The mass exodus continues but that doesn't seem to worry our leadership at all. It is simply unbelievable to me that they are letting the best people go to the competition so easily. Does anyone know if they even tried to keep someone from leaving?
9 replies (most recent on top)
- E.I. based hiring replaces merit with entitlement. Talented employees will always leave .
Unfortunately BNYM senior management continually get it wrong. They lay-off good, loyal and hard employees around globe and they somehow seem to keep the ineffective managers, the slackers and the sl--s in Pittsburgh that have affairs with married execs and cause the destruction of marriages and devastation of families.
@3woe+1jnJc0Kd which is exactly what the OP asked. Did they ever to try keep someone from leaving? Can’t be leaving unless you’re half out the door.
You want them to give you 30% year over year to keep you from considering to leave? Not how this works!
They may try to pay to keep you, but only when you’re half out the door.
I saw many folks who were top performers and were given stingy increases year after year. The company would claim, “We did all we could. You should be grateful for that pittance.”
Then they give notice and, suddenly, the company is able to match a 30+% increase. Magic!
The will not try to keep you. Pay is way much better at competitor. BNY salary grade has not change in over 10years!
If they really want to retain someone they will at least try. Speaking from a position of first hand experience.
Management has one main target, do it for less. If there was an all around target for performance, it might be handled differently. But when cost is the number 1 driver, this is what we get.
Just remember, the ones telling management costs (more specifically salaries) are too high are THE highest paid employees of the firm.
The problem is that HR leaves absolutely no credible way for managers to evaluate performance. We seldom get actual goals until more than halfway through the year and then the vast majority are fake cascaded goals which we have no way to influence. It’s been well over a decade since any of our managers understood what we actually do, let alone now many off hours we work.
In an environment like this best friends rule so evaluations only measure friendship, not any actual performance. People that hunker down and crank out a ton of deliverables aren’t networking, chatting and gossiping. Therefore they’re invisible and not valued. The networking politicians get great reviews while doing nothing.
When “the best ones” aren’t in the IN group, of course they don’t try to retain them… and then they wonder why no matter how long they meet nothing gets done.
They don’t properly compensate some of their best talent. I saw peer groups where there were huge swings in comp between “equals” and, without fail, the best compensated would be the worst contributors. The people they count on are taken for granted.