Thread regarding U.S. Bank layoffs

Yeah well my "leader' is running around like a headless chicken while screaming PRIORITIES!!! on every little thing.

@dm EXACTLY

@mp that's really d-mb for everyone involved. More money just makes you a liability sometimes. It should just be performance.

@md "location and remote had zero to do with comp this year. It was all about the employees that were < midpoint + 10%. HR took control and did it for everyone. A formula was applied. Goals and differentiation were thrown out."

I am not opposed to paying people < midpoint + 10% more money to level them up. But it should not be at the expense of high performers who worked hard through out 2025 and exceeded their goals only to see the goal post move at the last moment. That is unfair practice which erodes trust. Watch how very few are going to perform extraordinarily in 2026 as they have lost trust.

@bd location and remote had zero to do with comp this year. It was all about the employees that were < midpoint + 10%. HR took control and did it for everyone. A formula was applied. Goals and differentiation were thrown out.

This comp cycle created some sleepless nights in our tech area. Not adjusting comp mids, little or no promotions and these restrictive rules meant managers had very little discretion to provide any merit. Next year it may just be prescribed because why bother allowing managers to enter with so many rules? Just tell us what it ‘should be’.

The only they they measure off of is voluntary attrition which is their measure of outside opportunity broadly. That was the mask off moment from GK. Your contributions don’t matter if the market is not providing you with outside opportunities, which it currently is not. Therefore nothing but bare minimum comp and merit.

Elliott spoke to a “rebound” in the TTUS surveys so if you feel strongly then it’s time to make those numbers go down.

@a1 true … it wasn’t always this way but is what it is.

Employees are told to speak with their managers, yet explicitly discouraged from asking HR how compensation was determined despite senior leadership stating that compensation this year is driven by location (remote vs. RTO), not performance.

There is no enterprise-wide policy that explains how compensation is applied fairly under this model. Official documentation repeatedly emphasizes pay-for-performance, while leadership simultaneously acknowledges that remote employees are placed in a lower compensation pool than RTO employees. When questions arise, employees are redirected back to HR, creating a circular process with no accountability or transparency.

The result is an endless loop: manager → HR → leadership messaging → manager again, with no clear answers or written standards. This is not a misunderstanding; it is a structural lack of clarity and intentionally done at that.

At some point, the more prudent approach may be to seek independent guidance, such as consulting an employment attorney, to understand what options exist. The current approach appears to rely on employees accepting these inconsistencies without challenge.

Elcio is a g-d@mn cl0wn puppet. He stuck to a bs script and gave exactly zero answers to the questions he responded to.

Irritated to no end on the "talk to your manager" response. It's such a cop out. Managers can't do jack about compensation because new directive locked everything down.

All MC members should be embarrassed by the toxic direction GK is steering the company. Grow a spine. Absolutely zero care for employees.

Do as little as possible, I will play their game. Don't care anymore and I'll give them exactly what they give me.

Don't worry, I'm sure GK's raise and bonus will be quite nice.

@aj my experience was caps in terms of % of staff that could get merit. So the budget was the same but needed to be distributed to a smaller percentage of people. makes you think about what they're trying to do.

@a4 what was the caps like 2% 3%?

It’s pretty clear to me that merit increases are going away in exchange for the 3-day in-office week staying in place for at least 2026. Not remotely close to a fair trade.

Agree with the post. I can’t even begin to tell you how impossible it was to enter what we felt our team members deserved. There was a very little of discretion permitted. Workday had system-enforced limits, a preset ceiling, a hard cap stop on compensation. This control was set at the enterprise compensation team level not from your manager or anyone in the management chain, and the process was much more rigid than in past years. Have mercy on your managers. This was very difficult and they are not to blame. And pushing for higher goals? Yes, again at the highest level they’ve given managers the directive and again set up Workday with boundaries and suggested wording we to use to set the goals along with specific criteria. Work harder and get paid less. It seems to be an epidemic across all major organizations. A leadership threat perhaps…do it or we will replace you with someone or something (AI) else!

For me, there was never any doubt that they don't give a sh-t about us. At least now that the job market su-ks and the economy stinks, the bank is openly expressing its hostility and disdain towards its employees. The facade is lifted now.

But honestly, isn't this the most honest the corporation has been about how it feels about employees? It's not full transparency, but at least we are closer to the truth. I agree that the lie feels better, but at least you know.