Thread regarding Citigroup Inc. / Citibank / Citi layoffs

WOW. This post is spot on, especially the title. Keep Jane if you want more of the same, and now here we are being told this layoff will stretch out over the span of 2 years.

rinse repeat, nothing changes

I see that the bonus payout will be delayed. At least Jane got her 23 million raise in pay.
Jane, the financial OG looking out for herself.

Yes, having DEI as the sole focus of the company for the past two years has really paid off. Now is the time we all lay back and reap those rewards.

CNBC: “ Citigroup disclosed Wednesday that it needed to build reserves by $1.3 billion because of its exposure to Argentina and Russia, and that it would post a $1.7 billion expense for a special FDIC assessment tied to the 2023 regional bank failures.”

Jane is clearly out of her depth. She had\has no vision. She was counting on the woke mentality to turn a profit and it did not work. As one poster put it:

DEI (diversity, equality and inclusion) is great but its not a huge selling point. The populous won’t flock to Citi based on just that alone. Constantly touting it as a win year after year, does not a constant solid revenue make. Have we learned that you need to provide something else to the public. You have to provide a unique or better service or product than your competitors.

The following scenario does not work on a small scale, so why would it work on a larger one. Scenario: you have a store and business is bad, so you put a sign up in your store front window that says “We are ESG friendly”. From that point on people just come in and give you money for no other reason than you are ESG friendly. This does not exist, it doesn’t work. Keep the diversity etc…and all that, but you have to have something else to offer the public. Has that been learned?

Other banks incorporate DEI as well but its not their ONLY selling point. I truly believe that Jane thought that people would just come running to Citi for that reason alone. I think she thought the social justice warriors of the world would rally to Citi as customers because of such. The reason I say that is because over the past few years, article after article, interview after interview, that sole subject is the main topic that’s Citi keeps bringing to the forefront of the discussion. An interviewer would ask another question, it’d be answered slightly and then the conversation intentionally steered back to DEI.

So, no true innovation or unique offerings to provide, fast forward and here we are.

She cut through the layers of management? not so much. She just replaced the MD. Got rid of 300 and replaced them with 304. So in Citi math, that’s a win!!!!!

if she's cutting through management layers that's a good thing because we all know how manager layers are inflated at almost every company with people that could literally sit at home for the year and achieve the same things they are achieving now.

Cutting through the lower end employees, I don't know. Judging by the posts I see, it seems that she's ramping up on technology but I don't know if that will be a good bet in the end.

And like someone else said, she might get axed too for whatever reason and this might end up being scrapped away with after people have already been laid off.

The stock price is higher but that’s usually the case of any company who announces a layoff. Declaring a layoff gives stock holders the impression that “you are serious about getting the budget under control”. Its another matter after the fact. Its a matter of not only having the stock price sustain but rebound from its losses since Jane took over.

She’s got a way to go as since she took over the stock price fell -38% in comparison to JPM which rose +41% during the same time period.

At @1ceg+1ptKOPWk :

Jane has turned Citi into a zombie bank with her as patient 0 of the infection.

Everyone seems to be forgetting that in August 2020 TEN, 10 Citi geniuses, 10 pairs of eyes looked at the US$900 Million wire transfer form BEFORE the free money was erroneously wired to Revlon's creditors. Citi was and is the laughing stock joke "bank" that gave away almost US$ One Billion Dollars! LOL! Of course, if that $900 Million was wired to my bank account, even as Severance, it would NOT be an error. I myself will volunteer to be Laidoff. LOL !

@kquu+1ptKOPWk she is in a token hire for citi. she is a token hire as citis ceo. She has no business in this position!!

@kquu+1ptKOPWk

How is someone with 19 years experience at Citi a token hire? Who else has the tenure and experience across the bank as her?

Not saying she is great, but genuinely curious because that is such a flippant statement to make.

I hope the board of director are paying attention as even more chaos unfolds.

I think she’ll be gone in a year or two.

vote against Jane in the board eections

She was a token hire, and this is what token hires do (create constant buzzword campaigns and virtue signaling exercises), because they never have any actual experience doing the job they were hired for.

Its time for Jane to go.

@ftfi+1ptKOPWk : I agree. I think a change is needed for sure at the top. Replace the old guard with some new fresh thinking. Someone NEW outside of Citi who can truly think outside the box. Cut through the BS and KNOWS what the customer wants and KNOWS what they need which aren’t always the same thing. Someone who can get rid of the internal obstacles.

there was an expense problem before as well. Its really due to a culture problem where the bank could employ a simple fix to a problem, but they over-manage and over-engineer every situation. This is stemmed from an incentive structure driven by only downside risk from failure and no upside to act like a business owner. For every person doing work, solving problems or driving revenue, there are 20 overseeing and challenging work being done. Have a capital problem? Solution is to have 4 groups beat the cr-p out of every scenario and take the most conservative approach. Have a conduct problem? Stand up a massive program, spend billions of dollars standing up functions that are useless just so you can say you've addressed everything. People will say, oh, its the regulators, which is partially true but Citi doesnt take a common sense approach to anything, which is a leadership problem at the top and with every control function. THAT is what is driving the cost problem. I dont like to see anyone out of a job, but the bank needs to start embedding a more commercial aspect to problems it faces.

The only layoff notice I’m interested in, is the layoff notice the board of directors give Jane.

The hiring spree was a requirement of the Consent Orders. Unfortunately, it happened when the labor market was tight, so Citi overpaid for MDs and Directors. Citi's expenses are too high. This has nothing to do with DEI and ESG, which JPM also promotes. No matter who is at the top, layoffs are going to happen.

amen

Jane is handling the layoffs 100% exactly like she’s handled the company growth which is…..poorly.

She created the bloat with massive unneeded hirings to push her political views, now to offset this bloat, people have to be let go.

https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/business/money-report/citigroup-begins-layoffs-as-part-of-ceo-jane-frasers-corporate-overhaul/3149353/?_osource=db_npd_nbc_wvit_eml_shr

Fraser is under pressure to improve Citigroup, which has been mired in a stock slump as headcount and expenses have ballooned in recent years. The CEO, who took over in March 2021, is at a pivotal moment as she faces deep investor skepticism that the bank can hit performance targets she outlined last year.

They want you to quit. Why make it easy on them. Get whatever money you can based on your years and move on from this mess. If you get to stay that's great but who's to say this doesn't happen again later in 2024 in Q3 or Q4?

Do Not voluntarily quit. Let the Citi train wreck pay you WARN money and Severence cause these hit the stock price. If employees are forced to go down the black hole, take Citi with you. Do Not go down alone. If Citi F's you, then F- Citi in turn.

Remember “if you don’t like it, then get off of the train.”

I guess we’ll see what Jane has in store for us this last two weeks of Nov.
I hope she’s pleased with her efforts as to how we got here.

It really is time for the board to step up. They tic’d the box and hired Jane. Now its time to hire someone for damage control. Time to bring in someone who can actually lead. Woman, man, bi, tri, guy, gal, US citizen or not, don’t care so long as they can actually help the company and get us out of this downward spiral.

DEI (diversity, equality and inclusion) is great but its not a huge selling point. The populous won’t flock to Citi based on just that alone. Constantly touting it as a win year after year, does not a constant solid revenue make. Have we learned that you need to provide something else to the public. You have to provide a unique or better service or product than your competitors.

The following scenario does not work on a small scale, so why would it work on a larger one. Scenario: you have a store and business is bad, so you put a sign up in your store front window that says “We are ESG friendly”. From that point on people just come in and give you money for no other reason than you are ESG friendly. This does not exist, it doesn’t work. Keep the diversity etc…and all that, but you have to have something else to offer the public. Has that been learned?

Other banks incorporate DEI as well but its not their ONLY selling point. I truly believe that Jane thought that people would just come running to Citi for that reason alone. I think she thought the social justice warriors of the world would rally to Citi as customers because of such. The reason I say that is because over the past few years, article after article, interview after interview, that sole subject is the main topic that’s Citi keeps bringing to the forefront of the discussion. An interviewer would ask another question, it’d be answered slightly and then the conversation intentionally steered back to DEI.

So, no true innovation or unique offerings to provide, fast forward and here we are. Stock right now is at a 52 week low and -40% lower since Jane stepped in as CEO.

To the board: So if a regular non upper echelon employee has performance issues for an extended time, they are put on a performance plan and are let go if not improved. Maybe its time for Jane to go. Let someone new step in, maybe even someone from outside of Citi. I’m sure Jane did the best she could from what she learned from her predecessor, but its just not good enough. We have to pay the price for failed leadership and the Citi brand perception is at an all time low.

If Jane is still CEO at the end of 2024, this will show the Board's incompetency and the Board must also be replaced !

If Jane is still CEO at Citi by the end of 2024, it’ll show the competency of the board. They should find someone outside of Citi if they need to. She has failed. I truly believe she does not know what to do and we are floundering as a bank. It’s clear that I’m not the only one that feel this way.

So true about Jane giving herself a raise after the stress of and job well done Laying people off ! Citi is FUBAR and a sinking ship, train wreck in slow painful motion. It would not surprise the world if Citi got broken up, pieces sold or merged entirely with another bank. Maybe Jpmorgan Chase, Goldman, Bank of America, even Wells ??

It would not surprise me at all if after the layoffs, as in many of them, she wedges in a raise in pay or bonus for herself for a job well done. You know the stress of laying people off has taken a toll on her, so an increase in compensation will be warranted in her eyes.

In the past, all banks were under stress, Citi then like now in comparison to other banks was at the bottom on performance. Other bank CEO’s took a reduction in pay whereas Jane gave herself a rather huge increase. It was done I’m assuming under the hopes that under her guidance, “good things are to come”. So here we are today and stock is -40% lower, low revenue and low profitability in comparison to those same banks.

The answer: Lay people off. THAT is her solution, THAT is her answer.
It’s so bad that she can’t even do that. She has to hire outside consultants to make determinations. Behold, this is your leadership.

Revlon…gee…you had to bring that one up. I forgot about that one.

Why bother looking at the Board who hired Jane& Company ? They belong to the same Club and protect each other's @$$e$. Same with Mike Corbat. He hired Club members Brad Hu and others who only F-ed Up Citi even more and then they all ended up leaving Citi. The Revlon error $900+ million free money Citi gave Revlon's creditors was the last straw so Corbat and his cronies got kicked out.

ESG is a waste..... not profitable

From another post that said it so well.

“One reason why Citi is cheap with salaries, bonuses and promotions is because Citi is Not profitable unlike Jpmorgan Chase and Goldman. A root cause to all or most of Citi's problems is low revenue or low profitability. These are only some of the metrics of which Citi is behind the competition.”

All I can say is that rings so true and the across the board failure lay solely at the CEO’s feet and the decisions or lack of decisions that they have made. No vision, no direction….its time for a change at the top.

Harsh but true words on this post. Like others have said, it would not surprise me if we had new management by early 2025. I think you’d hear a roar of applause.