What is this meeting? Has anyone else received this?
17 replies (most recent on top)
What bizarre world are you living in that remote people cost more than people in a building? It's the other way around! If cutting costs was any kind of goal, they'd be acting completely differently.
Yeah, they are 'very transparent' with their lies. What they didn't tell the 900 Managers on the call is that once they've herded the unsuspecting masses into a small number of buildings, they'll start closing them one by one as I&P takes over all that work. As branches dwindle and mortgage is shut down, eventually there's no need for 90% of us to be US-based, and the hubs will start to go. They aren't telling us this yet because for now they need us to keep the profits rolling in, but they spend every waking hour coming up with new ways to eliminate the domestic workforce.
Meanwhile the "very transparent" chuckles Shart says he's never heard of it.
@1qvd+1qWcn32w. Well said. I've put that on this board a few times. What happened in the last 24 hours was entirely expense driven. It's been in works for several months and it was a completely different workstream than location strategy.
"You can dislike Charlie and the leadership for making this decision but they have been very transparent that this was coming." Did you say that with a straight face? Some leaders have been very transparent, yes. Charlie???? He is the fool that sat there, on camera, in front of the entire company, and played d-mb. He denied the location strategy, which is to say, obviously, he is a liar. How he can get away with that is baffling. Charlie? Transparent? Give it a rest.
One other misconception - location strategy and expense reduction are two different topics. While there is some correlation (obviously terminating remote people will naturally lead to expense reduction) the topics need to be considered independently.
Every area has expense targets they need to get to over the next few years. Some areas will meet those targets entirely through location strategy. In those situations, many employees who are impacted by location strategies may be offered relocation. Their positions aren't being eliminated, just moved. If employees don't take the relocation offer the manager is likely able to backfill for it.
If employees are being impacted due to expense reduction the position is being eliminated. Relocation won't be offered and the position won't be eligible for backfilling.
So much misinformation here.
Each group and then each LOB has a customized location strategy. That strategy includes the markets that WF wants to be in. The meeting is to share with managers what those markets are. Additionally, the meeting will cover other likely talking points. I can't speak to how each individual group is doing this but in our area this wasn't an "in the shadows" activity. They had 900 managers on a call to prep everyone. Then an official communication went out to all employees a week later.
Anyone who is surprised by this news must be completely checked out. This has been discussed over and over and over again internally. It has been discussed in interviews in the media. You can dislike Charlie and the leadership for making this decision but they have been very transparent that this was coming. The only "new" thing will be direction on your specific locations and that's only because each area gets to choose for themselves.
It’s a meeting to plan a plan to make plans. Not even kidding
relocation packages will be offered if you are asked to relocate. It will be on a case by case basis as to whether you get offered relocation or not. that said, you could relocate and still be laid off down the road so make sure sure you will like your new location. The same could be true for any company though, you move somewhere for a new job only to be laid off. If I was younger without a family I'd jump at the chance to relocate, but not so much now, then again, if I was unhappy where I was living then id move.
I don’t know… this posts reeks of trolling.
- 9% will not be allowed to relocate even if they offer, because the location strat has nothing to do with locations. If a few agree, no worries, they'll be downsized in the next round of excuses.
@1qkd+1qWcn32w … relocation packages? You must not work at WF. lol
What LOB are you a part of?
It’s probably to help managers identify/communicate who on their team will be asked to relocate, relocation package and what to say legally if your employees accept or declines.
Never heard of it OP, but please post up again to let us know. Shart likes to do things in the shadows when he thinks others won't notice. Don't let him get away with it. He is a complete failure on "candor", so we have to do his job for him and speak the truth.
They will prep u to lose ur team. So helpful!
They'll tell you how many Indians you'll get for every staff member you'll lose due to location strategy.
Oh, and they'll also tell you how many boxes of Kleenex you'll have charged to your BAU to soak up all the tears of those whose lives are destroyed by this BS.
Step 1. Wash face
Step 2. Go to office
Step 3. Kiss Charlie’s ba--s though your webcam