They are actively happening. They are steering non client-facing people into client facing roles. They need people to work in the branches. Right now it’s a gentle nudge. Next year, it’s going to be far more aggressive with additional role eliminations.
10 replies (most recent on top)
@m6 What are some legitimate strategies for pursuing a voluntary layoff with a severance package?
Correct at 20 years you get 3 weeks per year. Maxes out at 18 months of severance i.e. 26 years of service would get you to the max
@ft when does it switch from 2 weeks to 3 weeks? Is it the 20 year mark?
@f1 At least 26 years with BAC at 3 weeks each. Yep, the math checks out at 78 weeks.
@dj 78 Weeks??
@be+1kzbzjtp4 wrong. My teammate just took the package for 78 weeks and viola his work is now added to mine.
"Responsible growth" efforts to make life miserable enough that someone quits without severance failed in this department, so they packaged someone out, and thus made life even more miserable for those who weren't offered.
Great Place to Work, eh?
The WPE announcement will cause some attrition, mostly retirements. Core site requirement may be next. Staff reduction appears to be the end goal without mass layoffs.
This company isn't laying off any one. We have mutherfockas here trying to get fired and can't. This company is a complete shlit storm.
What do you mean by “client facing “ roles?
In my LOB, much thought goes into which teammates should be considered for client facing roles- they only want the most polished, accomplished candidates meeting with clients- so at least in my LOB, I don’t think they would “push” anyone into a client facing role if they were not suited to it.
To me, it appears to be a combination effort:
- The new WPE rules released yesterday.
- The rumors of going back to the location strategy from 2019: consolidating people at certain core sites. I have not heard about this, personally, but it's been floating around.
- Now what you're talking about, moving people into client-facing roles.
And who knows what else. It seems to me like they want to reduce headcount and are thus forcing people to quit. If that doesn't work to eliminate the number of roles they have targeted, the actual cuts will start to happen.