Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Strange, my brother was just recently complaining to me how he is always overly pressured to open other accounts by a teller (or whoever) when he goes in for his regular banking tasks.
Wells Fargo has been my bank for quite a while now and I don't have much money there, but if I did I might want to close my account and go somewhere else, however, I wonder how common this is in other banks?
I have been out of banking for 5 years or so, but by the time I left it was that way with all banks. Our bank had many many former Wells Fargo employees, who left because of the push to sell. I heard stories from tellers who were forced to stay late calling customers until they got a new account.
Where I worked, attempting to sell services was expected, although not oppressive. We tried to walk a line without annoying the customers.
We are just refinancing our mortgage at Wells Fargo, and I wish it was anywhere else. The only bank I hate worse is BOA.
Corporations are owned by real people. Let's look specifically at Wells Fargo. Here are its top shareholders:
Berkshire Hathaway; Warren Buffett is its most famous shareholder, but other shares are owned by various mutual funds and ETFs for the benefit of pension plans for state & municipal workers and 401Ks and IRAs of individual investors, and in trust for widows & orphans.
Is this the same Warren Buffet who says he's taxed at a lower rate than his secretary????
When those greedy employees stole from Wells Fargo by claiming compensation they did not earn for work they did not perform, they were stealing money from public sector union pension funds.
Are these the same public sector union pension funds that members are referred to as "greedy"?
When those greedy employees stole from Wells Fargo by claiming compensation they did not earn for work they did not perform, they were stealing money from individual investors like me.
But when Wells Fargo Stock went up you didn't complain did you?
Are you saying you don't believe anyone in management wasn't aware of any of this going on???
Are you going to complain about the head of the banking department "retiring" with an obscene $125million golden parachute???
Do we really think all those employees in multiple states and multiple branches orchestrated this "conspiracy" to defraud their account holders as individuals, separately and solely??
That concept is beyond rational thought, thus it must have been designed and compelled by those in authority who also had the power to ignore what was happening when the initial complaints came rolling in...
conspiracy means a federal fraud violation...RICO statutes should apply and bank officers should be charged and tried...not just fined...
How much money was supposedly made during the years this gaming strategy was in effect??
Fine WF x3 that amount...
Are you saying you don't believe anyone in management wasn't aware of any of this going on???
You seem to be making a distinction between employees and management - but that doesn't make sense in this case, as every manager is also an employee. They are all employees. It doesn't matter what their title is -- their title might be director, manager, VP, a corporate officer, whatever -- they are all employees. The only ones who are not are non-executive members of the board of directors.
So when I say "greedy employees defrauded Wells Fargo", that includes what you call "management" because each and every one of those managers were employees who received paychecks.
When Wells Fargo says it fired 5300 employees, they are using "employee" correctly to refer to what you call both employees and managers and executives, as each and every one of them are also employees of the corporation. The 5300 fired former "employees" include individual contributors, supervisors, managers, directors, general managers, functional managers, AVPs, VPs, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue biker
Are you going to complain about the head of the banking department "retiring" with an obscene $125million golden parachute???
It is clear that the payment is a contractual relationship between the former employee who received that $125 million and the corporation. I think that was a stupid contract.
I sincerely hope the FBI investigates this former employee (you would call her a former manager or a former executive, but I call her a former employee) and if they are able to determine she broke laws, I hope they prosecute her. I hope the FBI doesn't let her off the hook the way they did with convoluted logic to let Hillary off the hook.
I sincerely hope bank examiners among the various regulators (the Fed, the Treasury, Comptroller of the Currency, etc) investigate this former employee and assess penalties against her if she broke regulations.
I hope Wells Fargo Corporation sues her to claw back that compensation. Perhaps a Court would determine she engaged in fraud and hence the golden parachute should be voided.
**********************
Do you deny the Shareholders of Wells Fargo are the victims here?
Do you disagree that pension plans of firefighters and policemen that own Wells Fargo are indeed victims of unscrupulous employees? (By "employee", I mean individual contributors, supervisors, managers, directors, AVPs, VPs, SVPs etc -- any employee at any level)?
Do you disagree that individual investors who own Wells Fargo are indeed victims of unscrupulous employees? (By "employee", I mean individual contributors, supervisors, managers, directors, AVPs, VPs, SVPs etc -- any employee at any level)?
Last edited by SportyandMisty; 09-13-2016 at 03:56 PM..
Do we really think all those employees in multiple states and multiple branches orchestrated this "conspiracy" to defraud their account holders as individuals, separately and solely??
I think I'm using the noun "employee" differently than you. I'm using it to mean anyone who receives a paycheck. Their title might be "teller" or "supervisor" or "branch manager" or "director" or "functional manager" or "assistant vice president" or "vice president" . All of these people are employees regardless of their job title or the size of their paycheck.
And the fired 5300 include all the above.
That concept is beyond rational thought, thus it must have been designed and compelled by those in authority who also had the power to ignore what was happening when the initial complaints came rolling in...
conspiracy means a federal fraud violation...RICO statutes should apply and bank officers should be charged and tried...not just fined...[/quote]
I agree with you completely. I think it should extend to employees who were appointed officers and corporate officers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2read
How much money was supposedly made during the years this gaming strategy was in effect??
Fine WF x3 that amount...
Here I must disagree with you. The crimes were committed by employees (all the way up to and including officers of the company). The fines should be imposed on those people (former employees).
It makes no sense to fine Wells Fargo Corporation as you suggest -- because that is taking money away from the public sector union pension plans for police and firefighters, and it is taking money away from widows and orphans, and it is taking money away from 401K plans and IRAs and from individual investors.
Wells Fargo Corporation is the victim of the bad acts of the 5300 (which includes supervisors, managers, directors, VPs, officers of the corporation, etc).
Don't blame the victim. Don't blame the firefighters, teachers, police, widows & orphans, and and 401K plans and IRAs who are the owners of Wells Fargo Corporation.
There is a distinct difference between employees and managers. While all are technically "employees", legally managers represent the company, employees do not.
If you ever had the "privilege" to participate in investigations by the government, you will clearly see this difference. As a manager, every word out of mouth is regarded as speaking for the company, and every action I make is regarded as acting for the company. Employees are not viewed this way, what they say is not regarded as speaking for the company, and what actions they take are not regarded as acting for the company.
For example, if the government proves there is discrimination in hiring, it is the company that is fined, as it is the company that did it, even though it could be just one manager that did it.
That is the employee-manager relationship, managers are afforded authority in a company it is decisions and policies employees are not. In business speak, no one refers to everyone as "employees", when speaking the term "employees", it is referring to non-management.
You may disagree, but that is how it is. In this regard, over 5000 people were involved, including managers, this was not a handful of employees, but a systemic wide issue which clearly indicates this was company practice. It is company practice because managers were driving the train, thus the company was doing it.
If the system was the way you think it is, where individual personnel are responsible for actions and can be sued, that would mean companies could basically not be held liable for anything, ever, and construct their policies around this fact, it would be totally absurd.
Now what i would like to know is; how many employees during this time were fired or forced out due to not taking these kind of actions to make their goals?
There is a distinct difference between employees and managers. While all are technically "employees", legally managers represent the company, employees do not.
No, all managers do not legally represent the corporation. For example, not just any manager can legally sign the corporate tax return for the IRS. Not just any manager can represent the corporation in front of various judicial proceedings or the ITC or SEC; they must be a corporate officer.
In the real world, a major corporation is comprised of many separate legal entities. Each legal entity has a specific set of authorized legal representatives, and that number is small.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
In business speak, no one refers to everyone as "employees", when speaking the term "employees", it is referring to non-management.
Respectfully, I disagree. The Board of Directors views everyone including the CEO as employees. The CEO views everyone as employees including the COO, CFO, CMO or SVP of Sales & Marketing, CTO, SVP of Manufacturing, SVP of R&D... etc.
Even the COO, CFO, SVP of Sales & Marketing, CTO, SVP of Manufacturing get annual performance reviews. Some are promoted. Others receive warnings and may ultimately be involuntarily separated from the company.
All are employees. All must adhere to the official Employee Handbook.
All are employees except the Board of Directors -- and even then, it is common for some Directors to be employees as well (e.g., the CFO and CEO).
You may disagree, but that is how it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
You may disagree, but that is how it is.
Respectfully, no it isn't. A manager is a job title of an employee.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
In this regard, over 5000 people were involved, including managers, this was not a handful of employees, but a systemic wide issue
We agree. I think everyone agrees.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
which clearly indicates this was company practice.
I disagree with your conclusion. Nowhere in the official Wells Fargo Employee Handbook did it say anything like "it is OK to make up phony accounts so you can rip off the corporation for a bigger bonus." My guess is just the opposite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
If the system was the way you think it is, where individual personnel are responsible for actions and can be sued, that would mean companies could basically not be held liable for anything, ever, and construct their policies around this fact, it would be totally absurd.
Hmm. I see your point. At the same time, I think you know official policies because they are formal and written. For example, just about every major corporation has an official formal ratified published anti-discrimination policy that boils down to this: "We will not discriminate in employment practices on the basis of race, creed, national origin, gender, religion, sexual preference, sexual identity, marital status, veteran status, disability status, age" and maybe a few other things I'm forgetting. That is the policy, and if an employee breaks that policy, she or he is subject to written, formal, disciplinary action up to and including immediate termination.
(as a digression, there are legal concepts of protected classes. For example, in age discrimination, it is unlawful to discriminate in employment matters against anyone over the age of 40. This protection does NOT extend to people under the age of 40. Similarly, various racial minorities are specifically members of a protected class; white men are NOT. This may be splitting hairs and may not help in this discussion.)
The overwhelming reason to penalize bad actors is to provide a deterrent to future hypothetical bad actions. Which do you suppose would be a better deterrent to bad actions:
a) Let's say employee John Smith knows that if he does bad things, the worst thing that will happen is his employer will be fined, and in an extreme situation, he might lose his job.
b) Let's say employee John Smith knows that if he does bad things, he could go to jail and personally be required to pay fines?
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
Now what i would like to know is; how many employees during this time were fired or forced out due to not taking these kind of actions to make their goals?
My guess is not many, because the focus was on hitting the numbers rather than the method used to hit the numbers. At the same time my guess is there were a number of employees let go because they failed to make their goals. These are sales people. Some people are just not good at sales.
Look, in the real world, there are corporate bad actors. Let me give you an example I think you and I would agree upon.
If you read through the Wikipedia entry, you'll get a sense for the fraud involved up to & including the CEO of that corporation (who was indeed convicted of criminal fraud and insider trading).
For example, the CEO directed the corporation to put 26,000 bricks into hard disk drive boxes and ship them to Singapore, booking the transaction as revenue. Yeah, he really did that.
Bottom line:
Quote:
The investigation revealed that Q.T. Wiles (the CEO) set iron-clad sales forecasts and pushed these requirements down into the sales team, leaving no room for failure and setting bonuses on beating those figures. The sales team responded by "touching up" reporting documents as they moved back up the reporting chain. Wiles responded to these positive reports by setting even higher sales targets, leading to ever-increasing fraud to meet them. Wiles eventually left the company in February 1989, followed by most of the company's officers over the next months.
The Board of Directors report was released in the summer, stating that Wiles and his management team had "perpetrated a massive fraud" in a "company run amok"
Months later, MiniScribe declared bankruptcy.
I don't think Wells Fargo is another MiniScribe, or another Enron. Do you?
Last edited by SportyandMisty; 09-13-2016 at 09:42 PM..
A friend of mine, Shelly, worked about six or seven years ago at a Wells fargo in either woodland Park or colorado springs. She saw what was going on. she reported it. She was fired for being a whistle blower. This has been going on a long time.
I just listened to an Audible book about the Enron fraud...
In that situation which also occurred over years of mismanagement and deliberate fraud there were several levels of company management involved up to and including the Board in general and several members more specifically which failed in the fiduciary duty of oversight for several reasons -- although they technically didn't benefit directly except through the falsely affected stock prices. Most of the rank and file lower level employees lacked any real knowledge of how the books were being cooked but some areas certainly did because of the gross mismanagement and incompetence exhibited in day to day decisions...
The fact is that is the most difficult aspect of "wrong-doing" in running a company to get anyone to acknowledge...that people,in leadership.positions are just not good at their jobs...
When a company is perceived to be strong, a leader, profitable...no one wants to rock the boat and claim otherwise... At Enron there were several people in mid-to higher management who tried to bring people in power to see that serious problems were weakening the company, that some people were clearly not making good choices about company actions and decisions but they were either ignored or cautioned to mind their own business...
I don't know that any senior level management at Wells Fargo was terminated for actions related to this fiduciary breach...I really doubt it because the higher the management, the more implied liability for the company in general...
My understanding is that the company had been warned about this policy before and was supposed to be cleaning up its act only to have it persist for years...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
