They are next. Most of them couldn't get a middle manager job outside of this company.
27 replies (most recent on top)
@jr the "admins" are usually centrally managed by the division lead and aren't actually hired by the VP. Many of the VPs don't even use them. Many of the SVPs do have a chief of staff, but not all and depends on the size of their org.
Almost all VPs and SVPs have their own admins (ironically called Chief of Staff / Business Office / BMO), regardless how small their org is. Some SVPs even have a BMO team of over 10 staff led by Sr. Director/ Director.
Svp and higher only. Don't be a dum--ss and think everyone got the same nepo treatment you did, Roscoe.
@hn some of you are so lazy and misinformed that I am embarrassed for you. Their pay is well into millions. For far more people than you can imagine. There is sign on bonus, bonus, deferred salary and all sorts of deferred compensation. All in order to get around those salary caps. It takes 5 minutes of research but most of you are too lazy to do even that.
@hf I don't think anyone makes close to $1 mil there even the CEO, except maybe close with bonuses. They capped the CEO pay around $600k about 10 years ago, so I'm doubtful anyone makes more than that. I would guess somewhere between $250k to $400k in salary would appear more accurate. Even the leads and managers in my group only made slightly more than I do, but quite a bit more in bonuses is where the main difference was. I had considered applying for a lead position years ago, but decided not to. The pay was only about $5k to 8k more per year than what I was making and they said they couldn't go any higher.
I even know leads in other departments that were making less than I was making as a senior associate.
"We are having VP problems at Fannie Mae. They come to work with their company cars, they all have admins, they don't use cubicles-only private rooms, their meetings and rooms are booked by their admins. They make over one million dollars and don't provide value. They should be managing around 200 people each, but most of them have very small orgs. They don't have any real or outside experience, some don't even qualify as sr. managers, or even managers. VPs should come down from their high horses, and there is only one way to achieve it: lay off VPs, all of them, or most of them!"
Let's see...
- There are no company cars for VPs, just for Peter and Roscoe and Brandon who get moved around in giant black SUVs with armed guards because they've ruined thousands of peoples lives.
- They don't all have admins.
- Many sit in the desk seating with the staff as there aren't physically aren't enough offices left.
- I don't think any of them make over 1mm. Those are the SVPs. or EVPs. Maybe a couple do, but def not most. More like half that, at best.
- Managing 200 people each is pretty nuts. Not all jobs are the same production or call center work that your braindead a-s seems to work in.
No VP i know of has a company car, wtf are you talking about
@h5 if we start naming names, it's going to get ugly. I know so many of them who are complete wa-kers. Their job is to pretend that they are busy. They could never make it in the real corporate world. The hierarchical structure that we have would never exist if there wasn't unlimited money and profitability by systematic design.
There is one particular VP that has ruined their organization that needs to be let go.
And don’t forget those 100% remote VPs and SVPs…
We are having VP problems at Fannie Mae. They come to work with their company cars, they all have admins, they don't use cubicles-only private rooms, their meetings and rooms are booked by their admins. They make over one million dollars and don't provide value. They should be managing around 200 people each, but most of them have very small orgs. They don't have any real or outside experience, some don't even qualify as sr. managers, or even managers. VPs should come down from their high horses, and there is only one way to achieve it: lay off VPs, all of them, or most of them!
@f5 I don't think people are aware of this. What VPs have this perk?
Getting rid of Mark Palim is diabolical. Based on who's being eliminated and who they're hiring, only loyalists, interns, and AI will remain. What could possibly go wrong?
Why do you give VPs $100k company cars? These are Audis and VWs. Including insurance and gas. What do VPs do to deserve such a nice perk? Especially the VPs having a very small org. Save tax payers' money and lay off all the VPs.
Institutional knowledge, brain drain, my a-s. Work is done by associates, advisors and principals. The higher ups are mostly performative wa-kers.
150+ VPs in the company. Ridiculous. They can drop 50 of them and the company wouldn't skip a beat.
@ee I saw one with just 4!
@ee why do there need to be staffing cuts at such a profitable company?
VPs having less than 100 people should be laid off! Some VPs have only 12 direct reports, come on people! Some have only 3!!!! Waste of money, waste of resources. Cut all contractors as well, there must be over 3000 contractors!
That before or after the purge this week? Took out like 5-8% of them. That is light compared to the like 15-20% the whole company is down.
Parts of this place gonna fall apart. Other parts just humming along like nothing happening
@dr 5 Evp, 35 SVP, 130 VP, 210 sr directors and 260 directors. our structure is already pretty lean for a company of our caliber
@a3 these are not the officers we want to see leave. These were still part of the competent wrung of employees before the friends and family VPs started being hired. It’s a scary sign of things to come.
This isn't even close. It's not several hundred. There are several hundred directors, but officers aren't even a "couple" hundred.
@OP The VP / Associate ratio is way high. We have several hundreds of VP/SVP.
There must be more than 500 VPs who make more than $700k with company cars and other perks. Most of the VPs are incompetent!
https://www.scotsmanguide.com/news/fannie-mae-dismisses-senior-staff-in-another-leadership-purge/
About time.