Sure at least a third saw it comming. Yes trainees that were tracking got let go. Yeah, senior FAs were not consulted before their juniors got fired. It is what it is, and Morgan Stanleys’ promises to their people are good untill they are not. It’s not personal it’s just business, as the mafia hit men supposedly say. The million dollar producers are safe, untill the  promise to not sell the retail arm is no longer valid. You will know that promise is void when you show up in the morning there is a new name on the building. The beat goes on.

Mike Butler...Yes...Anyone 350-400 is the range for trouble.  From what I understand the exact number is not set.

Late August is still the timeframe.  If your over the number then I do not understand why you waste your time here.  If you are under then you should get your sh*t together soon.

[quote=MWD123]I think MS made some mistakes on this one.  Trainees meeting their numbers were fired.  Junior FA's on at least one large team were fired as well.  This has many senior FA's very upset - they were not consulted prior to the announcement.  I'm happy with many of the changes over the last six months, however, this move does not seem well thought out.  What does this say to other FA's that are meeting their numbers?  Watch your back.[/quote]

I think the numbers are flawed from the start.  You're not going to make it in this business if you get $7million.  You need to get up to 20+ in two years, especially if you are doing fee based. 

[quote=mikebutler222]

I can understand senior FAs being upset, but then these guys were really Jr FA employed by the seniors, they were trainees employed by MS.

[/quote]

I do think the Senior FAs should have been consulted because they were probably working the system.  They were probably making sure the Jr. FA only generated enough revenue to get by so that the team as a whole could make more money.  I do agree however, that the Senior FAs forget that the Jr FAs are paid by MS, not the Senior FA.

[quote=Incredible Hulk]mikebutler - i think MS has their own flavor of kool-aid and gorman's holding your bong.[/quote]

Kool-Aid?  Do you see MS brokers pushing products like the Jones guys or the insurance salesmen.... No.  I would like to know what you are refering to because that statement makes no sense to me.

[quote=iconsult100]I would bet that a third of those trainees had to see it coming though.  If you're 8 months in the business with 10 clients and $500,000 in assets, you're screwed anyway.[/quote]

if thats your scenario, you will soon be fired for not meeting goals so it wouldnt make a lot of sense to preemptively cut 500.  sucks for people who had a big client or 2 almost on the books though.  a lot of successful brokers dont steadily bring in $100k accounts, often a $5mm or $10mm pop is how people get going

[quote=Incredible Hulk]mikebutler - i think MS has their own flavor of kool-aid and gorman's holding your bong.[/quote]

Sure, I'm a kool-aide lover because I won't bite on Fritz' rumor that everyone below $400k is going to be cut. The fact that the deadline for the rumor has passed at least three times already and that such a cut would make no business sense has nothing to do with my view.

Feel better now? 

[quote=justaguy]It is what it is, and Morgan Stanleys' promises to their people are good untill they are not. [/quote]

I've said that before and that truth applies to every business in the world, including indy B/d when they make promises to the Reps using their services and even the Reps themselves when they make promises to their employees.

[quote=fritz]

Mike Butler...Yes...Anyone 350-400 is the range for trouble.  From what I understand the exact number is not set.

Late August is still the timeframe.  If your over the number then I do not understand why you waste your time here.  If you are under then you should get your sh*t together soon.

[/quote]

Again, Fritz, let's make it interesting and put your money where your mouth is. BTW, plenty of us here are above that line and simply enjoy this forum. Sorry if that doesn't meet your approval. 

a few thoughts on why this is wrong...

lies, lies, lies.  how many times have morgan employees been told there would be 'no more cutbacks'?  after about the 4th time in < 1yr that it was proved wrong, i jumped ship. 

in his memo, gorman draws a line bw trainees and FAs (who are supposedly safe).  at least in my office, trainees are FAs after 4 months.  there is no distinction.  trainees are forced to market themselves as financial advisors, there were 0 teams or partnerships.  there was no training program.  'trainees' were given 4 months to get 3 licenses but absolutely no instruction on how to be an FA except for a couple of useless conference calls.  no week in nyc, not even a 3 day boot camp in a regional hq.  there werent any 'junior fas.'  just a few green people (not necessarily younger) aimlessly trying to bring in some $$...  

ms says they fired 500 out of 1000, but there were originally 2500 trainees from the '05 classes.  wonder where the other 1500 went.  most didnt quit bc they were scared of the training repayment contract...

why not just let attrition take its course and start w/ smaller classes going forward?  if so few people are being successful, they will be forced out in a couple of months at the most anyways.  but oh yes, many would get a bonus for hitting goals. wouldnt want that to happen.

in what has become typical fashion, uncle mo foolishly tries to save a little bit of cash at the expense of bad press.  the irony is they may not even save any money w/ severance, unemployment benefits, legal action, etc. 

If the employees cannot trust there employer! How can the customers trust the company or the employees?

New employees must have signed contracts? So the company just breaks them! Sounds like a place I would not want to be!  

I hope this sends a message to all reps. Stay out of the wire houses! 

[quote=Greenbacks]

If the employees cannot trust there employer! How can the customers trust the company or the employees?

New employees must have signed contracts? So the company just breaks them! Sounds like a place I would not want to be!  

I hope this sends a message to all reps. Stay out of the wire houses! 

[/quote]

they cant and they dont.  clients will continue to leave... i wouldnt be suprised to see a class action law suit out of this

Although I feel sorry for the trainees that were let go in my complex, honestly not one of them was worth keeping around. There is no way that they would have been successful advisors in the long term. Absolutely none. The situation was similar around the country. The training program is not what it should be and Gorman will hopefully rectify the inefficiencies. I understand that I am not 100% safe given my level of production, but this business is difficult. If I do not continue to grow my assets and revenues I will be fired. Plain and simple. You have to prove yourself everday, to clients, to prospects, to your family, and to your firm.



Business is tough. Shareholders don’t have feelings.

[quote=xmsbroker]

a few thoughts on why this is wrong...

lies, lies, lies.  how many times have morgan employees been told there would be 'no more cutbacks'?  after about the 4th time in < 1yr that it was proved wrong, i jumped ship. 

in his memo, gorman draws a line bw trainees and FAs (who are supposedly safe).  at least in my office, trainees are FAs after 4 months.  there is no distinction.  trainees are forced to market themselves as financial advisors, there were 0 teams or partnerships.  there was no training program.  'trainees' were given 4 months to get 3 licenses but absolutely no instruction on how to be an FA except for a couple of useless conference calls.  no week in nyc, not even a 3 day boot camp in a regional hq.  there werent any 'junior fas.'  just a few green people (not necessarily younger) aimlessly trying to bring in some $$...  

ms says they fired 500 out of 1000, but there were originally 2500 trainees from the '05 classes.  wonder where the other 1500 went.  most didnt quit bc they were scared of the training repayment contract...

why not just let attrition take its course and start w/ smaller classes going forward?  if so few people are being successful, they will be forced out in a couple of months at the most anyways.  but oh yes, many would get a bonus for hitting goals. wouldnt want that to happen.

in what has become typical fashion, uncle mo foolishly tries to save a little bit of cash at the expense of bad press.  the irony is they may not even save any money w/ severance, unemployment benefits, legal action, etc. 

QUOTE]

Just a few thoughts on why you're wrong...

 Trainees are NOT FAs. I don't know what you've been told in your office, but trainees aren't FAs, period. They’re tracked, accounted for and paid differently than FAs. They’re essentially on probation until the exit their training program.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

I also have no idea where you get your impression that the training program was nothing more than a few useless conference calls. They fired 500 of the CURRENT CLASS, not the entire year’s class. I seriously doubt they'll be any "bad press" as a result of firing trainees who weren't making the cut (we heard the same thing about lawsuits from the cuts in August). You can count on cash being saved (your list of costs associated with just doesn't stand up), but in the long run I doubt cash was the real reason. It's more likely that getting on with revamping the training program and getting the new WM deal up and running was the real motivation.

[quote=xmsbroker][quote=Greenbacks]

If the employees cannot trust there employer! How can the customers trust the company or the employees?

New employees must have signed contracts? So the company just breaks them! Sounds like a place I would not want to be!  

I hope this sends a message to all reps. Stay out of the wire houses! 

[/quote]

they cant and they dont.  clients will continue to leave... i wouldnt be suprised to see a class action law suit out of this

[/quote]

ROFLMAO....

[quote=fired?]Although I feel sorry for the trainees that were let go in my complex, honestly not one of them was worth keeping around. There is no way that they would have been successful advisors in the long term. Absolutely none. The situation was similar around the country. The training program is not what it should be and Gorman will hopefully rectify the inefficiencies. I understand that I am not 100% safe given my level of production, but this business is difficult. If I do not continue to grow my assets and revenues I will be fired. Plain and simple. You have to prove yourself everday, to clients, to prospects, to your family, and to your firm.

Business is tough. Shareholders don't have feelings. [/quote]

where were the lines drawn? $2mm? 

xmsbroker,

Did you happen to leave last August? Also, what's with the caps problem?

Either you do, or you don’t. I am not trying to make excuses. However there was not much of a training program. No teams formed, in over 6 months only 3 of the one on one weekly development meetings happened, and maybe 4 of the weekly junior FA group meetings occurred, not one single meeting with the branch manager. Hard to believe but true. I ended up dragging my feet on two multimillion dollar accounts because I thought the system was too messed up for me to want to stay. Maybe my thinking is wrong: but I bring someone over because I am going to take care of them, and I just can’t bring them over if I think I won’t be there for them. For myself, I am fine with the cut: I just feel sorry for thoes that continued, and continue, to believe. And the beat goes on, and on…

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=xmsbroker]

a few thoughts on why this is wrong...

lies, lies, lies.  how many times have morgan employees been told there would be 'no more cutbacks'?  after about the 4th time in < 1yr that it was proved wrong, i jumped ship. 

in his memo, gorman draws a line bw trainees and FAs (who are supposedly safe).  at least in my office, trainees are FAs after 4 months.  there is no distinction.  trainees are forced to market themselves as financial advisors, there were 0 teams or partnerships.  there was no training program.  'trainees' were given 4 months to get 3 licenses but absolutely no instruction on how to be an FA except for a couple of useless conference calls.  no week in nyc, not even a 3 day boot camp in a regional hq.  there werent any 'junior fas.'  just a few green people (not necessarily younger) aimlessly trying to bring in some $$...  

ms says they fired 500 out of 1000, but there were originally 2500 trainees from the '05 classes.  wonder where the other 1500 went.  most didnt quit bc they were scared of the training repayment contract...

why not just let attrition take its course and start w/ smaller classes going forward?  if so few people are being successful, they will be forced out in a couple of months at the most anyways.  but oh yes, many would get a bonus for hitting goals. wouldnt want that to happen.

in what has become typical fashion, uncle mo foolishly tries to save a little bit of cash at the expense of bad press.  the irony is they may not even save any money w/ severance, unemployment benefits, legal action, etc. 

QUOTE]

Just a few thoughts on why you're wrong...

 Trainees are NOT FAs. I don't know what you've been told in your office, but trainees aren't FAs, period. They’re tracked, accounted for and paid differently than FAs. They’re essentially on probation until the exit their training program.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

I also have no idea where you get your impression that the training program was nothing more than a few useless conference calls. They fired 500 of the CURRENT CLASS, not the entire year’s class. I seriously doubt they'll be any "bad press" as a result of firing trainees who weren't making the cut (we heard the same thing about lawsuits from the cuts in August). You can count on cash being saved (your list of costs associated with just doesn't stand up), but in the long run I doubt cash was the real reason. It's more likely that getting on with revamping the training program and getting the new WM deal up and running was the real motivation.

[/quote]

im not sure what your hard on for ms is, but these are my impressions from the branch i was at.  obviously any given branch could be different w/ a great mgr.  on the other hand, im sure some branches were worse than my old one.

my impression of the trng program comes from having 3 trainees sitting outside of my old office.  they were given no help.  our branch didnt have a sales mgr and the bom was mia most of the time.  their training consisted of asking people like me questions. no meetings,  no structure and no real accountability either.

i dont claim to know everything about the 500/1000 number, but i do know someone who's year wouldve been up in a month or two so they certainly pulled from a good portion of last years class

trainees are not fas only when its convenient.  they are 'real' FAs to the public.  they solicit and conduct business as any other FA would.  hell, theyd probably be fired if they told a prospect they were a trainee.

the bad press comes from promising these people at least a year to hit the numbers.  if people are told to focus on HNW prospects, then 1 client can crush the numbers.  its not accurate to say they 'werent on pace' when the tracking goal is $2mm.  one good client and your a 'leader'