Thread regarding Bank of America layoffs

yea, we hire at $23/hr and never give a cent more ever.

Gotcha!

Smaller companies are apparently paying more. Time to voite with our feet.

Which is what they want anyway. Certainly no more to be gained by sticking around. The good ole days when we actually enjoyed working here are long gone.....

They like to brag about the starting salary being $23/hour. So they end up keeping most of their employees in the $50k-$100k range. No big raises.

This bank is run by a bunch of wuussys. The CEO BM is a complete phony. He got the nerve to go on CNBC and tell lies about how well B of A is doing and how they are doing it. He needs to step his big azz head down asap. He should tell the truth about how he pays his employees cr-p wages and how he hopes these mofos would just quit so he doesn't have to pay them a severance.

….dont even get me started…

@sud+1qLDc21u - "...why aren't more people quitting"

The question BM asks himself every night as he goes soundly asleep.

Closely followed by, "how many more quarters can I keep telling the Banking Analysts and Shareholders that Expenses are still on the high side and not budging? Nevermind, I'll just keep repeating Record Year over and over. They seem to like that."

At least Citigroup was open about their plans for layoffs. Protracted misery is the cowardly tactic here.

Too bloody expensive to pay for lay-offs. Far cheaper to make people miserable so they leave on their own. (ahem, "organic" attribution.

It's about $$$$.

Back in the layoff days (late 90s/early 2000s), managers used to have to keep force ranked lists of those they would cut if asked by Management to reduce headcount expense.

It was very open, everyone knew. Managers would announce in team meetings they were looking at possible cuts ("more details to come") They would have their own short list + you could go up to your manager and say, "hey, if you're asked to make cuts, I wouldn't mind" or "Put me on the list. If i can help save the seat of someone who really needs the job, happy to help). I tried for YEARS, but was always told "no, not you". :-(

Now the ones they'd let go have been here so long, it would cost them an arm and a leg + the dreaded bad press (good lord, not THAT!!). So the strategy is make people miserable and they will sort themslves out.

Personally, I would LOVE to be laid off as a bridge to retirement!! That would be beautiful - then, I really would be grateful.

Probably because they don’t want to pay out severance. Although they aren’t legally required to, it is probably what holds them back. I’m guessing, anyway.

The low or nonexistent comp increases might be their way to incentivize people to quit on their own. Which brings me to another question… why aren’t more people quitting?

HR is by far the most incompetent division within the bank. Dealing with it is a kafkaesque nightmare — and yet I’ve witnessed HR mid-level nobodies overrule SVP and Managing Directors! There are way too many of these minions and they have way too much power.

Laying people off is one way. Laying off the people who should be layed off is the RIGHT THING. However, the bank has too many planted employees that are friends or politically tied in some way or fashion. How else would you explain MD’s who stay here for so long and are deaf tone. True leaders don’t exist because they are planted in the company collecting paychecks and cashing out on long term equity since they have no risk. You can tell an MD is a protected citizen when they don’t even show up in their corner office. Workplace excellence doesn’t apply to them.

Because it’s “bad press”. Insert eye roll.

Because if they don’t want to pay you to work, they are not gonna pay you not to work either.

All while being somehow or another being labeled as a meets/meets
It is mind-blowing