Makes you wonder if the goal is just to burn the place down. Specialists, veterans, people with actual skills, the ones who held teams together - they're all getting cut. Any leadership that cared about the future would be doing everything to keep them.
10 replies (most recent on top)
@2me This might be one of the most accurate posts on here. Its gotten worse since going into office. Fine we are in the office but when that happened group think and tribal stuff took place. And then those promoted with little experience make decisions they decided optics were more important than actual work...probably cause a lot of those in management had very little knowledge what they were doing.
I still see people trying to hold on, its like a bad stock get out now. These people think its going to be similar to the one year they liked their job.
Funny, managers always seem to have a “trusted circle” — same lunch table, same jokes, same gossip, same people expertly performing the art of looking busy.
Meanwhile, the hardworking ones quietly deliver the actual work, get micromanaged to death, and somehow become the first targets during cuts. The a-s-kissers? Protected, promoted, and praised for “visibility” and being a “culture fit.”
Somewhere along the way, corporate success stopped being about contribution and became a loyalty program. Deliverables get you more work. Politics gets you protection.
@zq They should probably let go of smokers cause they leave their desk all the time. I would agree in the past many were low performers or didn't care, but this time a lot of top performers were let go and it appeared more based on who follows orders and doesn't question anything than who can get the job done. There are still many in production environments who can't get their job done in a 10 hour day but are still there because they look like they are working.
If you have someone getting their job done easily wouldn't you want to know why or question those that are taking a long time to get very little done. It seems to be a lack of any real leadership, but probably cause many in management couldn't do that job to begin with. They like to judge but not be judged and Monday morning quarterback.
@zq I wouldn’t recommend resting on your laurels here. Anybody can have assignments pulled away from them and have their relevance decreased outside of their control. It’s good to make sure you are working on relevant assignments as much as you can, but be prepared to get that text message too.
@zq If that guy was meeting all his goals in a limited time, that sounds like bad management, but I’m sure the manager is still around.
Except in the case last year where some decided not to move back after the return-to-office mandate, everyone I know who has been let go, earned it. They were the bottom performers, or as the one person I know let go in this last round, failed to work full days.
They are monitoring computer usage and this guy just didn't work. He would hit minimum production goal early in the day, and then just stop working. Even in office, I would see him sitting in lounge areas for an hour at a time. He'd sit back down at his desk for 10-15 minutes and then be gone again. He was pretty good at what he did get done but he just wasn't working.
I've been here for 20 years and for far too long Fannie rarely fired anyone and people got complacent. I think it's good to put a little scare into people again.
@fn at the end of the day, FM doesn't really need top performers. The capital markets machine will continue cranking out MBS's and as long as there are a handful of semi-competent people, FM will be fine. As long as American homebuyers are no longer the focus, then creativity, intelligence, ethics, diversity, opinions, etc. are not needed. Just a few people who make FM look good on paper.
@ez there are plenty of mediocre folks that coasted thru titles and merit increases over 10-15-20 years of their tenure. It's not really any indication of anything.
Eventually they will be left with only "yes people" and are losing too much talent. They don't want anyone with new or fresh ideas, just those that can show "cool" looking charts or other pointless spreadsheets that make them look important. Once they get managers with nobody reporting to them the bloated management structure will fall. Better to get out early before the ship sinks then to be there and trying to keep bailing water.
@OP I think the top performers tend to be those with higher salaries and bonuses (from good ratings over the years), and that's why they get cut...Fannie only cares about its financial bottom line at the end of the day (and yeah, cutting good performers is d-mb because the company will fall apart...but that's what happens when a nepo baby grifter is illegally running the place).