Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

Move or Charlie Rips the Chainsaw

So since next week we are getting letters to (A) Move or (B) GTFO, in my department because "every bank has a location strategy" what is everyone leaning towards?

I think this is the beginning of Charlie's reign of te---r before he jumps to the next company to pillage.

by
| 2016 views | | 12 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1t1iQYVL

12 replies (most recent on top)

You mean the guy that refused to move to headquarters? Rules for the but not for me Shart? Zero chance in he-l I would move for him. The talent being thrown away is mind blowing. It will come back and bite their a$$. Between the fraud in India, RTO, location strategy and the renewed push for numbers in the branches, it’s going to get really ugly.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1cjo+1t1iQYVL

@1goi+1t1iQYVL

The "saving the CRE market" theory holds zero water. Wells is on a multi-year project to massively reduce its number of buildings. That's not "helping the cause", at all. They've been dumping buildings cheap for 5+ years. Look into the various buildings we have bought/sold in Minneapolis sometime, it's the MO to lose 50% on these multi-hundred million dollar buildings, after pouring more millions into them for years on end. How does that help CRE? Location strategy is eliminating probably 90% of our non-branch buildings. If we were obsessed with property tax breaks and CRE we wouldn't be doing any of this. The truth is, those tax breaks aren't even that valuable relative to building expenses or Hudson Yards strategic goals. "Millions" is chump change for CPG. We spend a stupifying amount of money on these buildings, money we'll never get back. Ever been on a project management call? It's crazy how much we spend on even minor projects. Very soon we'll have just a handful of large hubs. Then one by one they will start to close those, one by one, until eventually it's just Hudson Yards and I&P as the only hubs. You and I will be long gone by then. We've cut about 80k domestic workers over the last decade or so. 12k in 2023 alone and this stupidity has ramped up. We'll continue cutting 10-20k a year until we're all gone. That's the reality, and once that's done, how many property tax breaks will we be getting? How will we be helping the CFE market? None, and we won't, and HY isn't concerned about that in the slightest.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1kir+1t1iQYVL

@1ust+1t1iQYVL

Because it isn't cheaper to WFH. You're missing the forest for the trees. Municipal tax breaks to keep corporate properties occupied amounts to millions. Then, you have the book value of those corporate properties. If those corporations didn't yank everyone back to the office, the corporate real estate market would crash, bringing our portfolio down with it. Those 2 factors alone will exponentially cancel out any sort of 'savings' to have people work from home.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1goi+1t1iQYVL

@ijh+1t1iQYVL

WFH is cheaper than in office, so if it's about saving money make it make sense.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ust+1t1iQYVL

When all a bank has to move a needle is layoffs....it's time to retire the firm and dismantle it. The regulators haven't removed the asset cap, the consent decrees and employees are unionizing. There is nothing left unless you're an id--t broker who is peddling your wares at rundown saloon.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ciy+1t1iQYVL

@cnx+1t1iQYVL

Right. Picture it like this. The CEO is obligated to maximize revenue to shareholders. If he doesn't, they find someone else who will. The choice is layoff workers or forfeit millions. He will choose millions, right? I mean, we all would. So then comes the how to go about it part. He can't just get rid of everyone overnight. That is madness. And don't bother with the India su-ks, they can't do our jobs etc. Racism aside, even if they are not as effective, they are a bargain for what they are able to do. So if they work at half capacity but you pay them 1/4 as much, that is the economical choice.

And that logic will apply to every single WF job in time. Yes, even yours.

Short of regulations and some edge cases, every job is subject to this.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ijh+1t1iQYVL

There is only one strategy folks, and yes, it's been going on since Shart got here. Eliminate the domestic workforce. That's it, that's the plan. It will be called various different names for PR reasons, but that's just a smoke screen. Shart hates you and wants you gone as soon as is possible. We had 258k domestic employees not all that long ago. Now we have under 180k. Last year alone 12k were termed and this year they tell investors they need an extra billion dollars, beyond whatever they originally planned, to term more of us. We're all going to go, it's just a matter of when.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cnx+1t1iQYVL

Charlie can’t move on to a next because he is lackluster on all fronts. He’s no “chainsaw” Al Dunlap.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @mks+1t1iQYVL

txu+1t1iQYVL

News flash, this began about 3 years ago. Not sure how some people are still asleep

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hwo+1t1iQYVL

Uh, the 'beginning of his reign of t**ror? Yikes. The layoffs in the first 6 months have been brutal, I'm stressed out enough. Now you're telling me it hasn't even begun?

Any specifics you can share?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @txu+1t1iQYVL

Which group is getting notice next week? I know I will get a letter at some point (not in a hub), but no idea when.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fpq+1t1iQYVL

CSBB doesn't even give you a choice to move unless there are 20 levels of management approval to do it. When management says they want everyone to gather in hubs they mean everyone who is already there. And even if you are in the golden hubs you'll be subject to lay off with job moved to India.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @mxh+1t1iQYVL

Post a reply

: