And was on an approved leave of absence is that legal has anyone ever heard this happened before ?
18 replies (most recent on top)
@sh slop response
The company is cutting its workforce and doing it via unconventional methods. Nothing new here. There has been, and will be lawsuits, however as usual, the benefit of headcount reduction will financially outweigh any legal matters. Life goes on :)
@OP Yes in MP.
@116 yup every Sam is gone on my team. Some Sam’s on other teams promoted (5 i believe in total) rest demoted or fired across all of audit. They don’t give a sh-t about compliance anymore.
@w2 Audit layoffs are happening today in decent numbers.
Yes. Very common
@m2 audit has been told that layoffs are happening and we have been told that for 3 months now. There was even a strategy deck that means remote will go. But the question is, when will it happen? It will mainly impact directors and Sam’s
I’m just going to say what everyone tiptoes around: some people have become absolute snowflakes when it comes to workplace accommodations. There’s this growing belief that any request - no matter how unreasonable, disruptive, or impossible - should automatically be granted. And when it isn’t, suddenly the employer is “illegal,” “retaliatory,” or “targeting” them.
Let’s be real. If you were fired, especially in a company with a full legal team reviewing every termination, it means the decision was legally defensible. Companies don’t just randomly terminate people on a whim. HR, Legal, Compliance - they all scrutinize these cases before anything happens. Yes, a handful of people have won lawsuits, but when you actually read through most of these stories, the outrage is way louder than the facts.
I’ve watched teammates make up nonsense excuses, exaggerate conditions, or magically “discover” issues the moment performance conversations start - all to angle for remote work or reduced responsibilities. That’s not accommodation. That’s manipulation.
Here’s the truth people don’t want to hear:
Employers can fire someone if excessive absenteeism or an unreasonable accommodation makes it impossible to perform the essential functions of the job - but only under specific legal conditions.
And under the ADA, employers must provide reasonable accommodations - not any accommodation the employee wants. There’s a difference between supporting legitimate needs and bending the entire operation around someone who simply doesn’t want to do the job they were hired for.
Some folks need to stop acting like every consequence is discrimination. Sometimes it’s just accountability.
@rw what team/area did this happen?
I requested a job accommodation, and was placed on a paid leave and was told I would be notified on how to proceed with my request. 2 weeks later I was sent an exit email without severance. Since being let go, 5 of my teammates had this happen to them. It wasn't a round of layoffs, but just slowly eliminating people, then merging teams when only 3-4 people are left, then letting go of a manager, etc.
USAA FSB has one more round of layoffs coming in 2026, expected to hit the last week of October.
If you keep hearing phrases like “the way we work,” “efficiency,” “simplification,” and “operating differently,” pay attention. In our area, we started hearing a lot of that language last fall. We thought our team was in a pretty safe spot. Then January 28th happened, and we lost our manager, our BBPC Sr, BPO I, and APO Sr.
Looking back, though, I’m not sure January should have surprised anyone. Go back and listen to Mike Moran when the October 29th layoffs were announced. He very quickly said, “we’re going to start off January the way we ended.” At the time, that probably went right past a lot of people. Three months later, it sounded a whole lot different.
That’s why I pay closer attention to the wording now. Sometimes leadership tells you exactly where things are headed without ever coming out and saying, “more layoffs are coming.”
I’m looking at opportunities in the new brokerage area myself, so this isn’t about saying the Bank is doomed or everyone should leave. There are still areas growing and being built. But I wouldn’t assume any area is untouchable just because it survived the last round.
October is coming, listen closely to what’s being said between now and then.
Jordan John the corrupt criminal. How does USAA get away with everything.
If many people in a similar role are also laid off and you just happen to be on leave then it’s completely legal. If you are singled out then you may have a fighting chance but if they offer you a severance then you’d rather take the severance. Those legal battles are incredibly difficult to win especially in TX. There are people who have won tho, but it takes a lot of time and resources.
@cq girl on my team was in the January layoffs, she was out on bereavement when they gave her the news, talk about F’d up.
had a friend who was laid off during her maternity leave (an FSB job).
The bank is a disaster, terrible leadership! Hope you find work soon!
Just know that the lists for layoffs get scrutinized heavily. There are multiple check points including HR and Legal among others before those lists are finalized. I highly doubt you’ll find any wrongdoing especially since these are mass layoffs. The bank in particular is looking to reduce costs and are targeting redundancy in roles. So they’re looking at folks with similar titles and volume of work to see if they need that many people to do the same job. That’s why you often see large swaths of people with similar titles or in same department/area.
It was part of a larger layoff so no you have no protections and aren’t immune because you were on leave
Being on an approved leave of absence and then finding out you’ve been laid off is a tough situation.
That said, the fact that you were on leave doesn’t automatically mean USAA did anything illegal. Under federal law an employer can include someone on an approved leave in a legitimate reduction in force, provided the decision would have been the same if that employee had been actively working. The key question isn’t whether you were on leave, it’s whether the leave played any role in the decision.
If your entire department or a larger group was affected as part of a documented restructuring, that’s generally different from being singled out because you were on FMLA, an ADA accommodation, or another protected leave. If you believe you were selected because you were on leave, or your position wasn’t actually eliminated while others in similar roles remained, it may be worth speaking with an employment attorney to review the facts.
You should receive your severance agreement within 24-48 hours, I would review it then see about speaking with a lawyer that specializes in employment law.