Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

Welp I’m walking away

Long story short.
I’m a long time team member.
While I’ve been laid off 3xs and retained; always had a positive attitude, I find it’s best to move on. For the second time I have been interviewed and hired by a manager I liked; when I was restructured under someone else that didn’t want to manage that’s when things got fishy - the first time I had a lazy, apathetic joke of a manager who “self admitted” they didn’t like managing anyone because they “aren’t as good as they are”. At least the first time the manager I was hired for gave me a heads up.

This time it happened again, albeit no manager giving me a heads up. Imma ride this and bounce.

by
| 3055 views | | 14 replies (last June 7, 2022) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1h3qf309

14 replies (most recent on top)

They could save a lot of "costs" if they would just stop doing all the activities that they keep getting busted and fined for.

How much have we paid in fines over the years, and how many jobs would that have saved???

Its always the people on the bottom that suffer. Ms 8isGreat is probably sipping a fufu drink out of a golden goblet on her own private yacht at this very moment.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4aee+1h3qf309

Back when the spans and layers layoffs hit the process was:

1- targeted job title
2- of those in job title who was not in a hub
3- performance

HR did the choosing and went to the 1 up manager to make a case of they chose someone who was more critical in practice than on paper.

They are still using these markers now with the exception of HR getting feedback. There have been meetings where they actually discussed eliminating entire job families and everyone in them. Sanity has prevailed so far but they are getting more and more aggressive about finding ways to lower costs.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1bus+1h3qf309

The manager is not involved in the decision for legal purposes. The myth of eliminating the bottom 10 percent is wrong.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1znh+1h3qf309

When layoffs hit my team. The manager and the +1 didn't know until the day before. The +2 knew further in advance but had no say.

Some team with HR just gave names of who is being laid off.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1otg+1h3qf309

Under Rubb-r Chucky's regime, yes, only the very high ups know ahead of time.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1wcm+1h3qf309

Not here and not these new layoffs under Charlie. Many direct managers were not aware until the day of. I know of a few managers that were really pi---d on who was chosen. Yes, someone knows, but it's usually a level or two up. If someone would work with the managers, they would have chosen the appropriate people instead of this game of Russian roulette

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fjv+1h3qf309

@eyc+1h3qf309, I don't believe that to be true. Managers usually do know who's going. The two times I was laid off, once at another corp. and the second layoff here, the managers definitely knew.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tnb+1h3qf309

This is a nothing post. Just some passive aggressive posturing and nothing more.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kql+1h3qf309

Managers don't usually give you a heads up on layoffs. They act as if they know nothing, but most times they do.
At least you were retained all of those times. Looks like it's time to move on now to greener pastures.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tne+1h3qf309

You’ll be back, for a fourth time

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @aoz+1h3qf309

I don't think your manager may have even known about your lay off. Sometimes, the managers are just as surprised

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @eyc+1h3qf309

If a company lays me off I would not come back. I rather move on

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @csz+1h3qf309

Can't understand how bad managers seem to thrive in WF. So much toxicity here.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @oth+1h3qf309

Go for it!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @zhd+1h3qf309

Post a reply

: