Most teams across the board seemed understaffed and overworked. But if they keep cutting it more we are sure to get poor service levels. Where are all these expenses coming from anyway? Technology? Failed digital initiatives? Too much people overhead?
3 replies (most recent on top)
We aren’t short staffed at all. No significant layoffs in many years going way back to well before Charlie left. The Todd era actually coddled people who should have been forced to step it up. Maybe some terminations with cause rather than problem people winning a lucrative package would send a message.
This is one of the worst companies I've worked for. They will always choose politics and favoritism of slackers just because they won't ask for a 5% raise. If you're not in the Manchester boys club get out now.
Look. We have answered this already. We need to let slackers go and being in the excellent Former GS employees. And they cost a lot more.
Just kidding. We are pretty thin already and likely cannot to afford to lose more. It when the “more days in the office” message comes out, we will lose many. And smucks like me will stick it out, working the job of 2 or 3 employees for a great 1.5% raise.