What are your thoughts?
51 replies (most recent on top)
Wow the entitlement in the questions about asking for compensation was out of this world. Makes me wonder WTF we did before the pandemic?
Hope yall find new jobs cause this is the quiet layoff without severance.
Good luck and may the odds be ever in your favor.
Hahahahah
@bf yes - today it’s called family security insurance. And I think it could be packed by company equity for sure in some form of a mutual fund. However, family security insurance is driven at the state level since the federal government is in no way or has any political to get it implemented. Therefore states have implemented various forms of family security insurance, but commoditize it and create an actual product that would be innovative.
@b5 we are also share holder (ESPP plans) let’s all sale when the price reaches 100.00 - or whatever arbitrary number. freak them out a bit. He’ll just complete neutral engagement ratings something to show you where your unified but it could be done.
I haven't read this point yet. Maybe someone said it, and there is the point that we all went in the office 5 days a week before COVID, But.... after we went home to work in 2020 we handled the largest trading day Schwab had seen ( still haven't surpassed it), all from home. Some of you may have remembered the Game Stop, AMC, etc Market Storm. Times changed, obviously Schwab CLevel is resistant to change. And not just regarding WFH. I think they may still have rotary phones on their desks.
There are some really great points in this thread but can you guys seriously not form an original thought without the help of ChatGPT?
@eq you are seething lmao
I rest my case. Lol. Thank you for making this assessment easy. Life is going to be perpetually rough for ya and I thank my good lord above that I don’t actually know uou. Bless your heart.
@e5 you wrote the poem didn’t you
@aw Ricks came across exactly as he is as person, when you think he cares - that is a corporate business facade
It is hilarious reading the obsequious nonsense populated by --and I don't use this phrase often-- absolute bootlickers in this topic. Your servility is honestly embarrassing, I don't know how many times you have to be bent over and railed before you people locate your spine. In response to those mentioning the RTO is the rule and we must follow, no sh-t Sherlock, no one is debating whether or not they have the authority to make the decision. The aggrieved on this site are protesting because it's a completely pointless decision aimed at reducing head count because these reprobates are trying to save money and ship even more of our labor over to India, all of this despite record profits. Also, the guy saying that 3 or 4 days has always been the standard? Yeah dude, again thanks for reminding us all that the sky is blue, we all are 14 and had no idea what the world was like 20 years ago. Thankfully you'll be surprised to learn we have a new invention known as the internet, and we've functioned for years working remotely, with some areas working entirely remotely and functioning just fine.
At this point, I find the behavior of the obedient "take it or leave it" lackeys here to be even more infuriating than the plainly malevolent but predictable decisions of the nepobabies in charge of this operation. I don't know what they put in the water, but the lengths some of you will go to in order to anonymously fellate a group of people that hate you and would delete you if they could save one single penny is embarrassing.
@b2 Spoken by a loser that is happy to pollute the air driving into work so he/she can se-----y harass women/men until finally their pea brain snaps and they shoot up the place. Funny, NONE of that s**t happens when people work from home.
@b9 actually I can name several off the top of my head that friends/family are working. Unfortunately they don't have positions open
@bs aren't you on here too ret*ard?
@ap most rational response I’ve ever seen on here. I applaud you.
I have second hand embarrassment reading these completely irrational and hysterical replies. Cringe doesn’t really describe it. I hope they seek therapy. I struggle to comprehend adults are on here. Eeek.
@bf Your thought process is so toxic, it should be a respectful two way street. While yes, employers are paying you for services but you’re not under a control relationship. That’s an odd and toxic way to think about it.
@ax next time you see me in office, say hi :)
@bf ???
Jobs undoubtedly provide financial stability and fulfill basic needs. However, they can also contribute to physical and mental health issues that many individuals face. Stress, anxiety, and chronic conditions such as diabetes are increasingly common among employees, often as a result of workplace pressures, long hours, and poor work-life balance.
The toll on health can be significant, leading to high medical costs later in life. Studies suggest that people suffering from work-related stress may experience long-term health complications, which not only affect their quality of life but also result in substantial healthcare expenses. As a result, the initial financial rewards of a job may be outweighed by the costs incurred in managing these health conditions over time.
This highlights the need for organizations to foster healthier work environments that prioritize employee well-being, ultimately benefiting both the individual and the company in the long run.
wonder if there's a way to show them people have power too
The answer is no, until there is a decisive shift away from the pervasive addiction to debt. The United States has never fully been free from systemic forms of control—where once chains bound people in slavery, now the burden of debt acts as a modern-day constraint.
Place which have Low Debt have assertive population, where There is HIGH debt population is dorsal.
@aw Even just the idea that 6 months is enough time has his age showing. Daycare wait lists can be a couple years long and they have gone up significantly in price.
@bf ???
go to a place where you’ll get paid and not get controlled? As long as someone pays you to work for them you need to follow their rules. Simple concept. Get it through your head.
It is the inherent nature of employment that the entity providing the job often remains in a position of power. However, the critical question lies in whether employers can achieve financial stability through flexibility, while still ensuring that job seekers maintain a reasonable work-life balance and mental well-being.
These figures are rough estimates, but they underscore a significant concern. Occupational diseases cost the U.S. economy approximately $250 billion annually, while mental health-related issues add around $300 billion in lost productivity and medical expenses each year.
This situation also implies that the income individuals earn today may ultimately be redirected toward healthcare costs related to job-induced conditions in the future. Given this, a potential solution could be for investment firms like Schwab to create mutual funds designed specifically to help employees prepare for future medical expenses resulting from work-related illnesses, including both physical and mental health conditions.
Do you think such a fund would be a worthwhile investment, and would you be inclined to contribute to it if offered?
This MF would be great for you.
wonder if there's a way to show them people have power too
Answer is No, here is why
The key factors for stability are debt management and the presence of employment opportunities. In situations where there is no debt and no employment, chaos tends to prevail, as seen in regions like the Middle East and Africa. Conversely, when there is both debt and job availability, a level of stability can be achieved, albeit without the transformative change that typically accompanies revolution. A post-World War II example of this would be the Western world, where the combination of these factors led to a period of relative stability without significant upheaval.
Just think when you have brought any major thing you brought without debt.
@a4 you actually believe that? He was i intentionally vague just like the "cant predict the future" comment on 5 days a week question
@aw can you name one company you want to work for that allows you to work remote whenever, doesn’t question your once a week mental sickness day requests and coddles you like your adopted mom does in her basement?
@b5
We can do that but then they will expand their office in Hyderabad. They will be all happy when the people in the Hyderabad office say "yes Schwab, will do that" to everything then they just do their own thing. I will be moving my money outside of Schwab then I'll laugh when all the problems start to show up.
@b3 wonder if there's a way to show them people have power too 🤔
@b1 go to a place where you’ll get paid and not get controlled? As long as someone pays you to work for them you need to follow their rules. Simple concept. Get it through your head.
4 or 5 days in the office was the norm and it’ll always be the norm.
In certain professional environments, being called into the office may not always be about collaboration, problem-solving, or contributing to organizational goals. Sometimes, these interactions are less about productive engagement and more about asserting control — a subtle reminder of hierarchy, authority, and the structure within which you operate.
When summoned to the office under these circumstances, the meeting’s true intent is not to exchange ideas or seek input. Rather, it serves as a demonstration of who holds power, reinforcing the idea of who is in charge and reminding you of your place within the organizational framework. In these situations, the purpose is not teamwork or innovation, but the subtle reaffirmation of control.
This kind of power dynamic can be both disempowering and demotivating, as it diminishes the value of your time, presence, and contributions. Instead of fostering an environment of mutual respect and collaboration, the interaction becomes a performance of dominance, underscoring the imbalance that may exist in workplace relationships.
Understanding these dynamics is important. Recognizing when you are being called upon not for meaningful engagement but as a reminder of your position can help you navigate such environments more effectively. While you may not always be able to change the system, awareness of this power structure allows you to manage your response and interactions with greater clarity and confidence.
From home, you can how ever you want but in office it may cost :)
I’m a people leader who comes to the office, and I just got more flexibility on my days in the office each week, more flexibility in my remote weeks each year, and more materials than I have been able to read to help me get my team ready.
These mo--ns can’t even get intentional cruelty right.
4 or 5 days in the office was the norm and it’ll always be the norm.
Until the 1920s, horse-drawn carriages were the primary mode of transport—so why not consider using one today? Why do we rely so heavily on motor vehicles?
Covid proved that you can work from anywhere in service industry.
If schwab or matter of shake any company want save , tell people working x days from home take a x amount as pay cut.
Mark my word lot of people will do.
The transition to modern transportation reflects broader societal changes, many of which also influence how we structure daily life. One could argue that the 9-to-5 work schedule, coinciding with daylight hours and often spent among people with whom we have no personal connection, serves more than just economic purposes. It keeps individuals occupied, limits time for deep reflection, and arguably reduces opportunities for collective critical thinking or societal upheaval.
This raises important questions about how modern systems are designed—not just for productivity, but potentially for social control and emotional isolation.
@ae bye!
You gen z or a or whatever are all so big mad! Be glad Schwab gave us 6 months to figure it out. Gives you time to find a remote job in Grenada or Haitis. No one cares. They can set company policies however they want to. You don’t own Schwab and never will. 4 or 5 days in the office was the norm and it’ll always be the norm. Cook up a pandemic if you want to work remote again. Don’t like the policy? Quit. There are many others who need jobs.
@OP Rick is not good “unrehearsed”. His answers during Q&A came across as flippant and tone deaf. Nobody cares that he had to get up at 4:00 AM. What Schwab is doing with 4-day RTO is a nonsensical slap in the face to hard-working employees who juggle work and family while making Schwab successful. Schwab has not been family-friendly for awhile now. And they should be ashamed at how they are treating those they originally hired as telecommuters. There is absolutely no benefit to going from 3 to 4 days in office aside from angering the very people you depend on to provide the services to your much beloved clients. Employees are clients too. Good job making your employees feel trapped and undervalued, but at least you can laugh about it.
Uninspiring Fake Leaders.
@ap Those here know plans won't change. The beatings will continue until morale worsens. They know that they are no longer professionals or family. They are cogs. That's tough to accept, especially when the company claimed they were hired for intelligence, capability and culture. Let people vent. They've earned that.
RTO? Everyone should be furious, particularly those who made a billion dollar deal successful through blood, sweat and tears. The message? It doesn't matter. You don't matter. After all that, we're going to increase your costs and waste your time. Your raise won't match inflation.
Maybe we have tens-of-thousands who claim to be fine with soul su-king commutes. Few really are and many good with a commute are motivated to escape a terrible spouse, noisy kids or loneliness. That doesn't change the intentional cruelty, absolute unsmartness or lack of need. If they don't need people, lay them off. Don't pollute the neighborhood while st-----g your ego.
I was appalled at Rick’s tone deaf and flippant responses. He was even laughing at some and making reactions so people in the audience would laugh. These are real questions people are asking to make tough decisions about their financial future and he laughs? Just rude.
@ap do you understand that’s the point of this site? For people to vent their frustrations. If you don’t like it, you don’t have to read it.
I am not a fan of the changes they announced yesterday, I didn’t like a lot of Rick’s responses today (I don’t care that a millionaire gets up early for work), and I’m sympathetic about what a lot of people are going to go through. But the tantrums on this site are embarrassing. Some of the questions today at the town hall were embarrassing too.
We have crotchety old school people at our company who think and say very unfair things about remote work and remote workers, most of which I completely disagree with, but these meltdowns on this site validate their biases. You come off like entitled babies, and I bet they hope you quit, not because you’re remote, but because they see how you act. You are free to quit and find a better job that fits your lifestyle! If they pay less, you get to weigh the trade-offs. That is normal.
We have tens of thousands of people who have no problem going to work in the office and they see how you are wetting your pants over this. One of you weirdos even wrote a poem. We have a lot of mature and responsible remote workers here, and you are reinforcing the worst assumptions that people make about coddled remote workers.
If I was Rick or the EC and I saw these comments, do you think I’m going to reverse the plans?
“wow, these people are melting down, they’re going to stick it to us by responding to the glint survey honestly like we ask them to, and several of them really liked a poem that one of the pants-wetters wrote. I think we should undo our announcement!”
@a4 You believe that?! :0
Bridge for sale! We’ve got a bridge for sale!
He mentioned that we already get yearly cost of living adjustments and merit raises so we won’t be getting an increase in pay for this. Where???? Merit raises were significantly lower the last two years to “avoid layoffs” and I’ve only seen 1 cost of living adjustment in the last several years. Merit raises have been between 1%-5% which hardly does anything.