It would have been a promotion, but since I'm not in hub city I can't even apply. Incredibly frustrating. I suppose those "opportunities for growth" are for only the geographically desirable.
89 replies (most recent on top)
I was interviewed for a position and wanted too much money and they sent my resume to another team they worked with who was looking and willing to pay my salary. They wanted me enough to get me into the company and at my salary request. If you are an excellent candidate they will do what they can to bring you in and keep you if you prove yourself willing to learn new things, work in the directly the company wants to go, and be positively proactive.
I’m sorry OP, that stinks. Others who say that management can make exceptions for dream candidates: that’s absolutely not true. I had to turn down multiple people who would have been dream candidates, and these are for senior positions. I think the company is very myopic with their location strategy, but they are clearly trying to drive attrition.
They don't want anyone enough, unless that person is overqualified and willing to be chronically underpaid.
That's not a recipe for talent acquisition.
@1eiz+1dpPfxsS they didn't want the person enough.
LOLZ at the amount of utter insincerity or outright ignorance (in the true sense of the word) in this thread. Do you guys not know how your LOBs operate? I know for a fact that recently candidate for a position in my LOB made it all the way through to the offer stage and then had to turn down the offer because he/she refused to move to a hub (how the interview process made it that far without that having been ironed out is beyond my understanding). Here's an example of the business clearly wanting a candidate and yet being unable to hire him/her due to their own policies.
Also, consider: If a LOB implements a hub strategy (and some, such as Risk, have) and then doesn't apply it fairly and consistently, it can open itself up to all kinds of litigation.
I'm hoping a lot of the anti-employee sentiment in this thread is just trolling.
PS: This isn't Reddit; you can't vote brigade a post into oblivion here.
@1jff+1dpPfxsS so you are saying executive leadership did not bring over people they worked with in another company because they liked working with them and that people dont hire people they used to work with because they liked working with them and that promotions don't usually happen with people who are liked by their leadership?
@1jff+1dpPfxsS don't strawman if the position was automated it wouldn't be a position available on the job site. You are describing situations where there isn't a value to have a position vs a person. Currently, if you aren't valued for a "promotion" that isn't being automated (which is why it is a position) then you aren't valued. Managers will create a new position for you if they really like you.
Hub location doesn't have much to do with it. Why do you think positions are being moved to India? Why are some people being let go and other people being moved to new positions in order to be kept by the company?
I love that to seemingly many here the only explanation is that OP sucks.
@1anu+1dpPfxsS
This is an archaic way of thinking. If they can get your performance or better from 2-3 super cheap candidates, you're gone. If they can get AI to do your job for you at a 90%+ efficiency, you're gone. If they can find someone who is willing to work longer hours and lives in a hub but doesn't do quite the same level of work as you do, you're gone. Once you start thinking you are not able to be replaced, or some sort of heaven sent employee - you're gone. Because nobody wants employees like that anymore.
"It is indeed very strict in some LOBs. Such as Risk."
It is never as strict when they value you and they can't find a better candidate in a hub.
The generalizations are being made on your side.
It is indeed very strict in some LOBs. Such as Risk. Which is curious because Risk hasn't really implemented 7:1, but it's super an-l about hubs.
Generalizations can be dangerous.
"You're being downvoted but its true. Location Strategy and hubs are the future for WF and many other employers, and in tech its very strict."
It is not very strict. We have hired 3 developers from around the country in the last 12 months and none of them are close to hubs nor are they planning on moving.
@1wte+1dpPfxsS
You're being downvoted but its true. Location Strategy and hubs are the future for WF and many other employers, and in tech its very strict. Some managers are trying to work around it, but the people at the top see this and will 'correct' it very soon. Eventually it is planned to be the same for all business units, but like the move to VOIP it starts with tech.
Contact the hiring manager and tell him/her about your situation. If he wants you he will try to get you. If not you know are not barred you are not hired.
Some of y'all don't understand what a hardline stance some LOBs are taking on their location strategies.
@1zjk+1dpPfxsS if it is in this persons own group the manager would have asked the op to apply and said there was a location package if they really thought this person was a value add to the position. "they just aren't that into you" is a more accurate read on the situation than "the company hates people who aren't in hubs"
I'm also pretty sure this person has never had a position made for them by management in a company...it's pretty standard when you are highly valued. (or red stapler if you are not)
If you were Management's dream candidate, they would have found a way to make your local hub the location for the job. Sometimes we have to face the cold/hard reality of a situation. They think someone else would be better, and they also don't seem particularly concerned that being left out of the running for this gig could result in you leaving your current gig for greener pastures. Doesn't mean they are right, but all evidence suggests that that's their mindset.
@kut+1dpPfxsS
Location strategy. Remote or not, you are required to live within 60 mins of a hub city. Currently I believe there's only 9 nationwide -maybe a couple more if you count the ones that will be closing within 5 years - and if you live outside of those areas you most likely wont have a job for very long.
"The leadership in your group would have asked you to apply if they wanted to see you in that position."
That's very cynical and dismissive of the impacts of the location strategies.
I saw a posting recently for software sr engineer in MN that sounded like a great fit. Went to apply and then noticed it’s in Mankato and not Minneapolis…. When did Mankato become a hub?
C’mon child. Hold my beer.
Yes new policy sucks. I'm remote and can no longer decide to move in my own position. I would have to find a different job to apply for even though our team consists of people all over country. Makes no sense.
Sorry, while I agree the hub strategy has its drawbacks, since I’ve worked here all jobs that are not fully remote have required one or more physical locations to be associated with the roles in order to even create the job posting.
If you apply for a job, those physical locations are a requirement of the job per the posting, so if you’re not already in, or willing to relocate, despite applying, you’re not willing to meet all the requirements of the job. (Key requirement here being one of the locations).
I know this might be a novel concept for those that have been fully remote, but for groups that have had core locations (most) this is nothing new.
The leadership in your group would have asked you to apply if they wanted to see you in that position.
I applied to 5 jobs and I was offered 3 of them, but I could not accept any of the jobs unless I was willing to move...
Cr---y policy that is causing us to lose top talent.
Really stinks it is easier to get a job outside of Wells than inside of WF.
Oh, there's definitely some pro-Wells/Charie (or anti-employee?) vote brigading going on in this thread.
And a bit of trolling.
I must be missing something with most of these responses. OP said he/she is a remote worker, so it shouldn’t matter where the new job is located. Is the new position not remote?
The job lists the locations where the job is offered. If you're not in one of those cities you don't me the qualifications. Just like if you don't have a degree or licenses. Seems pretty cut and dry. Would happen if I live in Charlotte but the job is only offered in Des Moines.
lmaoooo the crazy guy is parked on this page just spamming the votes because he for some reason has a problem with how the OP was f'ed over by the hub "strategy"
Too bad The Board didn't say the same thing to Charles when he refused to move to the HQ. Good for me, not for thee.
Yup. Hard to tout a collaboration initiative when you are posting positions in locations none of the existing teammates work. Be nice if they could make up a new excuse.
Yep, sucks just as bad as being forced to choose between job and your health.
It's almost like someone doesn't want anyone that isn't absolutely obedient to work...
@hnk+1dpPfxsS You weren’t kidding 😳 Some people apparently really want to preserve the illusion of the hub strategy
Lol the mental defective that keeps spamming upvotes on that patronizing post. Anything to cast aspersions on employees and not his beloved WF
@kzu+1dpPfxsS and now we know why you were told they wouldn't make an exception for you. You have a really bad attitude.
Sounds like what's happening in many groups, @xgq+1dpPfxsS. Once 401ks are matched and bonuses are paid out, folks will be clamoring for the door. I hope HR can keep up.
Same thing happened to our team. Senior Engineer position posted in locations none of us work in. Unable to apply for position so of course goes to someone from outside the bank. Needless to say that drove already low morale right into the ground, and now many are actively looking outside the bank
That was a lose for the bank, @hvy+1dpPfxsS. I am sorry.
When I applied for a posted position, I was asked during the HR screening if I would be willing to relocate at my personal expense to a HUB location for the job. When I answered "no", I was told that my answer was disqualifying and my application was withdrawn by HR.
Of course you won’t get the job. You don’t intend to work in a hub anyway so why should you be considered? They rather give it to someone intend to stay