Thread regarding Bank of New York Mellon Corp. layoffs

@5ldf, no way any department is limited to anywhere close to 50% India. Maybe 75% or 85%, but not 50%.

"We don’t listen. Consultants say we have too many layers and yet today we have more layers than we did a year ago because they keep bringing in external hires who bring in their own crew."

Agree 100%. I would add that de-layering should mean trimming the heavy top and middle management structure, not just the rank and file. I think we all know that will never happen.

@5ldf+1ffEN8jo You are very wrong. Consultants are brought in to analyze our operating model, which includes how our people are structured. Just ask McKinsey if about Blueprint. But don’t worry. We don’t listen. Consultants say we have too many layers and yet today we have more layers than we did a year ago because they keep bringing in external hires who bring in their own crew

It’s not just 50% of tech, it’s 50% of ops too!

This post is just trolling to stir up fear. Consultants aren't analyzing teams, BNYM employees are. There’s no financial or headcount catalyst targets for any group. But most groups have inefficiencies, people complain about them every day on this site. Pointless forms, ridiculous processes, endless approvals, stuff that happens because some MD asked for it five years ago and people are too scared to ask why. Hiring cheaper people offshore is hardly a new thing and you aren’t going to find a big bank or firm that doesn’t do it. BNYM limits the number of people in India for a particular function to 50% for concentration risk which in tech in recent years has mostly been through hiring more people (in India), not by cutting elsewhere. There’s plenty of cr-p to complain about (just look at the RTO mess or promotions or salaries), focus on the real cr-p not the imagined cr-p.

@3gct+1ffEN8jo

I tend to suspect old spaghetti code with SMEs long gone. Migrating is easy, fixing is hard.

@2emp, GF migrations have strict and ambitious deadlines and can not be held up by scope creep to "fix" applications. To go to GF they MUST have been updated to use current software and best practices for security, failover, monitoring etc. If they weren't, they MUST have had an exception. If they were migrated to GF, they are likely much better than they were in those areas.

nothing new, sr mgmt is always looking for new projects that will cut cost/save money. Which translates to more money for them because they have cut cost and saved $$$$$.

Wow, good luck with that BNY. Clearly Technology leadership has no idea of the depths of their issues. I feel bad for anybody still left supporting all those applications. There are so many better jobs with less stress and better pay.

Unbelievable to think that a premier custody bank struggles to roll out quality asset servicing applications. Worse yet, enshrining key archaic applications in Greenfield without fixing them first is inexplicable.

I've seen our team cut in half stateside the last 5 years just to be replaced by 50% more people offshore. So if anything, we're going to need MORE people than we had.

CIO said that quiet part out loud 4 years ago, but it’s no more realistic or possible now than it was then.

hopefully it will address the mess in asset servicing technology needing and fix mess GSP PSS SMD IMMS GTM CDW