I have been a part of it and each team has to have X number of employees not meeting expectations. These are the people getting laid off first. Now they are going to make sure all personal information is gone from the system or else (after we all had to store dependent verification documents on our work computer) Setting us up for “firings” to cut layoff costs.
16 replies (most recent on top)
Charlie beta boy you get a zero from me
In 3 years I have only ranked 1 employee under meets, so this isn't true
Well this is an exceptionally depressing thread
I knew this already. It is why I quit. Inconsistently Meets - whether you deserve it or not - gets you no Merit increase and one third of your cr---y bonus, if you are lucky.
Guys - If they need you, its the best time to quit.
As a manager, as late as this afternoon, I was informed that I need to stack rank my team and apply ratings to ensure proper separation. The self-assessments have not even been done, but that doesn't matter. They need to have ratings in early. It doesn't matter if you meet your goals, it matters what rating that they want to be dispersed throughout the teams so that they don't have to pay as much bonuses and increases.
I will have to rate someone lower than they actually performed and I will have no reason behind it... other than to just BS as their annual review. This is 100% real.
It is very real. I was a manager in tech before I quit last year and I was forced by my boss to put one of my directs into a does not meet category. I disagreed with him vehemently about the person, but was told we need to move someone to make it fit the bell curve. When I had to explain to the direct the reason, it was awful. That may have been the tipping point to me quitting and when I announced I was leaving, I encouraged that direct to leave also, which they did a few months later
I have a good relationship with my immediate manager and asked them about this during my mid year. They said there are those calibrations that take place at higher up level but they've never been told to change a rating personally. Its hard to tell at what range if 2 up, 3 up, 4 up etc. the bell curve and forced stack rankings applies but its definitely real.
What about teams that are losing too many people and needed? Are they still forced to give a lower rating to someone? I think we need to rate Charlie.
Stack ranking is real - but concerning if you get fired it depends on who you are - we have some people at the bottom that are useless - but they are in a - shall we say - protected category - so they are still here. I think the goal is to keep cutting their bonus till they find a new role in the bank...
I really don't care about the ranking or the bank. Waiting for the package.
https://i.ibb.co/hcTsSbG/1.jpg
https://i.ibb.co/hmqPB5W/2.jpg
Better go d-mb myself down with soybucks, and soybereats and stream more Netflix on my 5G device between emails so I succeed at Wells Fargo!
That's funny, I manage people and haven't had one direct report with a rating below meets. No one told me to do it either.
When my group was laid off, I noticed that it was the folks who got inconsistently meets on their ratings, so...
Yay! I hope I get laid off. I need a real vacation. Wait! What am I talking about? I’m WFH? I’ve been on vacation since Covid began. 😂
Stack Ranking is real. However Wells Fargo C-Suite would never be smart enough to eliminate their lowest performers. They love the low performers who dare not ask any questions, dare not ask for raises, dare not demand to be treated with respect, those who feel grateful. Didn’t you notice they are turning your jobs in to Call Center jobs? Offshoring the rest to third-world countries?
Charlie is eliminating the highest paid top performers (more money for him 🤥) and will leave the bank only with the lowest paid inexperienced sheep. The shepherd loves obedient and dependent sheep. If you have too many brain cells, Charlie’s coming for your job next.