i work for westpac, the takeover has to be stopped. workers will lose jobs. on both side , westpac and st george branches will close. especially in shopping centres with both banks. it is not good for the economy. gail kelly has a lot to answer for. clients on both sides will be affected.
the older mature workers will be hardest hit.......
we have to do something......
i was working at the commonweralth bank , when they, bought out colonial, the colonial were shafted, strange thing is gail kelly was working then at the commonwealth, very odd.
we have to do something.......
Posted by
1050952
at
12/05/2008 7:53:15 PM
|
this sux. at stg, we pride ourselves on being different to the big 4 and it is hurtful that we are finding out the same time as the public and the customers are coming in and we are having to answer questions that we don't know the answers to. there are promises that are being made, but as history shows, these seem to be forgotten down the track. branches will close and staff will lose their jobs. stg is going to lose their reputation as a "customer friendly" bank.
Posted by
1031117
at
13/05/2008 8:54:59 AM
|
I agree, all of those seek jobs will be filled very quickly.
Its a shame that an organisation such as Westpac, that pride themselves on being there for their staff, would put us all through this stress and worry about our jobs.
It is clear that because of duplication of services and positions, people such as ourselves will loose jobs. It happened when Westpac took over bank of melbourne.
I agree with the first comment made on this post by 1050952 at 12/05/2008 7:53:15 PM - people who are most likely to be at risk are older staff. Also people who are genuinely trying to achieve targets but are not quite making it. People who dont get along with managment, the list goes on.
Clearly for staff, this is not the time to achieve poor results, have any sick days, need family time, or not agree with managment. The finance industry is so competirive already, and it is so sad that now we will all be watching our backs and wondering where the next attack will come from.
The irony is only last week I completed my staff survey at Westpac, and remarked to another staff memeber that my overall opinion of the organistion had improved since last year.
Wow! wonder what I would say now?
Posted by
1067654
at
13/05/2008 5:06:32 PM
|
Is it a coincidence that Gail Kelly was with the Commonwealth when they took over Colonial. and six months after joining Westpac from St George that this has happened. I wonder what transpired (conspired) in the job interviews leading up to her Westpac appointment. Dont worry its not over yet - the fat lady is yet to sing. I do not believe $1-31 will be high enough. NAB is waiting in the wings. I wonder what their offer will be. NAB staff be warned. You may yet be involved here.
Posted by
1067757
at
15/05/2008 9:58:24 AM
|
Well the question we must ask ourselves regarding offshoring is 'Who is really beneffitting? Shareholders, The Indian Government? or there other unseen forces at work?
Posted by
800873
at
15/05/2008 4:47:40 PM
|
I agree with 1067757, would like to have been a fly on the wall in the 'job interview'. Let's face it, there have been quite a few 'management people' who are now working with Gail for Westpac that used to work for SGB. This has been coming since August when her appointment was announced.
I've been on leave, and only know what I have read in the paper. Great notification from SGB management! At least when STG took over BSA, we were advised by BSA management, whether we were on leave or not.
People are saying 'it's better than offshoring!' Not necessarily, at least with offshoring, quite a few people kept their jobs, with the 'takeover' anyone, and everyone, is a candidate to lose their job. 3000 or 5000 jobs gone, offshoring is a drop in the ocean compared to takeovers.
And for all those Westpac staff who have been advised by Management that their jobs are safe from offshoring, guess again. They tell you what they are told to tell you! Gail is a big fan of offshoring.
Posted by
806105
at
19/05/2008 10:30:09 AM
|
Business decisions should be made by the people running the business. It is not a union’s place to dictate to any company how they should operate or how they should structure themselves.
It is a union’s place to support its members working in those companies, and ensure that they get the best outcome from any decision a business makes. I believe in and fully support unions’ rights to support workers (I’m a paid-up member, after all!).
So, the FSU should ensure that its members who are affected by this proposed merger (and, yes, there probably will be job losses) are treated well and fairly: open and timely communication from management to workers; ensure follow-through on commitments to pay or provide all entitlements for employees; etc.
But, we can’t tell Westpac or St George not to merge – that’s not our place.
Posted by
1029720
at
20/05/2008 8:51:35 PM
|
I work in Westpac IT and have done so for a number of years. I worked in branches a long time ago as a teller, overseas officer, posting general ledgers, even posting customer ledgers by hand in a loose leaf book. So I've seen a lot of changes. Not all mergers are bad and it makes strategic sense for the combined finance group to keep separate brands where they are well recognised. Think of insurance companies and washing powder - lots of brands but few owners of the brands. Some jobs will be lost - sure - but redeployment opportunities will be available to those who are flexible. The new work is certainly going to be more interesting than mundane back office functions that are increasingly computerised anyway.
Posted by
72113
at
24/05/2008 11:51:25 AM
|
I work at a bank not affected by this proposed merger, but I went through the merger of the State bank Vic and the CBA. What resulted was massive job losses, lack of customer service, and within a few years, the actual value bought out by the CBA had been lost, because the business just walked out the door. From a consumer point of view, whether it is called a merger or a takeover, in essence it is the same thing. It will see less staff available to service the customer base of both banks, and less choice for consumers, who often end up with the short end of the stick. While it may make sense for shareholders, it is about time that their were other factors considered by the boards of banks before they decide to merge and takeover.
Posted by
1038452
at
3/06/2008 12:45:47 PM
|
Frankly I think Gail Kelly is guilty of a conflict of interest- Leave St George & head for Westpac 6 months later & shortly after that Westpac wants to take over St George & claims to have no prior knowledge or involvement?
Don't think so.
Posted by
800873
at
3/06/2008 1:09:59 PM
|
I work in the St George call centre in Parramatta and I agree with 1029720 that it is not the FSU's place to tell businesses how they should be run. It is the union's job to help protect the working conditions of their members. The problem with this takeover is the timing (with regard that parlaiment has yet to reverse work choices legislation) and that times have indeed changed. A lot of staff here at St George have already gone through a recent merge with Advance Bank, and are under the impression that things will be similiar to that. I don't think St George staff are aware just how union unfriendly corporate Westpac is, but the way to change that is by holding the Rudd government accountable to their promise to overturn work choices, lobby the Rudd government to do something in legislature to protect Australian workers from greedy coporate initiatives like off shoring, lobby government to legislate unions the right of entry and to bargain on behalf of it's members working conditions and educating the general public (just like the pre-election work choices campaign) about just what corporations are really up to. (And not just in the finance sector). It would be great to actually have the media support the union for once without portraying the union and it's members as trouble making thugs. At the end of the day, whilst the law allows corporations to introduce these business 'initiatives' they will! This will be just the beginning if this takeover happens. I think that this will open the door for the other 'majors' once the precedent has been set. More corporate mergers, more off shoring.
Posted by
1576
at
3/06/2008 2:11:29 PM
|
Union management please "Take your Blinkers Off". The merger will happen regardless of what action you take. If it doesn't happen with WBC it will happen with someone else. You need to focus and channel your engeries on getting commitments/agreements etc from the Bank that entitlements will be retained or enhanced, staff losses are minimised and all those issues that will effect staff addressed. I'm from BankSA and I have no objections to a merger and look at it as opening greater opportunities for my career....provided the union deals with the issues that will directly effect us.
Posted by
804089
at
3/06/2008 2:17:49 PM
|
Well guys, it's started already! Thursday 29/05 it's Business as Usual and Tuesday 03/06, 4 of our contractors have been given notice. Why should SGB projects be put on hold or canned altogether pending the merger. What are Westpac doing? Are they still spending money? Even though it's the nature of contracting, it still sux.
Posted by
19295
at
9/06/2008 12:01:53 PM
|