If severance costs are coming in fourth quarter , does that mean the layoffs have already happened ?
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/05/wells-fargo-ceo-warns-of-severance-costs-as-layoffs-loom.html
28 replies (most recent on top)
Anyone know if audit is included?
SF may still be officially a hub, but not for long. If you look at the CEOs directs, and their directs, hardly anyone is in SF anymore. Just a matter of time before they shut it down. There's no power there anymore, in fact anyone associated with SF is tainted according to the new ivory tower types.
This is a ridiculous statement and massive oversimplification. I've had a lot of different management roles and the number of people reporting to you is a minor factor in the workload and whether or not one person is capable of doing it well. I've been in positions where 6 reports was a mu---rous and unsustainable work load, and ones where 15 would be no problem. Setting a fixed number is a doomed strategy and, frankly, lazy and inefficient. But hey, why do any real analysis of staffing amiright? Bah, that sounds like work and there's golf to play and dinner parties to visit!
@1eop+1pVDpcby
“ So this really is about “location strategy.” It seems. Outside of NY, Charlotte, and San Fran, what are the other hubs ?”
Approved hubs depend on your LOB. Some hubs like Charlotte are hubs for most (all?) LOBs. Others (e.g., Raleigh) are hubs for some LOBs but not others. Des Moines, Minneapolis, San Antonio, Phoenix are often hubs, but again, it depends. Look at any open positions you can find under your general umbrella (even if not your exact team) and see which cities are listed.
Dallas, Minneapolis are hubs for CIB not to mention Charlotte and NYC. I have seen Iowa in some postings but few.
@1ypq+1pVDpcb
So this really is about “location strategy.” It seems. Outside of NY, Charlotte, and San Fran, what are the other hubs ?
Director here in CIB … was told to post a vacancy for one of my sr. Managers who is not in a hub. We met and she said WTF, this sounds like my exact job. I told her it was and that i was forced to do it due to her non hub location. Told her to post for it but no relo money to IA. 100 percent true and it’s happening routinely.
"Unrealized losses on securities totaled $683.9 billion in third quarter, up $125.5 billion (22.5 percent) from the prior quarter"
https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/quarterly-banking-profile/qbp/2023sep/qbp.pdf#page=1
The FDIC took the charts out of their QBP for the first time ever.
It's over. Learn to code.
Btw RCSA is never over
I’m sure the regulators would love to see Wells Fargo laying people off in risk lol
They might, but it won't really be a location strategy crack down, it'll just be laying people off. Don't think so? Offer to relocate to a hub when they can you and see what they say. Your location really has nothing to do with it, beyond being a bad excuse.
Once RCSA is over IT&V or EBCE will be off shored and control will get gutted.
I also think next year will be the big crack down on RTO. If you’re not near a hub you’ll be offered severance or a performance plan
They aren’t going to shutter 1500 branches. Although consumer banking does have the worst efficiency ration (besides WIM which has an incredibly bad efficiency ratio)
Well from what I see is there are way to many branches. On average there are appx 10 people per branch. I imagine they shutter 1500 branches that would be 15k roles and then the accompanying support roles. Then last January the bank said it is taking a step back from the home mortgage business which by the way still has 11500 people in home loans outside of servicing.
His grand scheme for increasing efficiency is to get rid of employees who aren't near a hub??? I guess when you have no other ideas, you gotta come up with something.
We should ship Charlie to the Island of Misfit Toys.
Love the trolls still trying to fearmonger severance being cut in half. As if giving people less comfort in waiting for a layoff is going to make them leave their job in this horrible hiring market.
No, it means they will happen. The bank is setting aside money now, to pay for severance next year. Similar to how the bank sets aside money now for anticipated losses in the future.
just doing simple math I'd say we are looking at 15K layoffs or more next year. On the high side let's say average salary at WF is $100k per year. If you then average 6mo severance (not including any benefits) that works out to 15K ($750MM / $50K).
and just think of all the people with manager titles that don't even have any direct reports. Lots of changes coming next year to many. what I find interesting is that the news never covers the offshoring aspect. Sure, we've cut almost 12K people this year, but that is stateside, we've added just as many in India. Maybe our elected representatives should ask the various bank CEOs about this when they have hearings in the coming weeks around new capital requirements.
Don’t believe the hype. I still see a lot of people including highly compensated managers with nothing to do. What happened to spans and layers? You have no business being a manager or a director unless you manage 12 plus people.
Why would wells buy up all that space in Hudson yards and then lay people off ? I’m thinking those who aren’t tagged to a hub are most at risk ?
It’s been floated many times on this site about changes to severance policy. I think 2024 it happens. 1 week per year with 6 months max. No insight or knowledge. Just a prediction. Charlie and the C Suite are ticked enough haven’t quit. Severance has been under calculated. This impacts Charlie’s pocket book. I think changes are coming
"does that mean the layoffs have already happened ? "
Nope: "..low staff turnover means the company will likely book a large severance expense in the fourth quarter...That expense is an accrual for worker layoffs that Wells Fargo expects to make next year, according to a spokeswoman for the bank."
Apparently, not enough layoffs have already happened. Or according to Charlie and the rest of the clown suite, not enough attrition.
Read the article:
"The company needs to get “more aggressive” on managing headcount because employee attrition has slowed this year, Scharf said. While the bank has made progress under his tenure, Wells Fargo is “not even close” to where it should be in terms of efficiency, he added."
When the CEO HIMSELF is saying they need to get MORE aggressive in doing layoffs, that means there will be far more layoffs in 2024 than in 2023 and they've already laid off something like 1000 a month in 2023. Expect that number to be higher in 2024 for sure because the CEO himself said they will be "more aggressive."
He's not named Chainsaw Charlie for being a lumberjack.
I would plan on no role being “protected” well, unless you are one of the overpaid senior executives.
No one is quitting because we want our severance. They should just let us volunteer at this point. Let the ones who like working here stay.
Risk is totally bloated and feels like 25% of resources are manager who just recycle decks.
The article states that the severance expense increase is an accrual for 2024, meaning that, because voluntary turnover is lower than forecasted, there will be more layoffs in 2024 than previously planned.
With the RCSA mess going on, I wonder if business control/risk/compliance will be in scope.