... in looking at 2025!
While this round will continue to review the impact of the "New/New" at SECU, would like to broaden the discussion to include what is happening nationally with credit unions. Much is changing. Many folks believe that national trends toward open membership, commercialization, merger, consolidation, and national expansion mark the end of an era for credit unions, as originally conceived.
Some say these changes are a natural business evolution. Others claim "the new industry standard" is a betrayal of the original concept and fundamental principles of a credit union - and therefore a betrayal of individual credit union members.
Some say that credit unions are simply giving members what they want and need in a "new" AI/ digital world. Others believe that boards and managers are simply "cashing in" for themselves out of personal greed. Well, let's take a look at some of those trends and how they are or may affect SECU.
To get started would ask you to review the following posts: 1) SECU: What Is A Credit Union? [link], 2) Why Was SECU Created? [link], 3) SECU As An Employee Benefit [link], 4) SECU: Statewide Organization [link], 5) SECU: Federal Insurance, No Longer Monitoring [link].
Why reread? Because we need to see if we agree on how credit unions were originally conceived, how SECU in particular got started, and how we have evolved to this point in time. Hope the review is pretty straight-forward, not subject to much debate.
😎 The debate is over where next and why? Saddle up!
... do your homework! Final exam coming up... in 2025!
SECU showed today they do not care about their employees. You’re full of it. Scared to make a decision. Hats off to Truliant who closed all branches in the state at 1pm- leaders made a call to show they care.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately a huge number of SECU managers believe that employees should risk their safety in order to avoid causing our members a minor inconvenience. It has always been this way.
DeleteEhh. This is nit picky. SECU has been that way for years as far as employees working in the snow. Nothing to do with Brady, Hayes, Lord or Blaine. Advantages of remote work do come into play here, but I do think branches should’ve been closed. But this is nothing new. I’d rather harp on executives trying to take away the rule of 85 and outsource work to 3rd parties rather than sucking it up and working during a snow day. Let’s pick our fights wisely or else we just look whiny. What’s worse the board giving Jim Hayes 6 million or workers working in the snow for a day?We can suck that up and not whine
Delete@ 1:20 why are you presenting it as though it has to be one or the other? Both things can be true. SECU has a history of not closing during adverse weather. It should be addressed. This is irrelevant to the things you brought up.
DeleteThat was up to the management of the different departments. Our managers allowed for a skeleton crew to be on-site / volunteers. Safety and service was considered all the way. If you didn’t feel safe you could leave or didn’t have to come in.
DeleteSecu doesn’t force you to work during the snow @10:14. You literally can call in if it isn’t possible for you to come in and work and they are fine with it. Like I said, pick your fights wisely.
Deletewho is full of it? SECU showed today it cares about serving its membership.
ReplyDeleteThe members who walked in after 4pm as the tv is saying stay off the roads- just apply for a loan ( which could be online). If you don’t care about peoples safety just say it, but don’t come out and say you do because you prove over and over again that you do not. The 2 to 3 members that came in per hour could’ve waited another day or so for what they needed. But of course they were off due to the weather ! We should’ve closed at 3 across the board. Show you CARE- real leaders make tough choices sometimes.
DeleteMany credit unions are falling short in meeting the needs of their members. I completely agree with the public scrutiny they’re facing. The focus of member service has shifted to prioritizing growth above all else.
ReplyDeleteEmployee safety is a top priority or as we are told just as it is for any company. Sometimes business close, schools close etc to show that. SECU did not. And no we should not have been closed the entire day.
ReplyDeleteFunny the gym was packed yesterday ... of course I don't have access to Gym's gym that I paid for .... FWIW ...
ReplyDeleteIs that still a thing?
DeleteHmmm, it will be interesting to see what Secu is up to in 2025.
ReplyDeleteFor those of you complaining about not closing due to the storm, I worked for SECU for 25 years, we closed 1 day in all those years. Most of the time we just let people leave early who had further to drive home. It’s your SVP/EVP’s call.
"We just let people leave early" you mean like 15 minutes? The policy is that you can leave early if you feel conditions are unsafe - at your own expense. We have to use our own PTO. Also, it's not a real option because everyone can't just decide to leave. Managers STRONGLY encourage employees, particularly senior employees, to come in to work, regardless of how they may feel about road conditions. You know it and I know it. SECU should not force employees to use their own PTO and risk their reputations to their managers when conditions are unsafe. I'm not saying close down just because there's a little bad weather, but when people are being warned to stay off the roads we should act accordingly. Early closures in some parts of the state would have been completely appropriate.
DeleteHow much PTO do employees get each year? Does SECU provide higher than average PTO to their employees? Why wouldn’t employees be expected to use PTO when they choose not to work?
DeleteSorry. But 20 years ago there was no true HR department either. Whatever the SVP wanted to happen they got.. Do you know how many HhR lawsuits SECU is exposed to if the employees were not so loyal to the company. Now the organization is top heavy with management, decisions are not made out of fear.
ReplyDeleteFirst sentence is simply not true... rest seems to want to make several points but can't tell how the thoughts are connected.
DeleteIf there was an HR department it was in name only. There were so many labor law violations I’m shocked SECU wasn’t the subject of a lawsuit. Unpaid overtime, hostile work environment. Your probably either didn’t see it it or just ignored it.
Delete