Thread regarding Fidelity Investments layoffs

I'm the same person from the 1st and 3rd comments. Used my resources to get tons of pertinent information.

This was completely cost saving. From the roles that only had a person or two eliminated from each site, like phone supervisors, all of the chosen individuals were the longest tenured and therefore highest paid, some maxed out for the salary bracket. An exception that proves this is a newer supervisor who for personal reasons only worked 30 hours a week was also laid off. 30 hours qualifies as full time for full benefits, meaning they were proportionately much more expensive than a 40 hour rep who would have the extra work hours and therefore productivity to balance the cost of full benefits, which are extensive.

For other departments where it was more than a person or two, or an entire site's team for a function, some of these were long rumored because of regulatory changes (Fidelity was terrified of the DOL rule change, especially when everyone thought Hillary would win - this is just a fact and please do not turn this discussion into politics) and for the changing business environment, competitors, etc. Many sales roles affected.

The worst layoff I know of is a person who was specifically tapped and asked to manage a phone team, then 6 months later when Fidelity started all of this reorganization in motion they gave them the option to either be laid off or find another role as they were demoting a director of another group to that manager position to save money there as well. The now-demoted manager who is an amazing employee and had fully drank the Fidelity Kool-Aid before went to a sales job focused on rolling over 401ks internally. Because of the DOL rule that entire role he moved into was heavily hit, likely to be removed entirely in the future if it hasn't been already at this point. He got laid off twice by the same company in less than a year.

Lastly, in all Fidelity layoffs in the past and in this one, the most targeted types of roles are Individuals Contributors. Employees at salary grade jobs that have no employees reporting to them/being supervised by them. Learning and Development, Training Facilitation was heavily impacted, even with a Director being axed.

Some roles seem to have been downsized. Auxiliary, support roles. The trade support/trade dispute management group lost its entire team in several sites and only remains in two I believe. This means 60%+ of that role got dropped. The remaining sites also are the ones with the cheapest labor/pay scale. Even if they cut too many people they will likely back fill the difference for that in the remaining sites with that function. Transferring to another site at Fidelity after working 2 years in a role means you retain your higher pay if you move to another site with a lower pay grade for that role.

Hey since you were already cutting calls short to make the current goal let's raise so you are shorter with callers needs than before.

The new CPH goal of 6 will also involve a change in the calculation. They will no longer factor in available time. Will it be obtainable? I guess we'll see.

I didn't see anything today at my site, but I was only around part of the day. But before I left, I did hear that HNW is going to 5 CPH and SVC to 6 CPH, so what the poster says about "wringing every drop of sweat out of employees" sounds right.

That and not investing in the mindset of reps. They should at least hire someone to teach them how to handle more of a workload emotionally. A small investment could pay large dividends. But it's not on paper so they won't consider it.

The team*

Just got new information on specific people who were chosen. Evidence seems to highly point towards the persons who were chosen as being the highest paid of their groups as all the ones I learnt were the most tenured of their business unit in the site.

to be cheap and cut cost but probably raise expense ratios of Funds

Both. The last year+ Fidelity has been focused heavily on doing more with less. Wanting to wring every drop of sweat out of their employees to meet ever higher goals instead of having a balance between employee morale and productivity. Some sites had an entire team for a business unit laid off but they were a small yea. While at another site only 1 phone supervisor for that department was laid off for the whole department for that location. It seemed like 1-2 people per site for that business unit got the axe. Not sure how they decided the specific person from among the team. Perhaps they looked at some performance metric and dropped the bottom 1-2 from each location.... or perhaps they picked the highest paid.