Are there any? We have in writing from a manager that there were forced stack rankings. WFC doing bad faith IMs to avoid layoff severance. Anyone talked to a lawyer yet? Our group would like to join.
18 replies (most recent on top)
I'd join one for the forced RTO cr-p.
@11d I'm sure if there is a class action lawsuit, they will be eager to try and contact you.
Is there a way to join? I am very interested, and definitely want to participate in the class action.
i'd join in and i'd wager the other older folks from my team who were laid off would too. in the displacement letter, only a few people displaced were under 40 with the majority over 50. i have zero doubt "The Firm" is targeting the older people and those with medical accommodations.
I really wish someone would do one about location strategy and the medical accommodation process and the validity over the miles radius.
And how all of a sudden a protected health condition magically becomes invalid because of where someone lives, and that if it's permanent, they can just on a whim say it no longer applies despite historical medical documentation on file.
hahahahahaha
usually when firms get caught w the appearance of very bad bad faith there will be an internal investigation
will be quite a payday for outside counsel when a company aint got their cr-p in order. they will be laughing for yrs
@g3 yeah, then why did GE and Microsoft abandon it? Why did Microsoft suddenly start innovating again after a long period of stagnation and sh---y products?
@as, this is economic darwinism whether any of us like it or not. The stacked ranking (forced distribution) is designed to save the most dollars by terminating those who would otherwise qualify for severance. And it pits employees in similar workgroups against each other, forcing them to fight for a finite number of acceptable performance ratings to avoid being cut.
You can argue the long term benefit, but the market allows it to exist- and some have built a career on promoting it. Not a single executive has lost bonus dollars because of it. So, the economic incentives are clear.
Stacked rankings are very commonplace. Nothing illegal about them. Firing people for no reason whatsoever however? Thats shady as all get out.
strategy is too far out of the bag they wont be able to single out the whistleblower. people took notes. there are likely memos, people in HR who are not cool with the plan. It's one giant pretext and i wouldnt want to be in legal when the sh-t hits the fan (after midterms)
count me in.
not long ago, We were discussing the similar topic here. Seems like employee signed arbitration agreement.
So may not be able to do the class action.
Unless it is discrimination against like older people, non indians, etc.
need to talk to a lawyer about that what you mentioned. maybe there is another angle.
but did we sign the Arbitration agreement? I signed Lot of documents but never really know.what i am.signing
@ap this is not capitalism in action. It is failed management and it ultimately harmed the companies who embraced it. Its good for shorter term stock gains, but long term it does pretty considerable damage. It has been well studied.
Would be fun to see, considering we're trained every year to worry about "reputational risk" to the WF brand. Being sued for discriminatory firing is about as big a reputational risk as you can have.
Jack Welch publicly pressure tested all of this years ago while running GE. He wrote books and made a brand out of it. This is capitalism in action.
@aa
I really don't think WF cares about the lawsuit(s). They are so big, and the money coming in is so large that whatever happens is a drop in the bucket for them.
I concur however, when I was laid off, it seemed like those who left were older than those who stayed.
There are many historical examples of yank and rank systems leading to lawsuits based on discrimination. If history is any indicator, it's only a matter of time. The outcomes of the lawsuits have been mixed, but I think even in cases where the company won the legal battle, my guess is they still beared pretty significant costs.
Management school teaches this as an anti-pattern, but for whatever reason it seems to be en vogue again. I assume c-suite knows the risk/cost, but figures they will smooth it over in time. It may take a few years to normalize the culture again and a company the size of Wells Fargo can likely absorb the shorter term fallout.
Pointless
I am in for that if someone sue