Thread regarding U.S. Bank layoffs

Hubs Based Geographically

Companies that operate with a hub-based workforce model should align their teams geographically rather than scattering small numbers of employees across multiple states. When the majority of a department or function is concentrated in a primary hub, it makes operational, financial, and collaborative sense to place the entire team in that same location instead of maintaining one or two employees in various other states.

First, collaboration and communication improve significantly when teams are centralized. Even in remote environments, employees located within the same region or hub tend to share similar, leadership structures, and workplace culture. When teams are spread out as “one here and two there,” those individuals often become disconnected from the main group, making collaboration less efficient and creating unnecessary communication barriers.

Second, centralizing teams supports stronger leadership and accountability. Managers can more effectively support employees when their teams are structured in a clear and cohesive way. When a handful of employees are placed outside the main hub, they may receive less consistent oversight, mentorship, and integration into team processes. Bringing employees together in the dominant hub location creates clearer reporting structures and stronger team cohesion.

Third, there are cost and operational efficiencies. Supporting employees in multiple states often introduces additional administrative complexity such as payroll compliance, state-specific regulations, and HR management differences. Consolidating teams in the primary hub reduces these complexities and allows resources to be focused where the company already has the strongest infrastructure.

Finally, a hub model should actually function like a hub. The purpose of a hub is to concentrate talent, resources, and collaboration in one central location. Maintaining scattered employees across various states contradicts the very concept of a hub structure and weakens the benefits that such a model is intended to provide.

For these reasons, companies that promote a hub-based workforce strategy should ensure that teams are largely located within the same primary hub rather than distributing small numbers of employees across multiple states where they operate in isolation from the core teams.


by
| 1221 views | | 15 replies (last March 6) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kjz7572b

15 replies (most recent on top)

Why should my career growth be stunted because I’m not in a desirable HUB? We should go back to the old days of just doing our jobs and have the MC keep quiet.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @e0+1kjz7572b

@c1 it won’t be different but they are playing with fire and will get burned. Too bad it will be too late to save this sinking ship.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cf+1kjz7572b

@bs they literally transitioned into a more flexible location strategy 10 years ago because they couldn't find talent in our footprint. Idk why they think this will be different now.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c1+1kjz7572b

OP, I'm going to keep this short.

It is 2026 not 1996. Keep up with the times.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bt+1kjz7572b

One of the many way USB sabotages itself is by hiring strictly based on location instead merit. Several departments have gone downhill after laying off knowledgeable, experienced, and talented employees and replacing them with cheaper id--ts that are within 30 miles of a specific hub. It always catches up eventually. Hopefully the damage can be repaired when they do finally wake up.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bs+1kjz7572b

WAY to long of a post. You forgot to ask your AI bot to write a concise point of view on perceived advantages of a hub strategy. So your AI bot tried to impress you by writing an excessively lengthy, verbose, repetitive essay which keeps making the same point over and over. Can you even write on your own? Or at least edit or ask your bot to edit what it wrote for you?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b2+1kjz7572b

OP - the world has changed. It's not the 1990s anymore where things work the way you describe. Leaders who actually have leadership skills learned years ago how to manage a geographically dispersed workforce. Those who require everyone be within 20 feet of their office in cubicles in order to collaborate, lead, inspire, and motivate their team have not grown their leadership skill set in decades. They are the ones who need to be gone, not the workforce who learned a long time ago how to collaborate with their teammates using modern communications technology. The MC may not want to hear this, but they are very stuck in old, outdated ways of working and need to adapt or be gone.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b1+1kjz7572b

What's a great way to combat climate change and cost of living crisis, two looming major global issues at the same time? Remote work.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @at+1kjz7572b

Wrong. Unless you are customer facing or do work with physical assets that requires your presence, if you cant figure out how to work without being co-located then you need to find a different line of work. Remote work is not new. What’s new is the weirdly counter productive requirements from the bank for physical presence in specific locations.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ar+1kjz7572b

On the flip side that limits career advancement opportunities. You now have to be lucky by being in the right city to get a new role in the bank if you want to.

And any of you who can't adapt and learn how to work on a geographically dispersed team means you learned nothing during covid. We all worked at home and we did it successfully. You are already going to have to do that with contractors soon.

Some of us were able to thrive and get a lot more done and still effectively collaborate with our teams over the application called teams.

Yes you might be able to collaborate really well and everybody's in the same office but you can still collaborate effectively, maybe not quite AS good but still quite effectively, being spread out. I have over 10 years experience here at the back including before covid doing just that.

Bottom line is there a trade-offs and the ability to apply for any job in the company if I'm working a hub now, gives me plenty of options. I have plenty of evidence showing that this does work fine.

Workforce in the 21st century, get used to it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ah+1kjz7572b

They are not wrong for utilizing AI to write a clear and concise statement US Bank encourages the use of AI.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ag+1kjz7572b

@ad AI slop that's very accurate

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ae+1kjz7572b

Exactly. My team is spread over 5 hubs. 8 people are still remote!!!! Makes no sense why you still have remote and force people to to come to office and sit by themselves.

On my floor, we have 6 different departments, most have team and managers that are in other hubs.

The few people that are in same department, they don’t sit to talk to each other. lol

Makes no sense

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ab+1kjz7572b

This is 1,000,000% accurate. Many of us want WFH nonetheless because it matches our lifestyle needs, but RTO may be easier to swallow if folks were actually going to an office to collaborate with their team. Pushing RTO to send employees to an office with none of their team is ridiculous.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a3+1kjz7572b

Post a reply

: