I suppose there must be an exception for financial institutions but this is why employment blacklisting is illegal in California. It seems like a good idea (as an employer) until you realize how utterly ripe for abuse it is.

I don't know if this abuse is enough to warrant regulation of the way the finance industry operates the blacklist but perhaps it's worth considering. I'm not sure how you could retain the obvious benefits of the blacklist while preventing abuse though. Perhaps require that only illegal/fraudulent behavior as a permissible reason?

I don't know enough about the industry to really offer meaningful suggestions that won't have catastrophic unintended consequences but abuse of employees by their employers makes me incredibly angry.

IIRC, several of the blacklisted employees were in CA. I wonder if it's somehow legal in this situation.

I want to leave WF solely on this issue but it is so hard to actually change banks. They have better to me then other national banks as a customer but I find this to be beyond repair.

In the UK they've actually fixed this. The whole process of switching is automated and requires very little work from you. The process is called the "Current Account Switch Guarantee" (Current Account is British for Checking Account). All of your electronic payments (in and out) are migrated automatically. And because the vast majority of payments in the UK are done using direct debit nowadays (rather than checks), there's very little extra work to do on your part. I'm a US citizen but spent a few years in the UK. I miss their banking system.

Here's an example of the standard process: http://www.hsbc.co.uk/1/2/switching-to-hsbc

If you're thinking about switching banks you should strongly consider moving to a credit union. Do your research but many(all?) are member owned and offer many benefits when it comes to fees you might otherwise occur at big bank. I could not be happier with my current credit union

The credit unions in my town had one or 2 branches (in a town of 300k+ people) in very obscure locations. Maybe an extra ATM here or there if you knew where to look. Yet there was always a wells fargo branch or ATM within a 2 mile radius.

If a CU wants my business, they should have a branch that's open till 8 or 9pm, open saturday and sunday, and have plenty of ATMs throughout town. That's a start, then they can have at least everything WF offers, such as linked credit and home equity accts. They should innovate, not lag behind.

Most people need to go to a branch rarely, so the number of branches doesn't seem like a big deterrent for most.

As for the number of ATMs, both credit unions that I belong to are part of the sum network (free reciprocal ATM access) and actually reimburse me for fees that off network ATMs might charge.

After years of getting slammed by big banks with excessive fees when cash was tight and balance ran low, I came to appreciate using an institution whose goal is not to profit off of me however they can.

I'm at a predicament because WF has been very good to me, going back to circa 1999. never opened fake acct's, never charged me predatory fees, always had easy-to-access ATMs, friendly tellers, never made a single mistake. Now they have my mortgage and HELOC, so as much as I'd like to "punish" them by cancelling my account, I'd be punishing myself just as much.

I didn't find it hard at all. The few places I use auto-pay come off of credit cards for this very reason. I just had to keep a little extra money in my "old" account for a month or two just in case.

The scariest part was, after a couple months and no spending, the bank said to close my account I had to write a check to myself for the exact balance in my account. Once cashed, and the account hit $0, it would close automatically. I was terrified of overdrafting or undershooting it by 1 cent or something.

I left Wells Fargo. It's not as hard as you think.

FWIW I went to Chase Bank. I'm not happy, I'm not sad. Banking is as exciting as a loaf of bread. The less I interact with a bank and the humans at a bank, the happier I am.

>"The two most glaring abuses, in my mind, were the blackmailing of employees to put their name on a banking industry do-not-hire list if they didn't make sales quotas that proved nearly impossible without the opening of fake accounts."

Are you referring to a U5? That would be ironic because I believe that all of the retail employees that were fired now have a huge red flag on their U5 which means it will really difficult to get a job in the industry going forward.

Yes, the second link leads to the episode discussing the origin of the form.

>The two most glaring abuses, in my mind, were the blackmailing of employees to put their name on a banking industry do-not-hire list

But we want the CEO to go to jail?

When people in the financial world do "wrong", they go on a list. The dispute here isn't about the list, it's about whether they did "wrong" (which appears they didn't).