Goldman Sachs to lay off hundreds of employees in annual talent review

Layoffs due to cost cutting: Goldman Sachs is planning to cut hundreds of jobs as part of an annual review process targeting underperforming employees, a person familiar with the matter told Reuters on Friday.

The investment bank reinstated performance-related job cuts in 2022 after suspending them for two years due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Our annual talent assessments are normal, standard and customary, but otherwise unremarkable,” a Goldman spokesperson said in a statement to Reuters. “We expect to have more people working at Goldman Sachs in 2024 than in 2023.”

Last year, the exercise reportedly resulted in between 1 and 5 percent of Goldman employees losing their jobs. Over the years, cuts made under Goldman’s strategic resource assessment have fluctuated based on market conditions and its financial outlook.

The bank’s global headcount stood at 44,300 at the end of the quarter on June 30. In 2023, the bank undertook several rounds of headcount reductions as trading activity was impacted and higher-for-longer interest rates weighed on the macroeconomic outlook.

The operating environment for banks has since improved, with Goldman reporting that its second-quarter profit doubled in July thanks to strong debt underwriting and fixed-income transactions.

The resilience of the U.S. economy has given corporate executives the confidence to close deals, debt sales and stock offerings. But despite the industry-wide recovery, dealmaking activity has remained below historical averages.

Goldman shares turned positive in afternoon trading, closing up 0.6 percent. The stock is up 32 percent this year and has outperformed the broader market as well as an index that tracks rival large-cap banks.

Earlier in the day, a Wall Street Journal report said the layoffs that have already begun will continue through the fall and could affect more than 1,300 employees, or 3 to 4 percent of its workforce.

However, Goldman said in its statement to Reuters that the figures reported by the Journal were not accurate.

Source link

Disclaimer:
The information contained in this post is for general information purposes only. We make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the post for any purpose.
We respect the intellectual property rights of content creators. If you are the owner of any material featured on our website and have concerns about its use, please contact us. We are committed to addressing any copyright issues promptly and will remove any material within 2 days of receiving a request from the rightful owner.

Leave a Comment