UBS - Layoffs
339 RepliesJump to last post
Did your friend approach the BOM with questions regarding the impending layoffs or was his BOM forthcoming withe info?
[quote=nestegg]
[quote=Raindog]There is a guy in my office doing around $300, and he was told by the BOM that he is not going to get cut. Also, teams are the focus of UBS going forward, and individuals on teams are safe.[/quote]That will make it that much sadder when it happens…Remember when they said Lehman wasn’t goinf BK, and Wachovia was a healthy Bank…etc etc…you can’t trust these big banks as far as you can throw them[/quote]
Or “we’re not going to cut the dividend”…
MY BOM said they same thing to someone making $225k trailing 12....that they were safe. As mentioned earlier, the problem that is becoming more and more evident is that these BOM don't have the power to save anyone. I wouldn't count on having your BOM save you, b/c the final desicion isn't there's to make. From what I was told (above BOM level), BOMs are on the list as well. AND the layoffs that are coming from the top....they don't care specifically who gets cut. They need to shave off $300 - $350 million a year on the US Wealth Management side. If one branch needs to cut 25%...it will come from the bottom UNTIL it reachs the last person that's needed for that branch regardless of whether your BOM has tried to save you. They simple don't have the pull you think for this round of layoffs.
The only thing I'm not sure of is whether it's happening april 17th or april 20th; or if I should leave before or after the layoffs.Well, call me an unadulterated cynic, but does it seem possible (or even likely) that the BOM would give “assurances” to select FAs who are on the block that may have clients that fit Hoekstra’s “new business focus” (2-10MM) to make those FAs feel like they’re not being let go, so that they don’t look around for anywhere else to go, and then those same FAs (who was previously told they wouldn’t be cut) are let go with everybody else?
You see, that would give the BOM plenty of time to segment and target the FAs book for the clients that UBS wants to keep, U-5 the FA, so that he's not registered and has nowhere to immediately land, thereby giving UBS plenty of time to reassign his accounts to either other FAs that are staying, or sending the "undesirable riff-raf accounts" (<2MM) to the call center, and leaving the unfortunate FAs in the cold with no clients and no B/D. In the time it would take those FAs to land with a new B/D, their clients will have been worked over and retained. Amd I'll bet that when those FAs go to their BOM and say "You told me I was safe!", the BOM will say something like. "My bad! I was overruled... sorry!" Does anybody believe that could happen?UBS is a joke. Market has probaly made a low and recovering and these idiots cutting back. Same idiots that paid 270% on peak T-12. UBS last in everything
[quote=NFA1972]Well, call me an unadulterated cynic, but does it seem possible (or even likely) that the BOM would give “assurances” to select FAs who are on the block that may have clients that fit Hoekstra’s “new business focus” (2-10MM) to make those FAs feel like they’re not being let go, so that they don’t look around for anywhere else to go, and then those same FAs (who was previously told they wouldn’t be cut) are let go with everybody else?
You see, that would give the BOM plenty of time to segment and target the FAs book for the clients that UBS wants to keep, U-5 the FA, so that he's not registered and has nowhere to immediately land, thereby giving UBS plenty of time to reassign his accounts to either other FAs that are staying, or sending the "undesirable riff-raf accounts" (<2MM) to the call center, and leaving the unfortunate FAs in the cold with no clients and no B/D. In the time it would take those FAs to land with a new B/D, their clients will have been worked over and retained. Amd I'll bet that when those FAs go to their BOM and say "You told me I was safe!", the BOM will say something like. "My bad! I was overruled... sorry!" Does anybody believe that could happen? [/quote] 72, It's possible, for sure, but not likely in most branches. I guess I'm just naive, but here's what I think. Most people in this business have changed firms once or twice during their career. Not everyone, but most everyone. Most of that change happened in one community, and they were able to build and maintain relationships with FA's and BOM's that are now domiciled in many different firms. But again, if you're like me, you don't burn bridges, and you keep in touch with all those old colleagues. Not just to have them help you in your time of need (and vice versa), but mostly because they are your friends. There comes a time, especially in small to mid-sized communities (<500,000 population) that you know "everyone." And everyone knows you. If you have integrity and you are good at what you do, you make a good name for yourself. If not, eventually you're exposed for who you are, and you exit the business. What also happens with these relationships, is that you develop an "Us Versus the Man" mentality when it comes to dealing with these gi-normous firms like UBS, ML, Citimorg, etc. And you then watch each other's back. I know managers are most concerned about their own arses right now, as well as providing for their families. This is understandable. But, they will have to live with the reputational consequences in these communities if they bend someone over and give it to them dry. Managers know this. They also know that they're only as secure as the profitability of their branch, which is determined mostly by FA's and their efforts. Screw enough FA's in your branch, and you will eventually get what's coming to you. I'm no UBS homer, believe me. I'm as pissed off as the rest of you right now. But to lump every BOM together, and to believe that any and all of them will lie to your face in order to take care of the mothership at the expense of their neighbors seems a bit far-fetched. Having said that, though, just in case I'm wrong, remember the Boy Scout motto-- Be prepared! LANow is the time to extend the hand of friendship to old friends, don’t you think? I have put out a few calls to former colleagues letting them know that if the rumors become fact and they need a place to go they can join my practice. (I know they have clean compliance records) If everyone under 400K gets the boot my practice could wind up with 4 new FAs in the next few weeks. I don’t think these FAs are going to have alot of choices. They will be the walking wounded. I don’t think UBS can sue me for raiding if they fired all the people I bring in.
Agreed!Now is the time to extend the hand of friendship to old friends, don’t you think? I have put out a few calls to former colleagues letting them know that if the rumors become fact and they need a place to go they can join my practice. (I know they have clean compliance records) If everyone under 400K gets the boot my practice could wind up with 4 new FAs in the next few weeks. I don’t think these FAs are going to have alot of choices. They will be the walking wounded. I don’t think UBS can sue me for raiding if they fired all the people I bring in.
Does anyone know anything about the business plans that were distributed to some FA’s about 3-4 weeks ago? What was the purpose? Were they the first stage of notifying the FA they are at risk for layoff? Or does it mean these guys may get a reprieve? Does being in a joint number or partnership with someone save an FA? I would welcome feedback.
From the other posts in this thread, I would suspect that if you have been given a biz plan, you are on the list to go. But, I have no info myselfDoes anyone know anything about the business plans that were distributed to some FA’s about 3-4 weeks ago? What was the purpose? Were they the first stage of notifying the FA they are at risk for layoff? Or does it mean these guys may get a reprieve? Does being in a joint number or partnership with someone save an FA? I would welcome feedback.
We have heard from Rep’s or rumors of reps that have spoken w/ their BOM regarding impending layoffs and the ones that are under 300 and 400 who have a verbal commitment that they will not be impacted by the upcoming downsizing. Are there any out there that have been forewarned by the BOM that they will be affected and that this layoff will occur at or before month’s end?
There was a conference call last week - I’m guessing if someone wasn’t on it, that probably doesn’t bode well for them, unfortunately.
You mean if you weren’t a part of the conference call you should expect to be let go? Do you think this lay off will occur next week?
I talked to an FA at UBS today who did just under $400k last year. I think there are definitely people in his office who did b/w $300-$400k last year, which means they are most likely annualizing at a less than $300k rate. He said that his manager told him that “nobody” in his office will be affected. So, either things are being greatly exaggerated on this thread or his manager is being lied to by upper management or the manager is lying to this FA
Thank you!I talked to an FA at UBS today who did just under $400k last year. I think there are definitely people in his office who did b/w $300-$400k last year, which means they are most likely annualizing at a less than $300k rate. He said that his manager told him that “nobody” in his office will be affected. So, either things are being greatly exaggerated on this thread or his manager is being lied to by upper management or the manager is lying to this FA
[quote=HymanRoth]
[quote=SuperRecruiter]
[quote=RecruitingWhiz]I’ve heard any new rep that got a “deal” and is let go will be able to keep the deal no questions asked.[/quote]
This is true. We (somehow) managed to push through a $380k producer (third quintile by LOS) at UBS. He got a 240% deal about 4 months ago, and now we’re going to help him look for a new home, because he knows he’s about to get cut. Best of both worlds for this guy, the only reason he went to UBS is because he could not pass up the deal.
[/quote]
And you and this producer think this is a good thing? Something to celebrate? Meanwhile his clients heads are spinning.
No wonder our industry has such a bad reputation and nobody disagrees when I refer to the wirehouses as “formerly” major firms.
[/quote]
Well, yes… it is a good thing. Much better than getting sh*tcanned and asked to pay the money back, don’t you think?
Where is everybody? I heard there was a meeting in NY today for UBS Council Seat. I understand from a reliable source that M. Hoekstra spoke, confirmed that the layoffs would be harsh… line in the sand at 300.