Swearing fealty to Goldman Sachs

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member


Article:
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. plans to ask junior bankers to confirm their loyalty on a regular basis in a bid to limit advances from talent-hungry buyout firms.

The investment bank will ask new analysts to certify every three months that they haven't already lined up jobs elsewhere, according to people familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified discussing the confidential plan.

"We are committed to a culture where our employees act with integrity, consistent with all of our policies," said Goldman spokesperson Andrea Hurst.

The move is meant to thwart poaching by private equity firms that have been signing up junior bankers near the start of their on-the-job training, a practice known as on-cycle recruitment. Some buyout shops are even approaching newbies before they show up for their analyst programs, stoking tensions across the industry.

Last month, JPMorgan Chase & Co. told incoming graduates that they'll be fired if they are caught accepting offers of future jobs somewhere else before they complete their first 18 months at the firm.

Soon after, Apollo Global Management told prospective investment-banking candidates that it wouldn't interview or extend offers this year to the class of 2027. Chief Executive Officer Marc Rowan said "asking students to make career decisions before they truly understand their options doesn't serve them or our industry."

The fight over talent creates a tough situation for banks, which try to maintain good relations with former employees who jump to other firms. Goldman in particular is known for cultivating a strong alumni network and boasts of "boomerang" hires when people return.

But if trainees secretly promise to take a job in the future, it can create conflicts of interest. Junior bankers are often privy to confidential information about banks' proposed or pending deals — information that may be valuable outside the company.

JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon said as much in September, when he called on-cycle recruitment unethical and said he may stamp it out.

"It puts the kid in a terrible position, and so I think that's wrong," he told an audience at Georgetown University. "It puts us in a bad position, and it puts us in a conflicted position. You are already working for somewhere else and you're dealing with highly confidential information."

Stricter attempts to tighten controls on analysts have backfired in the past. In 2013, Morgan Stanley ditched a policy to block junior bankers from talking with recruiters for outside firms after some of them complained, Bloomberg News reported at the time.
 
They still have to act as a fiduciary right?


If I had a job with a loyalty pledge, I would be out. I do sign NDAs all the time.
 
I work for a bank, and I needed to take a banking oath (personal or before your diety of choice) for ethical conduct and to act with integrity as it is the law here in the Netherlands. I have no idea if its had any effect, but the bank took it pretty seriously. Breaking the oath also has legal ramifications. A bit off topic, but pretty neat I feel.

Swearing an oath to not look for other jobs is pretty dang stupid though.
 
They can just have multi-year contracts with a non-compete clause? Sounds like Goldman Sachs wants absolute loyalty from their new hires but doesn't want to extend any employment guarantees to them.
 
rD2qVGUHzoLxa3yo.gif
 
So Goldman Sachs becoming a cult. As if they weren't evil enough as it stands.
It's maybe not quite as bad as it sounds. People go to GS only to validate their elite finance bro status via the selection process to get in, at which point they immediately jump ship elsewhere as soon as they find an alternative. Sounds like GS wants to curtail this sort of behavior and retain their junior people.

The solution is funny and dystopian though.
 
It's maybe not quite as bad as it sounds. People go to GS only to validate their elite finance bro status via the selection process to get in, at which point they immediately jump ship elsewhere as soon as they find an alternative. Sounds like GS wants to curtail this sort of behavior and retain their junior people.

The solution is funny and dystopian though.

But the way to gain a person loyalty is not by making them do oaths.
It's by giving them good conditions, that out offer the competition.
That's why so many tech companies offer stocks as rewards for certain objectives. For example.
 
Pretty scummy all around. Also leaves me with a number of questions.

PE headhunters chasing after fresh analysts is a slap in the face of any organization willing to train a worker. Whether that PE doesn't have confidence their training would be comparable to the experience you can soak up at big investment firms or whether they're just cheap bastards (or both), I couldn't say.

On the other hand, how little are GS and other investment firms incentivizing junior employees to stick with the firm that they can be headhunted so easily? The firms' reps paint the problem as one of potential conflicts of interest - where, presumably, poached employees could sell off confidential information - but how much valuable information could an employee weeks into their training possibly have?

Interesting tidbit for me is how the recruiting timetables have shifted back since 2010. When supposedly, poachers waited almost a year before chasing after junior investment firm employees, they're now doing it before the employees are barely in the door just to beat out other/PE competition? Are investment firms' recruiting sources that reliable or is this just another case of 'Be first doing what we've been doing it and it'll work out (hopefully)'?
 
So Goldman Sachs becoming a cult. As if they weren't evil enough as it stands.
Just an FYI, the movie Margin Call which has gone viral in recent years was based on Goldman Sachs selling all their toxic subprime mortgage assets to unwitting buyers. Knowing full well they were worth nothing. They literally crashed the market and made millions go bankrupt. They were supposedly well within their rights to do this which is why no one went to jail, but i dont want to hear about ethics and loyalty from assholes like Goldman Sachs.
 
Just an FYI, the movie Margin Call which has gone viral in recent years was based on Goldman Sachs selling all their toxic subprime mortgage assets to unwitting buyers. Knowing full well they were worth nothing. They literally crashed the market and made millions go bankrupt. They were supposedly well within their rights to do this which is why no one went to jail, but i dont want to hear about ethics and loyalty from assholes like Goldman Sachs.
Didn't the bald Archdemon say at one time in front of some US committee that he was doing ''God's work.'' It's kind of amazing how their HQ was not a pile of rubble after the subprime con job. I do someone badly, fuck with their family, I expect retaliation. Millions bankrupt and it's just crickets.
 
They can just have multi-year contracts with a non-compete clause? Sounds like Goldman Sachs wants absolute loyalty from their new hires but doesn't want to extend any employment guarantees to them.
I was thinking the same thing. Easier to control, understand, and who wants to sign a pledge every 3 months?

BUT, I've seen things like this before but not job interviewing related.

Ive worked at companies where the Sales Team is asked to sign over a doc saying what they've done at the company is accurate and involves no shady shit. Or else the company can come after them. Some kind of supplemental code of conduct form that goes beyond all the regular HR code of conduct crap everyone has to do at the office.

And this was done at one company every 3 months, and the other once or twice a year. They probably want to protect themselves in case there's some scams they are doing with the customer colluding or whatever weird shit the company is thinking of.

Funny thing is I've only seen this extra layer of conduct for Sales Teams and never for any other department including Finance even though our dept can fuck around with numbers and monthly submissions way worse than any sales guy can.
 
Last edited:
Ive worked at companies where the Sales Team is asked to sign over a doc saying what they've done at the company is accurate and involves no shady shit. Or else the company can come after them. Some kind of supplemental code of conduct form that goes beyond all the regular HR code of conduct crap everyone has to do at the office.

And this was done at one company every 3 months, and the other once or twice a year. They probably want to protect themselves in case there's some scams they are doing with the customer colluding or whatever weird shit the company is thinking of.

I used to work in the QA, facilities and environment department of a huge multinational health care/pharmaceutical company. Besides the basic NDA, which are norm because we dealt with raw material quantities, process flow etc, basically anyone that has access to the public sector, inspection, public tenders/biddings etc. representing the company has to sign a supplemental code of conduct just like the one you described.

It's would be very simple to ask for a legal team with HR to make every new junior analyst to sign a Non Compete Clause right of the bat.

ps. okay... Since i'm not american, NCC may be kind of illegal in the US based on which state you are... according to co-pilot in NY...
"A new bill introduced in 2025 (NY A01361) proposes strict limitations on non-competes, allowing them only under specific conditions and with clear disclosures" So while non-competes can still be enforced, they're under heavy scrutiny, and many are successfully challenged in court. If you're dealing with one, it's wise to consult a legal expert to assess its enforceability.
 
Last edited:
loyalty bids for junior banker analysts? I assume that AI will replace these types of jobs sooner rather than later. Kinda surprised it hasn't started already.
 
I think a non-compete close won't stand in court, you can't actually ask someone not to get a job in the field they are in.
 
Top Bottom