid, silly. Remote became a thing at that point. Remote is bout not coming into an office. The folks in NY were hired there due to proximity to banks and NY relationships
@ah As a blanket statement for the entire firm, that is untrue. I work in an area of the firm that requires specialized knowledge, advanced education, and ideally some good experience. I assure you, there is a talent shortage in St. Louis in my particular area.
@ah - if talent shortage in St Louis was not an issue, why would the firm hire remote folks?
@ad talent here has never really been the problem.
I have talented team members all over the country. They are hard working and deserve to continue their employment just as much as everyone else. You're always going to hear gross generalizations and projection from bitter people like @ab.
Having lurked on this board for most of this evolution, it appears there's been an uptick of negative/troll posts and vote brigading recently. Along with some very obvious posts from overseas. Try not to let this noise get to you. The firm needs to make changes, but no sane associate is cheering this on. And the "leadership" satire posts are just chumming the water.
Take care of yourself and those at EJ that support you!
@ab This feels a bit too personal. What’s going on here? Is this the Hunger Games? St. Louis is the culture and we should remember that, the city is not exactly overflowing with talent. That’s why they started hiring outside of St. Louis
Typically, you go after the dead weight and people that leaders have been afraid to manage because they shy away from controversy. We all know there is dead weight walking these halls. I’d also hit as many of the remote folks as possible.
@a5 likely won’t be remote specific. I wouldn’t be surprised if both remote and local are impacted. It’s really the roles. I also wonder if it’s at the GPs saying we want X amount of these roles then maybe looking to see if 2 have same and 1 is meets and 1 is exceeds. They might want to keep one or the other or they might look to see which one is paid more. Not sure.
@a5 I understand the reasoning behind this, but it feels contradictory at the same time. A lot of the new talent is working remotely or away from St. Louis, which goes against everything they've been doing.
I'm surprised nothing has leaked yet. No one has brought this up, but I think one of the impacted groups may be remote workers who live in high cost of living areas (or remote workers in general).