#transparency

We keep getting vague emails about stuff like strategic alignment and zero details about layoffs, budgets, or direction. Basically, anything that truly matters. We're at the point where the grapevine is more reliable than any official channel. That's not a management style, that's damage control.

This feels like a textbook example of people believing their own narrative. Instead of meaningful transparency or honest discussion, it’s filled with self-congratulation and carefully crafted talking points.

There’s very little substantive information here. It’s just selective framing, unsupported claims, and messaging that doesn’t align with what many people are actually experiencing. Rather than acknowledging legitimate concerns or difficult realities, the focus seems to be on celebrating themselves and controlling the narrative.

Real leadership is measured by results and accountability, not by how enthusiastically you praise your own performance. At some point, the applause for yourselves has to give way to honest conversations backed by facts.

Me to Claude: should all these people lose their jobs?

Claude: “Thanks for the question. It would appear so.”

BNY leadership loves talking about “virtue” the way marketing teams love talking about “transformation” — loudly, frequently, and with zero connection to reality.

Our CEO reminds LinkedIn followers that he’s a proud New Yorker of 25+ years, as if residency somehow translates into leadership credibility.

Our Global Head of Wealth and Investments performs the humble‑origins monologue while pocketing compensation that could fund a small college like his alma mater.

And the COO? He champions mentoring interns while spending most of his career perfecting the art of shuttering facilities and escorting experienced employees out the door.

It’s remarkable how consistently these executives wrap themselves in altruistic, philanthropic language while employees experience the exact opposite.

If this is “leadership by example,” then the example seems to be: say one thing publicly, do the opposite internally, and hope no one notices.

But employees do notice — hence the monthly mutinies on this forum.

The workforce isn’t rejecting their virtues; it’s rejecting the performance. Because nothing erodes culture faster than leaders who preach stewardship while actively dismantling and failing to communicate honestly and transparently with the very people they claim to serve.

We have so many rumors and so few details. It'd be great if we started getting proper information instead of just little scraps.

Robin Vince announcing his appointment to the OpenAI board reads like peak corporate satire: the CEO of a bank whose employees publicly describe leadership as opaque, dismissive, and allergic to accountability is now helping steer the future of “responsible AI.”

Sadly, it’s almost poetic. At BNY, Vince champions AI as a “capacity creator,” which is a polite way of saying it helps leadership know more, move faster, and replace people more efficiently — a theme not lost on the thousands of workers and former workers posting their experiences on this forum.

His statement about deploying AI “responsibly, securely, and with strong governance” lands awkwardly when employees can’t even get responsible communication about layoffs, offshoring, or the never‑ending transformation cycle. And the part about AI benefiting “all of humanity”? BNY staff might settle for it benefiting even just a fraction of its workforce.

The real comedy is the humility act — Vince describing himself as “humbled and grateful” while employees describe him as absent, evasive, and increasingly disconnected from the reality inside his own institution.

If OpenAI truly wants to understand how AI impacts people, they’ve now got a board member whose own employees already feel like failed test cases.

How can someone who is so out of touch possibly guide humanity’s future while BNY employees can’t get straight answers during his entire tenure with the firm?

Eliza? . . . Eliza? . . . Can we get a little help here?!?!

Juan just casually exposed that he and the Life company and the Bank president are mining member financial transactions in the Bank to determine what they pay other life insurance companies for life policies and annuities!!! That is illegal and unethical, with serious implications to the sanctity of member data he is supposed to protect. Here is what AI says. While legal under loopholes in federal laws like the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, consumers and ethicists generally consider this practice a breach of trust. Mining transaction data for the explicit purpose of intercepting competitor business exploits a fiduciary relationship for aggressive cross-selling.Key Ethical ArgumentsBreach of Trust: Historically, consumers view bank data as a tool for security and basic transaction processing, not as a lead-generation product for the bank's own profit centers.Lack of Transparency: Many customers remain unaware that their highly sensitive transaction histories are being combed to create targeted marketing profiles.Coercive Cross-Selling: Approaching a customer with a competing life insurance offer directly after they pay a premium can feel predatory and invasive.Current Industry ContextFinancial institutions utilize advanced predictive models to segment customers and minimize "churn" (the rate at which customers leave for competitors). However, the ethical line is crossed for many when defensive churn-prevention shifts into we-ponizing personal transaction data to undercut competitor pricing.Could you tell me which specific bank or financial institution you are looking into? I can help you find their exact privacy policies and opt-out instructions.

Saw a meeting on my calendar for the 2Q results this Friday. I am pretty sure it said that it was with "Wall Street analysts". I don't think I've ever seen that on any other results all hands call before. I wonder if they are real Wall Street analysts or just paid stooges that are going to say the future is bright and getting booted off the Dow after 22 years means nothing.

I feel like things like this are a red flag like the time in 2024 when they spoke about transparency for almost the entire all hands call.

It was just by chance that Verizon had just lost a class action lawsuit for not being transparent so they had to prove that they at least knew how to say the word.

I was recently laid off and started digging into the WARN data. Something doesn't add up.

The national WARN boards show these layoffs concentrated in Iowa, yet I know for a fact there were layoffs this year in Chandler, Irving, and Charlotte—not even counting non-core sites.

Is the company required to report WARN notices accurately by location? If so, why does it look like the layoffs are being funneled into one market? That raises some serious questions about transparency and accountability.

There are discussions about possible management-related layoffs next month. Has the company provided any official update on whether this is accurate, and if so, which organizations or leadership teams would be impacted? Transparent communication through official channels would help reduce uncertaint

Talk about some spin. If AK and his cronies in the C-Suite forgo their bonuses for the rest of their undoubtedly extremely short tenures and take a significant pay cut, then that'll show accountability.
And doesn't AK attend the WEF in Davos every year? What advice did he receive from all those geniuses?
Somewhere out there one can hear the echoes of Ginni's hysterical laughter.

https://www.businessinsider.com/ibm-ceo-arvind-krishna-facing-leadership-test-accountability-2026-7

By: Sarah E. Needleman | Jul 15, 2026, 4:56 AM CT

When IBM delivered bad news on Tuesday, CEO Arvind Krishna didn't look for someone else to blame. He owned it.

Krishna, who is widely credited with turning IBM around since becoming CEO in 2020, said in a letter to investors that clients had redirected quarterly capital spending toward scarce infrastructure. Management underestimated the scale of that shift, contributing to the company's second-quarter shortfall.

"These conditions require our teams to execute perfectly, and this quarter we faltered," Krishna wrote. "We did not adapt and move quickly enough, and numerous large deals failed to close on the timelines we expected."

Though IBM's shares tanked in response, current and former tech executives told Business Insider that other leaders ought to emulate Krishna's candor. Owning a setback can strengthen a CEO's credibility longterm, they said, by showing that management understands the problem and is prepared to address it.

"He will develop more trust among his shareholders and employees and customers by being transparent," said former Cisco CEO John Chambers.

Leaders can gain more credibility from how they handle setbacks than from their successes, he added, though they need to move quickly. They should explain what happened, acknowledge what did not go as planned, and outline how they intend to get the business back on track.

"Rule 101 on setbacks: speed and be very visible," Chambers said.

Openness carries risks, though. Leaders facing a setback may not yet have complete answers, and acknowledging uncertainty can leave them vulnerable.

"You have to have the courage to say, 'Here's what I know. Here's what I don't know,' " Chambers said. "And that sometimes exposes you to critics."

Accepting responsibility

Gilad Bechar, CEO of Moburst, a digital marketing agency, described Krishna's remarks as "refreshing." He said CEOs often attribute disappointing results to outside forces such as tariffs or other macroeconomic headwinds.

"Usually you don't see Fortune 100 companies that are owning their situation like that," said Bechar. "They are very afraid of being this candid."

Krishna may have helped contain the damage by characterizing the shortfall as a forecasting error rather than as evidence that demand for the company's products and services had deteriorated, added Bechar. Showing that management understood what went wrong gives investors reason to believe the problem can be corrected, he said.

"If you're in control of the situation, you fully understand everything, and you just misjudge one specific element, it sounds like you're in a much better place," Bechar said.

Public-company leaders may be obligated to disclose material setbacks promptly, but accepting responsibility is a choice, said Jeffrey Puritt, the retired CEO of Telus International, a technology services provider now known as Telus Digital.

Krishna could have satisfied investors' need for information without explicitly owning up to management's mistake. By doing both, Puritt said, he demonstrated the accountability expected of someone in the top job.

"If you're the CEO, you get paid to take responsibility for the business's performance, win, lose, or draw," he said. Blaming others, Puritt added, would have been "a bit of a cop out."

'What you need to hear'

Krishna has spent more than three decades at IBM. He helped orchestrate the company's $34 billion acquisition of Red Hat, which closed in 2019, and became CEO the following year. Since then, he's led an overhaul centered on hybrid cloud, software, and artificial intelligence.

Rod Adkins, a former IBM executive who also spent more than three decades at the company, said transparency is consistent with Krishna's leadership style.

"He has always been what I would call an above-the-board executive," Adkins said. "He will deliver what you need to hear versus what you want to hear."

That approach is especially important at a company like IBM, whose technology supports mission-critical operations, such as banking transactions and systems used by healthcare providers, airlines, retailers, and government agencies.

"Part of the trusted brand is being authentic with your communications," Adkins said. "Transparency, especially today, is a very important leadership attribute."

My thoughts...
Collins Aerospace experienced a significant workforce reduction on June 11, and there is ongoing speculation that additional layoffs may occur between September and November. Concerns have been raised regarding the effectiveness of the current leadership team, as uncertainty about future organizational changes appears to be affecting decision-making and overall confidence within the company.

Employees have also expressed concerns about operational and product-related challenges, including reported issues affecting certain brake programs. There is a perception among some that senior leaders are not being sufficiently transparent with customers and are shifting accountability to lower levels of the organization. While the company emphasizes its commitment to ethics and values, many employees feel these principles are not consistently reflected in business decisions.

Continued workforce reductions and restructuring activities may provide short-term financial benefits, but they have also had a notable impact on employee morale. Additionally, the loss of experienced personnel risks creating a significant drain of institutional knowledge, which could affect long-term operational effectiveness and sustainability.

While many recognize that organizational change may be necessary, there is a growing belief that meaningful improvement will require renewed leadership and a clearer strategic direction from the executive team.

Front page of the online edition of the WSJ at time of publish and still there at time of this posting: 24:46 UTC 17 July 2026. (11–14 minute read)
AK's days are surely numbered.

https://www.wsj.com/tech/the-inside-story-of-ibms-shocking-profit-warning-839ef4f2

Big Blue bet on transparency and paid a steep price. Can its CEO win back investors?

By: Emily Glazer, Anissa Gardizy and Lauren Thomas | July 16, 2026 6:00 pm ET

IBM’s board was staring down difficult news: The second quarter had been a bust.

Directors had long known that the artificial-intelligence revolution would upend the technology icon’s business, but the pain came sooner than expected, leaving the company with a tough choice, according to people familiar with the discussions.

Board members debated whether to issue a rare warning that bad news was coming or wait for the numbers to hit the tape a week later when executives could discuss them with investors, the people said.

After asking tough questions of CEO Arvind Krishna, the board agreed to take its medicine and disclose the disappointing results in the hopes of winning credibility for transparency. “This quarter we faltered,” Krishna wrote in an investor letter that IBM published hours before markets opened Tuesday.

The stock plunged 25%, the worst day in the century-old company’s history.

International Business Machines, a company that helped send humans to the moon, worked on America’s Social Security system and built a supercomputer that beat contestants at “Jeopardy!” is reckoning with the punishing realities of the AI bo-m.

It is one of the first big corporations to confront the costs and disruptions of the fast-evolving technology—and have to explain itself to anxious investors. Even as IBM helps its customers adapt to the AI age, it was caught flat-footed by it.

The news has sparked discussions on Wall Street about whether IBM should be broken apart or an activist investor will come hunting for Big Blue. It isn’t clear how much guidance the company will be able to give investors when it reports full quarterly results next week, one of the people said.

Krishna “needs to get this straightened out quickly because the last thing any 63-year-old CEO can afford is being stigmatized as a spotty executor that is responsible for historic selloffs,” said Don Bilson, head of event-driven research at Gordon Haskett, in a note to clients this week.

IBM declined to comment. Krishna promised to go into deeper detail when he hosts a conference call next Wednesday. “We have conviction in the strength of our portfolio and the strategic transformation of our business,” the IBM boss wrote in his letter.

Fears that AI tools from companies such as Anthropic and OpenAI would replace software have rattled the shares of Salesforce, Workday and Snowflake over the last year. IBM presents a different problem. Its warning this week showed that investments in AI infrastructure such as memory and new cybersecurity concerns are displacing spending on hardware, too.

Squeezed between server orders and AI buildouts, some of IBM’s customers now treat the tech giant as discretionary spending, said Daniel Morgan, a portfolio manager and analyst at Synovus Trust.

“I think you might see some, ‘Hey, we’ll hold off on this for a couple quarters…we don’t need to upgrade to the new mainframe right now,’” Morgan said. “That’s kind of hurting them.”

Missing out

Unlike other AI-infrastructure providers and cloud companies such as Nvidia, Google and Oracle that rent computing capacity, sell chips and offer networking hardware, IBM sells hardware and software systems that corporate customers install at their own sites. Its customer base includes leading financial-services firms and retailers.

The company’s top leaders have discussed whether it has become too reliant on large accounts that come with inconsistent deals and upgrade cycles that they can push off in lean times, people familiar with the matter said. They have talked about the need to diversify and court a wider range of customers, such as medium-sized companies, but it would take time to see if such an approach paid off, one of the people said.

Board members will be watching to see if Krishna’s team comes together, because this will be a test of his leadership. Some also are concerned that the company might swing to a more conservative stance that could hamper growth. The board is expected to meet again in late July.

One IBM alum, who now runs his own AI company, praised Krishna for his candor and said the market reaction was overblown.

“The punishment doesn’t fit the crime,” Debanjan Saha, CEO of DataRobot, wrote on LinkedIn. “This selloff wasn’t about a quarter. It was the market repricing a question: can a 115-year-old enterprise company lead the agentic era, or merely survive it?”

IBM has reinvented itself many times, transitioning from tabulators and time clocks in its earliest days to personal computers, mainframes and supercomputers and later AI and hybrid cloud computing.

Saha noted that the company had survived antitrust battles, the PC wars and the rise of the internet. “Every obituary was premature,” he wrote. “This one will be too.”

Krishna’s era

Krishna, who joined IBM in 1990 as a software engineer, was appointed in 2020 to succeed CEO Ginni Rometty. The selection of an executive who had been senior vice president for cloud and cognitive software signaled where the company was headed.

IBM bought open-source software company Red Hat for $34 billion, a deal Krishna helped integrate and would become a major growth driver. Software accounted for about $30 billion of IBM’s $67.5 billion in revenue last year.

IBM further sharpened its focus on the cloud-computing market with investments in hybrid cloud computing software and quantum computing. It spun off IT-outsourcing business Kyndryl to further simplify the business and bought cloud-software company HashiCorp.

Krishna told people last year that he expected AI would replace around half of the work in many workflows, increasing productivity and job reallocations. IBM has trimmed thousands of roles from its 260,000-person workforce and has hosted reskilling programming for its own staffers.

While Wall Street was initially skeptical of Krishna, his strategy started to bear fruit. As recently as last year, the company’s army of consultants had built up billions of dollars of bookings helping customers navigate how generative AI would change their business, and its software business was growing.

In April, IBM struck a first-of-its-kind settlement with the federal government, paying more than $17 million related to its diversity practices. The next month, its stock popped when the Trump administration awarded the company $1 billion in grants to boost quantum computing. IBM said it would invest $1 billion of its own cash alongside the award to set up a specialized quantum-chip manufacturing facility.

The stock’s drop this week has pushed its market capitalization below $200 billion, leaving it dwarfed by companies such as Broadcom ($1.8 trillion) or AMD ($800 billion) that were once seen as small suppliers to giants like IBM.

IBM and its advisers are aware that this week’s bad news could make it vulnerable to an activist investor showing up in its shares or pushing it to examine potentially splitting the company up, according to people familiar with the matter.

The quarterly warning was especially unusual coming from IBM, an American blue chip that held a reputation among investors for results that are steady, if unspectacular. For decades, IBM chief executives didn’t even participate on earnings conference calls, leaving such matters to the company’s financial executives.

Board members are aware that the near-term is likely to be messy and that an impatient Wall Street is unlikely to tolerate two or three more quarters of underperformance, according to the people familiar with the board discussions.

Gary Cohn, who has been IBM’s vice chairman since 2021, suggested Wednesday on CNBC that the change in companies’ spending on technology products and services might be temporary. While IT budgets set months ago have been disrupted by high spending on computing, companies are now starting to question the return on investment. Some, Cohn said, are asking whether they should go back to reinvesting in proven enterprise infrastructure.

Asked about the decision to warn about the poor results, Cohn said, “Arvind took it upon himself to say, ‘Look, I want to be transparent with the world. I don’t want to surprise them.’”

Not the PR number, the actual one.

Makes me want to vomit. Better not be fully transparent when a good percentage of employees are listening on the call.

In addition to the rolling layoffs we've seen in marketing and sales I can confirm that additional layoffs have hit roles in project management and engineering. Naturally this will never be addressed, but it would be nice to know when this can be expected to subside. Extremely disappointing approach from leadership and such a departure from the transparency of the founders and subsequent leaders.

Any word on Value layoffs? I have heard about a reorganization of people. But, no specific details on how people will shift around in the DK organization. I suppose with the departure of Ken this was inevitable, and with the serious reduction of resources and capex we have alot of “strategist” and product managers not really doing anything.

I wish leaders would remember how this anticipation made them feel. Please comment anonymously. Do the right thing.

How long will leaders realize they cannot keeping pushing the terrible GES scores under the rug? Why is HR keeping them so close?

Something that executives probably are not telling you is their concern as to the unexpected costs by AI providers (vendors) for AI tokens.

AI is today actually more costly than human beings workforce performing the same tasks.

Now I know they have been telling you that their goal for AI is not to replace anyone but rather to assist them in their daily work to focus on higher learnt daily tasks. Well, that is simply an outright lie (or fabrication if I am to be more civil in my wording).

They most definitely want to replace you!

Unfortunately for them, they probably had to ramp up letting persons go before AI had “learned” everything simply because AI is costing large corporations way more monies than they anticipated. So, to keep stock prices up and shareholders happy, they have had to earlier than anticipated had to layoffs folks to offset tje high AI costs.

Notice nothing has been said yet about the true customers (aka the members) as to how things will affect them. That is because members are not even in the equation (the thinking mindset) of the executives, as to their decision making.

With JR making a comment with no real transparency, and RMC being so big does anyone have any info on business lines within RMC being impacted?

This coming transition has been nothing but terrible communication like normal. They tell you to ask questions, but when you do no one will answer. For people taking on an RTM position, they were not informed of what the pay will be prior to accepting, how many stores are on the routes, how many merchandisers they will be managing, etc. Did they tell everyone they expect you to be on call on the weekends if you can't find coverage? Did they tell you they want you to do more merchandising if the low labor budget can't cover the amount of deliveries you have and you run hot? Always lacking the information needed to make a good decision.

......as my manager told us last Monday that an important update about the VSP was coming and he was referring to the date change to rescind your application.....the email that was only sent to those that applied for the VSP. So, either my manager applied for VSP and got the email, or managers are getting more information than what they are sharing with the plebes.

In the US, we cannot see where we stand on SCORE so we have no idea how we are progressing towards our quota. We cannot see all of our backlog. Is this the same globally?

After five mass RIFs in less than four years and many other unacknowledged workforce reductions, the only way for coworkers to achieve any transparency or fairness is through collective bargaining. I’m shocked that the Teamsters haven’t already organized the warehouses.

While organizing “knowledge workers” is more difficult, the CWA has had some success with bargaining for better severance packages, standards governing reductions, and guardrails around AI (and company’s false narratives about “efficiency gains”) at Google and Microsoft. If you’re an individual contributor, your right to discuss pay, benefits, and working conditions and organize a union is protected under the National Labor Relations Act.

Power concedes nothing without a demand. If you’re tired of CDW’s coworker last decisions such as authorizing a $1 billion stock buyback that they paid for with your former coworkers’ jobs, demand change collectively.

Management is rolling out a brand-new "Competency Model" framework for upcoming mid-year reviews that completely changes the rules of our jobs right after a massive layoff. They are introducing a mandatory "AI Competency" metric, requiring everyone to use AI tools daily and even "configure simple agents" just to be rated as "Effective" in their roles. This is a transparent move to force a smaller, surviving workforce to use automation to absorb all the leftover work from our departed colleagues. By rushing this out by August 31 alongside mid-year "goal adjustments," management is building a paper trail that redefines what it means to do your job well. If you don't adopt these new automated workflows, they can mark you as underperforming even if you are doing your core job perfectly, creating a loop hole for them to shift to performance-based terminations instead of layoffs so they can dodge paying severance down the road. Just when you think they can’t go any lower, they now want to take away severance pay

There seems to be a large amount of spin from the company executives about these outages, but nothing mentioned about the real cause.

CFO Ackland speaks about "good mobile signal strength" being available at certain locations during the outage. However, that radio signal is completely useless if the core / IMS network elements have failed.

The CEO and CFO both said that mobiles camped onto other provider's networks during the outage and that emergency calls would have still been possible.
However, if the customer's own radio (RAN) signal is still active (and core network has failed), mobiles WILL NOT move to other carrier's networks for the purpose of initiating emergency calls.

The company needs to come clean about what really happened to cause the outage.

Moreover, in the current political climate, all risks to network integrity need to be removed. Allowing offshore operation & maintenance access to Australian networks is an unacceptable security risk.

While offshoring may be cheaper, telecommunication companies should re-consider this horrible risk to Australia's critical infrastructure.

PLs have been given some insights this week. But are not saying anything.

Anyone wanna pop on this site and tell us what you were told this week.

I've noticed that layoffs only get announced if the affected group leaks it. Otherwise they just pretend it didn't happen. It's absurd.

The way they keep us in the dark about everything is exhausting. I shouldn't have to rely on internet forums to figure out my own job security. This is going to backfire on them eventually.

https://courtindex.sdcourt.ca.gov/CISPublic/casedetail?casenum=26CU024888C&casesite=SD&applcode=C

https://www.makaremlaw.com/blog/2026/06/illumina-press-release/

We were told a completely different story about a leadership exit in Finance. Total lack of transparency. Shameful

If you applied for the VSP did/are you telling your PL? I did not. If my PL asks I will tell them I did.

I wonder if my PL applied if they would tell the team?

Even when I was still employed at WF several jobs posted did not list the salary. I had to email the recruiter listed and ask them what the pay was. I've found that this behavior has increased and not just at WF. Is saying you want a job for the money really so taboo? Why would anyone apply for a job when they don't know how much it pays?

it feels like we're being gaslit... as if we didn't hear what leadership said and read the program information and FAQs. I pulled the receipts.

quotes from Sarah's 6/15 Calling:

"we are sitting here today as a result of policy changes and market changes, program changes and strategic business decisions that we have made."

"when our membership shifts, we need to shift our organization accordingly. In plain terms, what that means is there will be CenTeamers who are impacted by some of the restructuring that we need to undertake in the near term."

"[The Voluntary Separation Program] is something that our people team has worked incredibly hard on... we felt it was really important in this moment as we were embarking on this restructuring, to give CenTeamers who, for whatever reason, may be ready to move on to their next chapter, or to continue to pursue our mission in a different way somewhere else, the ability to raise their hand and do that with some enhanced benefits."

"there will be a wave of restructuring, our goal is to notify any of the impacted CenTeamers by early August."

"my commitment to you as we go through these changes, both in the near term and whatever change comes as a part of Mission Simplify, is to be as transparent as possible."

• both in the near term AND whatever change comes as a part of Mission Simplify... that's not anxiety inducing at all*

Tanya's 6/15 Email:

"Today, we are announcing a Voluntary Separation Program (VSP) to provide a pathway for those employees who are ready to start their next chapter, as well as the hard news that following the VSP, some members of the CenTeam will be impacted by a wave of restructuring."

"the VSP is designed to provide eligible team members with choice."

Employee FAQs:

A1 What is the Voluntary Separation Program?
The Voluntary Separation Program is a program that provides eligible employees with the opportunity to apply to voluntarily leave Centene with some enhanced benefits.

A2 Why is Centene offering the VSP? And why now?
We have a responsibility to our customers and members to constantly evaluate whether we can deliver better outcomes more efficiently. At the same time, when our membership base shifts - whether because of policy changes or strategic business decisions - we must adjust our organization to match that membership. Combined, these factors mean we are entering a period of both reimagining and restructuring. So we are offering the VSP as part of our efforts to right-size our workforce.

• we are offering the VSP as part of our efforts to right-size our workforce*

A3 Will there also be job eliminations as part of an involuntary program?
Centene is offering the VSP now to proactively manage changes in the business while being transparent, remaining true to our culture and providing team members a voluntary option first, before considering other actions. Following the VSP, we do expect that we will need to make further restructuring decisions, and we will expect to notify anyone whose role is impacted by early August.

• we do expect that we will need to make further restructuring decisions*

Tanya's 7/1 Email:

"The Voluntary Separation Program is an opportunity for those employees who were already considering an exit from Centene for personal or professional reasons to do so with some enhanced benefits."

"We strongly suggest that you apply for the VSP only if you want to leave Centene."

in essence, they said what they said... we heard what they said, we listened to what they said... we are not d-mb. we know that MCR/MCD/MKT health insurance is going through a major change. we know the economy is not looking all that great...

so we were supposed to risk being cut with less money? we have seen people post on here that they received significantly less severance. we have families to feed, we need to keep a roof over our heads!! I have been with the organization for years, believe in our mission and planned to stay for many more years, but this is ridiculous...

How's that working out for our executives?

Is anyone else questioning the legitimacy of things we've been told about the VSP or our future here? I mean, with all the intentional ambiguity and gaslighting, I don't trust anything or anyone anymore.

What's up with the disclaimer in the offers that says "this is an estimate and can change"? How would it change? Hopefully, people aren't making decisions based on the numbers provided, only to find a significant gap when the money is dispersed.

I’m curious what conversations are happening across the company. Have your leaders:

• Told you they expect your department to be relatively stable?
• Suggested your area could be significantly impacted?
• Discussed how workload, business need, or performance may factor into future decisions?
• Or are you getting little to no information?

It seems like communication varies dramatically depending on the department, and I’m interested in hearing others’ experiences.

What are they not telling us?

Since this platform is anonymous, are any people leaders willing to share what they know? Just give us what you can without exposing yourself.
How many need to accept VSP to prevent layoffs? Will layoffs hit all business lines?
Seeing post after post about closed-mouthed leaders only adds to the anxiety and frustration.
My direct leader offered some words of encouragement but not much else. Her leader, who usually has lots to say about everything has said nothing worth hearing, just the usual emotionally void attitude and gas lighting us to accept all this as normal.
Leadership is playing numbers games, but these are people's livelihoods. We deserve transparency.

Hello, as the BNY People Leader and member of the BNY Executive Committee, there are many posts on this forum the scream loudly for executive leadership attention. People concerns for accountability and transparency on topics related to business transformation and responsible leadership, stewardship of Human Resources and governance. While this forum is outside of PeakOn surveys and other formal feedback mechanisms, the readership here would like to have honest dialogue with you and your peers about company behaviors that have created a beyond toxic workplace environment with restrictive RTO policies, forced and falsified performance ratings, a constant cycle of fear and doom related to real estate closures, layoffs, consolidations, offshoring, onshoring, H1B visas, short staffing, reductions in force, staffing shortages within key departments, offshoring of entire job families, the continued buildup of Pune as the largest growth location within BNY, voracious cost cutting, ageism, forced and voluntary terminations, lack of severance, lawsuits, concerns about WARN Act circumvention, USA EEOC complaints, false optics and disclosure issues, etc., etc.. Should you and your staff be interested in reviewing and addressing my employee feedback beyond retributive PeakOn surveys, we would strongly encourage your direct involvement and attention. You and your EC colleagues are choosing to remain silent on all of these topics while ignoring company bylaws. Please come out… come out wherever you are!!!

It's been since April 1 since I've received a commission check, my boss said we would have plans at the end of April so we could get commissions, then May, then mid-June, and he now admitted he has no idea when plans will be out so that we can get paid. He laughed and said he isn't getting paid either. Fortunately, I have some savings, and can absorb a couple months of waiting, but I am running low on funds now, but half of my team is looking for another job, they need the income. There is no confidence that even when plans come out, that the commissions will be right, trying to mix XBS Corporate and now Enterprise, and Lexmark with all the assignment changes. My salesforce is still wrong, and I am missing accounts that were sent to inside sales for now reason. Our CEO and SLT promised better communications and transparency but we haven't seen even one communication about commissions. Is this to hold onto cash or something? Are others having problems getting paid commissions? This seems widespread

The Oregon Health Authority is cutting jobs due to a $90 million budget gap. Nine to ten higher-level staffers are being laid off by July 31. This initial round precedes an anticipated $421 million in federal Medicaid cuts. These future cuts could cause 200,000 Oregonians to lose health care coverage. Employees express concerns about transparency, morale, and potential service reductions.

Salem, Oregon

https://www.thelundreport.org/content/oregon-health-authority-layoffs-spark-concerns