Thursday, November 2, 2023

SECU - The Pause That Refreshes: Why Not Rebuild Credibility? #4

 https://www.upyourtelesales.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/dreamstime_sm_139830766.jpg  If you're right about risk-based lending, why not pause and reconfirm your view with the membership?

Yesterday was an interesting study in human character! That time honored phrase: "People Helping People" seems to have lost its' cachet with some folks. But in the prior posts, heard little objection to the statements that all members prefer lower loan rates and that SECU does not need risk-based lending to be financially successful - now or in the future. 

Let's try a couple of simple ideas today and see where we go. First, does anyone disagree that there is a fierce, honest difference of opinion about risk-based lending among the SECU membership? (Y/N?)  That that disagreement has been harmful to the reputation of SECU? (Y/N?) That given the wide divergent of views on the fairness and validity of risk-based lending that one side or the other - or perhaps both! - may have their facts wrong? (Y/N) That SECU might benefit from a pause in the further implementation of RBL to re-discuss and re-explain the value of RBL to the SECU membership? (Y/N?)

Why wouldn't the SECU Board and leadership agree to pause and re-discuss such a divisive issue with the member-owners of SECU? Wouldn't you, if you were a member of the SECU Board? (Y/N?) Was the message unclear from the membership to the SECU Board at the 2023 Annual Meeting? (Y/N) Will the message be different at the 2024 Annual Meeting, if the RBL issue is not resolved? (Y/N) 

If critics of risk-based lending are misguided, then take time to correct their reasoning. Where is the harm in that?  The current pursuit of risk-based lending without further discussion appears self-destructive. Has listening become dangerous? (Y/N?) Why rush into a potential, further disaster?

✅ And, just in case you hear some "blah-blah-blah" about "we must proceed", tiers/rates are in place, programming is complete, commitments have been made, "this train has left the station", etc, etc ... the typical you know what. 

😎 There is a simple answer to all that B.S.! If acting in good faith and maintaining the respect and trust of the membership is important to the SECU Board ....  the easy solution is ... ready, figured it out, it ain't that hard....

 

... just set the rates on all the tiers to be the same temporarily. That would immediately eliminate all the "blah, blah, blahs" wouldn't it? (Y/N?)

15 comments:

  1. Whose idea at SECU... was RBL? If it was Jim Hayes', he's gone. Will the new board members get to vote on whether to continue down the current RBL path (seems like Phase II was hurried so the new board members couldn't)? Unfortunately, this feels like a political divide, where folks feel the need to double-down and dig their heels in. Can't possibly admit it was a bad idea...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It seems as if Leigh and Loan Administration are still taking its orders from the former CEO. Very much on point with the "train has left the station" as an alternative. Probably the same for the secondary market standards on mortgages that we hear are running full steam ahead. It looks like SECU is losing the values it was built upon among other things. For what gain?

      Delete
  2. Post 1 of 2: Extremely concerned Member and Former Employee

    Well said as always Mr. Blaine. I apologize for my long diatribe below, but I assure you that it's all heartfelt and 100% sincere. I divided it into 2 separate posts due to the length. I sincerely ask that you consider posting both. I carefully considered each of your questions and answered them to the best of my ability.

    Yes, I completely agree that there is a fierce, honest difference of opinion about risk-based lending among SECU membership.

    Yes, that disagreement has been very harmful to the reputation of SECU. The membership, especially those who aren't familiar with RBL or SECU's recent implementation of it, see divisiveness and conflict. This hurts our reputation moreso than anything I can remember, especially in the recent past.

    Personally, I think the facts are against the implementation of RBL for SECU. Firstly, charging higher interest rates for those who are struggling adds to their economic strain. Why not charge "everyone" a low interest rate. SECU used to pass their profits along to the membership. Now, it seems that we have lost focus of our charter and the purpose of why we were created in 1937 in the first place. Do we really want to become a for-profit bank like institution? I know that is what the board, Ms. Brady, and Mr. Bomba along with his acolytes want. I'm pretty sure that the majority of our membership disagree with their wreckless crusade.

    SECU most certainly would benefit from a pause in further implementation of RBL so that they can discuss and further explain the reasoning behind this change to the membership. We still are the owners of this collectively owned cooperative the last time that I checked. Depspite Board's/Brady's/Bomba's efforts to lead us astray from our purpose, RBL isn't the direction that the majority of our membership wants to take. I think that was made abundantly clear at the Annual Meeting last month. Despite Ms. Brady's fraudent and disrespectful claim that you, Mr. Blaine, gave all of those a script to read from and that they were effectively just your puppets was extremely offensive. The board changed the bylaws this year to eliminate the new business (I think that is what it was called) at the conclusion of the meeting where you, Mr. Blaine, spoke last year in an attempt to shut us up. Boy, did that backfire on them. Multiple people expressed their strong feelings, rightfully so, about their adamant concern on where this fine institution has been led the past couple of years. I especially appreciate the nice lady who is a member who voiced her opinion that if she had been able to hear the information presented during the question and answer section before she was forced to vote, that her vote would have most likely been different. It's just plain wrong that this board and Ms. Brady and Mr. Bomba have been deceptive and the complete opposite of transparent. That is a disgrace, and they should be held accountable.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Post 2 of 2: Extremely concerned Member and Former Employee

    The SECU Board and executive management should absolutely pause to re-discuss such a divisive issue with the member-owners of SECU. Their continual refusal to do so speaks volumes, and the only solution may be to replace the majority of the remaining 8 prior board members and to remove the current executives who are tearing apart "our" credit union.

    I definitely would put a pause on RBL if I was an SECU board member.

    The message at the Annual Meeting was absolutely clear. Shame on Ms. Brady for alleging that the fine folks who spoke were fed their lines by Ms. Brady. I worked with many of the retired SECU leaders who spoke. Ms. Douglas is one of those. I have always admired Ms. Douglas' outspokenness and dedication for our credit union and our members. She is a wonderful example of someone who fights for our branches and for our members. The branches love Ms. Douglas as did/do I. To suggest that she isn't able to speak on her own is utterly offensive and insensitive.

    I feel extremely confident that the message of our complete disagreement with RBL at the 2024 Annual Meeting will be made even more clear to the SECU board, Ms. Brady, and Mr. Bomba that we're sick of being treated like second class citizens who are supposed to just sit-down, shut-up and accept whatever they say as the gospel. We will not stop!

    There is absolutely no harm in them attempting to correct our reasoning and strong opposition to RBL. They obviously won't do this because they don't have any strong and legitimate arguments other than wanting to make our credit union a for-profit bank like institution who caters to the privileged elite and takes advantage of the little guy who may be struggling. That is just plain wrong and against everything we stand for.

    Listening does seem to be interpreted as dangerous to Board/Ms. Brady/Mr. Bomba because they've buried their heads in the sand and are h*ll bent on barreling forward no matter what we (members/owners) think. They somehow think that they're smarter than us and know better than us. I'd like to let them in on a little secret. They're not smarter, and they certainly don't appear to know any better either. Why must they feel the need to rush into futher disaster that is tearing our credit union apart.

    ReplyDelete
  4. https://www.secujustasking.com/

    ReplyDelete
  5. Does anyone disagree that there is a fierce, honest difference of opinion about risk-based lending among the SECU membership? NO
    That that disagreement has been harmful to the reputation of SECU? YES
    Given the wide divergent of views on the fairness and validity of risk-based lending that one side or the other - or perhaps both! - may have their facts wrong? YES
    That SECU might benefit from a pause in the further implementation of RBL to re-discuss and re-explain the value of RBL to the SECU membership? YES
    Why wouldn't the SECU Board and leadership agree to pause and re-discuss such a divisive issue with the member-owners of SECU? Wouldn't you, if you were a member of the SECU Board? YES
    Was the message unclear from the membership to the SECU Board at the 2023 Annual Meeting? NO
    Will the message be different at the 2024 Annual Meeting, if the RBL issue is not resolved? NO
    If critics of risk-based lending are misguided, then take time to correct their reasoning. Where is the harm in that? The current pursuit of risk-based lending without further discussion appears self-destructive. Has listening become dangerous? NO
    Just set the rates on all the tiers to be the same temporarily. That would immediately eliminate all the "blah, blah, blahs" wouldn't it? YES

    SECU - There was a Difference!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Replies
    1. That is not the answer

      Delete
    2. #RemoveLeighBrady

      Delete
    3. @ 9:14 PM…Agreed that solely removing Brady isn’t the answer.

      In addition to removing Brady, the remaining 8 board members and Bomba also need to be removed.

      Brady is in way over her head. It’s more difficult for her to take credit for others’ work now that she is CEO. The Buck should stop there, but unfortunately she only has a penny.

      Delete
    4. Remove Chris A.

      Delete
  7. As a current employee, RBL is for the birds!!! Our CEVR Lon has been 10.75% since the beginning of time or as long as I can remember. First call of the day Wednesday November 1 was for a personal loan application. Modest beacon of 644, excellent length of employment, direct deposit into SECU, we are their primary financial institution and the RBL quoted him
    12.5% percent!! Now tel me that’s not highway robbery and an attempt to make money!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A for profit not for profit! The major focus at the annual meeting was how much money SECU was making. Most profitable year ever. A real head scratcher for this member. How can so many intelligent people not connect the dots? Maybe no "common sense"!

      Delete
    2. 'Industry Standard' ...
      SECU - There Was a Difference

      Delete
  8. #RemoveLeighBrady #EndIndustryStandard

    ReplyDelete