Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

Sigh. I’m a mgr that arrived after Charlie . Let me just say it is obvious to us newcomers that too many meets and exceeds were given out before. They have been pushing distribution down since I got here. I have no problem with some old exceeds getting meets now because it’s clear to those of us from the outside. The last year or so they have been focused on pushing meets down to IM and while some of that needed to happen the forced bell curve is garbage and too many are being pushed down. And for the mgr below that said we have to do it he is wrong. You can not move someone down if you don’t think they belong there. Your mgr can overwrite it which is their prerogative. Just get in writing your message to mgr you disagree. That’s it. It doesn’t take big cajones to do this. Your moral compass can still stand.

Stick to your principles and avoid Wells altogether. It's not a good company and once you escape you end up finding the right organizations to work for. That bellcurve model benefits no one but the bald white man you call your boss. He's after your bonus and career. Run.

I'm hoping there will be a giant class action lawsuit.

There have been several lawsuits against the use of stack ranking. Usually there is an underlying claim of discrimination against a protected class. Goldman Sachs, Uber, and Microsoft have faced legal challenges over their stack ranking systems, which have been criticized for reinforcing biases and negatively impacting protected groups. Goldman Sachs ultimately discontinued the practice as a result of legal risks and public criticism.​ While specific settlements and verdicts are often confidential, the discontinuation of the practice indicates the effectiveness of some of these legal challenges​

The only thing real on Wells Fargo are the eyelashes.

Very similar to fake accounts and fake DEI interviews… it took a while for those to surface too. While management kept marginalizing and denying any work doing until hard evidence was collected and people stepped forward.

This has been done since GE and Jack Welch invented it. Dozens of major corperations have tried and abandoned it mostly due to higher attrition and employee backlash. Unfortunately we aren't there yet. Some still use it like Amazon, IBM and Meta. It works well where objective measures decide the ranking. Here it is just subjective which creates the problems. Stack ranking has NEVER been proven to increase performance or productivity.

I was pressured to write a few negative reviews. It felt wrong but had to do it.

OMG, would this really qualify as a scandal? Seriously. First of all, no one cares what the company does against their own employees unless it is done because of retaliation for whistleblowing (or paying/incentivizing them to break rules that result in customer harm). they care about what the company does to the PUBLIC/CUSTOMERS. So get out of here with this being a scandal that would be publicized far and wide.

Secondly, there is literally ZERO illegal about this practice UNLESS one can prove that disparate impact has occurred against those receiving the lower ratings (meaning those being provided with those lower ratings with light justification are members of one or more protected classes). By the way, higher compensated individuals is NOT a protected class for illegal discrimination purposes. NOR is where the individual is located...........which is exactly WHY they chose that route for determining who gets laid off.......because it's entirely legally defendable and ensures that regardless of race, religion, gender, disability, age, and all the other protected classes, if you're in a non-hub location, you're going to be laid off. So you have a disability and are laid off because you're not in a hub and want to sue? Sorry, good luck getting any lawyer to take that case once they realize that a cr-p ton of NON-DISABLED people were laid off for the same reason (location). Same thing with the other protected classes. Those in protected classes are actually fewer than those who are not, so the company can very EASILY point to how they are not discriminating against ANYONE in these reviews or layoffs because regardless of who you are, what you look like, what disability you have, etc. you're a target because of where you are located (which is NOT protected).

Without documented evidence, proving this will be extremely difficult. Securing legal support may also be challenging, especially since employment lawyers typically take these cases on a contingency basis.

The management team in our group received formal training from HR on how to write and document the reviews. Essentially how to fabricate, exaggerate, emphasize irrelevant things just make it seem like ratings were justified. Then came the coaching and calibration BS. Sorry, but I feel like I was pressured to do it.

@jlo+1tZOIlD2
Are you so dense to think a controversial practice like this would be listed in a policy or a handbook?

Contact a labor attorney and blow the whistle. Whining about it here does nothing. Get a pair and do something.

I think it’s a ploy to pay less bonus, and justify layoffs. At will employment does not need reason to terminate employment, but it will protect the bank of there is law suit for disparate treatment.

It’s a dual strategy:
1- Intended to make you want to leave so they don’t pay you your severance.
2- Fabricate false documents to fire you in case step 1 is not effective.

They don’t need to give you a bad review to lay you off. Terminate, yes. There needs to be a sticky on this forum explaining the difference.

Nobody outside the bank will care about this. Do you care what happens at Google or Facebook?

Unethical? Yes. Illegal? Probably not. When the general public learns of a bank’s unethical practices, they say “what else is new” and lose interest.

Read what the policies say about a grading curve. Big no no. So tossing my BS flag.

If you have or can prove it, you are obligated to blow to whistle. Just will be served not to mention a huge whistleblower reward.