第一金證券投資信託股份有限公司

The company has no precedent of firing employees.

Bonuses and performance targets are among the lowest. The manager makes promises, saying they will let you pass the probationary period, but then does not tell you the evaluation criteria and ultimately extends the probationary period once more. Since the manager is responsible for performance, there is a conflict of interest with the financial consultants. They will first assign monetary-product sales performance to you, then after the probationary period ends, take it back and change it to their own code. However, the client was passed over from another unit and is not their client. When I asked during a push for performance whether I could call that client, I was told that it was their client and I was not allowed to contact them. The assistant also follows the manager’s instructions. I do not know whether changing the credited performance to the manager’s code is legal, and it was changed into the manager’s performance without my approval or stamp. In short, there is a lot going on beneath the surface. When other branches redistribute resources, the manager says that the general manager did not approve distributing the shared client list. When a colleague pointed out that the central and southern regions were all distributing theirs, the manager fell silent. The manager can see the maximum subscription amount for every client on the shared list. As for whether it can be changed to the manager’s account, they say openly that it cannot. However, any clients assigned to me can be changed so that the manager receives credit for the performance, so there should still be ways to change the codes on the shared list. In short, there is a lot going on beneath the surface.

The company has no precedent of firing people.

Bonuses and performance targets are among the lowest. The manager will make empty promises, saying they will let you pass your probation, but then fail to tell you the evaluation criteria and ultimately extend your probation once more. Since the manager is responsible for performance targets, there is a conflict of interest with the financial advisors. They will first assign currency-based performance to you, then after your probation ends, take it back and change it to their own code. However, that client was passed over from another unit and is not actually their client. When I asked during the push to meet targets whether I could call that client, the response was that it was their client and I was not allowed to touch it. The assistant also listens to them. I do not know whether changing the performance attribution to their code is legal, and it was changed to their performance without even obtaining my signature or approval. In short, the situation is very complicated. When other branches distribute resources, they say that the general manager does not agree to distributing the shared client list. When colleagues asked why the central and southern regions were distributing it, they stopped talking. The manager can see the maximum subscription amount of every client on the shared list. As for whether it can be changed to their name, they publicly say it cannot; however, all clients assigned to me can be changed so that the performance is credited to them. There should still be ways to change the code on the shared list. In short, the situation is very complicated.

The company has no precedent of firing people.

Bonuses and performance targets are among the lowest. The supervisor will make grand promises, saying they will let you pass the probationary period, but then they will not tell you the evaluation criteria and will ultimately extend the probationary period once more. Since the supervisor is responsible for performance targets, there will be conflicts of interest with the financial consultants. They will first assign monetary-product performance to you, then, after the probationary period ends, take it back and change it to their own code. However, the client was referred by another unit and is not actually their client. When I asked during a performance push whether I could call that client, the response was that it was their client and I was not allowed to contact them. The assistant also follows their instructions. I do not know whether changing the performance attribution to their code is legal, and it was changed to their performance without my seal or approval. In short, there is a lot going on beneath the surface. When other branches further divide up resources, they will say that the general manager does not agree to distribute the shared public-list leads. When a colleague asked why branches in central and southern Taiwan were distributing them, the supervisor fell silent. The supervisor can see the maximum subscription amount of every client on the shared public list. As for whether those clients can be changed to their name, they say openly that it is not allowed; however, any clients assigned to me can be changed so that the performance is credited to them. There should also be ways to change the codes of clients on the shared public list. In short, there is a lot going on beneath the surface.

The company has no precedent of firing people.

Bonuses and performance targets are among the lowest. The supervisor will make empty promises, saying they will let you pass your probationary period, but then they do not tell you the evaluation criteria and ultimately extend the probationary period once more. Because the supervisor is responsible for the team’s performance, there is a conflict of interest with the financial consultants. They will first assign currency-type performance to you, then after the probationary period ends, take it back and change it to their own code. However, the client was passed over from another unit and is not actually their client. When I asked during the performance push whether I could call the client, the response was that it was their client and I was not allowed to contact them. The assistant also listens to the supervisor. I do not know whether changing the performance attribution to their code is legal, and it was changed to their performance without even obtaining my signature or approval. In short, the situation is very complicated. When other branches distribute resources, the supervisor says that the general manager does not agree to distribute the shared list. When colleagues asked why the central and southern regions were distributing them, the supervisor stopped talking. The supervisor can see the maximum subscription amount of all clients on the shared list. Officially, changing them to the supervisor’s name is not allowed, but clients assigned to me can all be changed so that the supervisor receives performance credit. There should also be ways to change the codes of clients on the shared list. In short, the situation is very complicated.

The company has no precedent of firing people.

Bonuses and performance targets are among the lowest. The manager makes grand promises, saying they will let you pass the probationary period, but then does not tell you the evaluation criteria and ultimately extends the probationary period once more. Because the manager is responsible for performance, there is a conflict of interest with the financial consultants. They will first assign currency-based performance to you, then, after the probationary period ends, take it back and change it to their own code. However, the client was referred by another unit and is not even their client. When I asked during a push for performance whether I could call that client, I was told that it was their client and I was not allowed to contact them. The assistant also follows the manager's instructions. I do not know whether changing the performance attribution to their code is legal, and it was changed into their performance without my stamp or approval. In short, there is a lot going on beneath the surface. At other branches, when resources are being allocated, the manager says that the general manager does not agree to distribute the shared contact list. When a colleague pointed out that branches in central and southern Taiwan all distribute it, the manager fell silent. The manager can see the maximum subscription amount of every client on the shared contact list. As for whether they can change it to their own attribution, they say openly that they cannot. However, all clients assigned to me can be changed so that the manager claims the performance, so there should still be ways to change the codes for clients on the shared list. In short, there is a lot going on beneath the surface.

The company has no precedent of firing people.

Bonuses are among the lowest in terms of performance. The manager will paint a rosy picture, saying they will let you pass your probationary period, but afterward they won't tell you the evaluation criteria and will ultimately extend the probationary period once more. The manager is responsible for performance, so there will be conflicts of interest with the financial consultants. They will first assign monetary-product performance to you, then after your probation ends, take it back and change it to their own code. However, the client was referred by another unit and is not their client. When I asked during the performance push whether I could call that client, the response was that it was their client and I was not allowed to contact them. The assistant also follows their instructions. I don't know whether changing the performance attribution to their code is legal, and it was changed to their performance without even obtaining my stamp. In short, there are deep waters here. When other branches redistribute resources, they will say that the general manager does not agree to distributing the shared list. When a colleague asked why the central and southern regions were all distributing it, they fell silent. The manager can see the maximum subscription amount of all clients on the shared list. As for whether it can be changed to their name, they openly say no, but the clients assigned to me can all be changed so that the performance is credited to them. There should also be ways to change the codes of clients on the shared list. In short, there are deep waters here.

The company has no precedent of firing people.

Bonuses are among the lowest in the industry. The manager will make empty promises, saying they will let you pass your probationary period, but then will not tell you the evaluation criteria and will ultimately extend the probationary period once more. Because the manager is responsible for sales performance, there is a conflict of interest with the financial consultants. The manager will first assign money-market sales performance to you, then, after your probation ends, take it back and change it to their own code. However, the client was passed over from another unit and was not the manager’s client. When pressured to meet performance targets, I asked whether I could call the client, and was told that the client belonged to the manager and I was not allowed to contact them. The assistant also follows the manager’s instructions. I do not know whether changing the sales performance attribution to the manager’s code was legal, and it was changed to their performance without my stamp of approval. In short, there is a lot going on beneath the surface. When other branches distribute resources, the manager says that the general manager did not approve distributing the shared client list. When colleagues asked why central and southern branches were distributing it, the manager fell silent. The manager can see the maximum subscription amount of every client on the shared list. Officially, changing the attribution to the manager’s name is not allowed, but clients assigned to me can apparently all be changed so that the manager receives performance credit. There should also be ways to change the codes of clients on the shared list. In short, there is a lot going on beneath the surface.

The company has no precedent of firing people.

Bonuses and performance targets are among the lowest. The manager will make grand promises, saying they will let you pass your probation, but then they do not tell you the evaluation criteria and ultimately extend the probation period once. Because the manager is responsible for the performance results, there is a conflict of interest with the financial advisors. They will first assign currency-product performance to you, then after the probation period ends, take it back and change it to their own code. However, the client was referred by another department and is not their client. When pressured to meet performance targets, if you ask whether you can call that client, the response is that the client is theirs and no one is allowed to contact them. The assistant also follows the manager's instructions. I do not know whether changing the performance attribution to the manager's code is legal, and it was changed into their performance without my stamp or approval. In short, there is a lot going on beneath the surface. When other branches distribute resources, the manager says that the general manager did not approve distributing the shared list. When colleagues ask why the central and southern regions are distributing it, the manager falls silent. The manager can see the maximum subscription amount for every client on the shared list. As for whether the clients can be changed to the manager's code, they say openly that it is not allowed; however, any clients assigned to me can be changed so that the manager receives credit for the performance. There should also be ways to change the shared-list clients to the manager's code. In short, there is a lot going on beneath the surface.

Can't think of any

Bad money drives out good money

You'll be infuriated if you join