Of course, there are good managers who do their job well, but the problem is that there are too many who are completely useless. Does BNY Mellon need this many managers? I think that they are not needed, but perhaps someone thinks differently? On the other hand, I think it would take a miracle for this place to get rid of at least some of them.
13 replies (most recent on top)
Good for you. That’s the way to pick yourself up and get it done! Great job.
I was @1cbr+1iKFtnVH. I finally got a new job. Absolutely crazy and sickening how underpaid I was. I hadn’t even been looking that long but as soon as I started checking out other companies, me being underpaid seemed so clear.
If only Charlie had actually cut the useless layers of middle management that he had correctly identified we would be doing just fine. So many layers simply parrot talking points from above. If a “manager” cannot do or understand a subordinates job, which is the norm, then the manager should be delayered. With no technology improvements our only option is de-layering middle management and hiring more operations staff.
That’s not a good attitude. You should interview externally as you’ve surely soured your image with your management team. Just a word to the wise…
This is a sad story. I can tell that you’re an effective go getter. You should initiate a job search. I’d hire you in an instant.
A few years ago we went for the “Flat Organization.” Apparently our middle managers misunderstood and implemented the Fat organization. Charlie was right on spans and layers. Todd gave us 4 years of job security but this is going to end badly.
Just remember in times of layoffs at BNY Mellon typically it’s the end level manager who gets shot first
To your point. I’ve been asked numerous times about my stretch goals to get to the next level and I tell them every year I’m not doing the extra work until I get paid. I’m not working raking for free.
Pay me, then I’ll do the extra work & put in the time.
Last year I became the manager of my team (originally being from that team anyway), but because of the high work volume, I’m effectively still an individual contributor in many cases. I don’t have much clout but my managerial role is more administrative: performance reviews, team meetings, delegate work, etc. I have very little say on what our procedures should be or how much gets allocated for raises and bonus. I don’t have as much discretion as I should so things often get bottlenecked. The kicker is that they hired two more people with a higher grade than me but aren’t managing people so their workload is relatively tiny, though they do bring value to the overall team. But when you don’t have to manage people, your scope of responsibilities shrinks immensely and that leaves you time to do other things. If I could do it all over again, I’d probably pass on a management role, but even in this role if they stripped me of that title, I’d still be the one the team goes to if they need help or want my advice on something. Too often the company thinks they can fix stuff by adding really expensive people at the top of the house or hiring cheaper people in low cost locations. Both groups have high turnover and generally don’t add much in terms of results. It’s those “middle” employees that warrant the most support.
Sure it’s a management fad right now but Charlie really did have it right when he was railing on about spans and layers. The problem is that we are inefficient due to our old home grown technology that results in high cost of operations. The Catch 22 is that we cannot downsize Ops without modern technology and there’s no money for that.
Reforging to a tech/OPs blend won’t change a thing without leadership and a plan. We throw good money after bad. Iincreasingly the only workable options are moving to ever more H1-B. workers.
We have about 4-6 layers of middle management whose sole job function is to cascade “information” downwards, process HR tasks and meet, meet and meet, They don’t make decisions. They don’t have ideas. They are totally expendable.
At the top we have a huge political layer of Managing Directors overpaid and with nothing to do.
De-layer the middle to the point where every manager understands and could do their subordinates’ jobs. Cut the bloated political layer at the top by 20%.
Assess the results, rinse and repeat.
In most areas I worked/was exposed to, the managers were also individual contributors. So they were not an extra layer. In fact, they did their managing off the sides of their desks.
Totally agree, but who do they layoff to cut costs the workers. Try cutting a few managers im sure they would cut costs a lot better by eliminating a few and their salaries. So sick of people who are not mangers losing their jobs while managers sit in their offices. Wake up BNYM!